CDC mentions the following serious adverse events after vaccination with coronavirus vaccines:
Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination is rare and has occurred in approximately 2 to 5 people per million vaccinated
in the United States. Severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, can occur after any vaccination. If this
occurs, vaccination providers can effectively and immediately treat the reaction. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and allergic
reactions, including anaphylaxis.
Myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. As of July 6, 2021, VAERS has received 971
reports of myocarditis or pericarditis among people ages 30 and younger who received COVID-19 vaccine. Most cases have been reported
after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), particularly in male adolescents and young adults. Through follow-up,
including medical record reviews, CDC and FDA have confirmed 594 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis. CDC and its partners are
investigating these reports to assess whether there is a relationship to COVID-19 vaccination.
Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis.
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 331 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were
administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 6, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 5,946 reports of
death (0.0018%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19
vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause.
NOTE: Reports of adverse events to VAERS following
vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical
information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines.
However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the
J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare
and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths.
Although COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are new, this type of vaccine has been studied in people before. mRNA vaccines against HIV,
rabies, Zika and flu have been tested in phase 1 and phase 2 trials in people. The technology has also been used in clinical
trials as a way to treat some cancers. Even though these products have not been licensed for use in people, these efforts
provided important information about mRNA technology and its safety.
mRNA is made and used in protein production in all cells of our bodies. As such, cells have mechanisms in place to ensure
that no protein is made in quantities greater than needed. One way this happens is that mRNA has a “poly(A) tail.” In the
cytoplasm, this tail ensures mRNA decay. As the mRNA is used to make proteins in the cell, the length of the poly(A) tail
decreases, until it is too short for the mRNA to continue being used as a protein blueprint. Once this happens, the mRNA breaks
down and is removed as cellular debris. This process limits how long mRNA remains in the cytoplasm — and, therefore, how much
protein is produced.
As such, poly(A) tails ensure that the cell breaks down the vaccine mRNA in a timely manner. Likewise, this understanding allows
scientists to design vaccine-delivered mRNA in a way that ensures it does not stay in the cell longer than needed to generate
immunity.
Approximately in December 2020, the media revealed that White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows had threatened the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration to approve the Pfizer vaccine or he would be ready to resign.
Pfizer, a vaccine with endless problems and controversy
This is a completely new type of vaccine. Which in case of Moderna and Pfizer vaccines is more like a gene therapy, not
vaccination. Previous gene therapy was used only for life critical diseases like cancer. So it is natural to be slightly skeptical
toward them.
This is especially concerning since the Pfizer vaccine is an mRNA vaccine, an untested type of vaccine which creates new proteins
and can actually integrate into the human genome, according
to a report from the National Library of Medicine. In other words, degenerative brain conditions may appear at any time in your life
after receiving the vaccine.
“The RNA sequence of the vaccine as well as the spike protein target interaction were analyzed for the potential to convert intracellular
RNA binding proteins TAR DNA binding protein (TDP-43) and Fused in Sarcoma (FUS) into their pathologic prion conformations,” explains
the report. TDP-43 is a protein known to cause dementia, ALS and even Alzheimer’s, according to
Alzpedia. Similarly, the FUS protein is known to cause ALS
and Hereditary Essential Tremors, according to the
Human Genome Database.
The experiment done for the report was to determine whether or not these two harmful proteins embed themselves into our DNA, as
an mRNA vaccine is expected to do. The report determined that “the vaccine RNA has specific sequences that may induce TDP-43 and
FUS to fold into their pathologic prion confirmations,” meaning that both proteins have the potential to embed themselves into our
DNA and cause harmful neurological diseases.
The report’s abstract summary concludes that “The enclosed finding as well as additional potential risks leads the author to believe
that regulatory approval of the RNA based vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 was premature and that the vaccine may cause much more harm than
benefit.” The report itself ends with this warning: “The vaccine could be a bioweapon and even more dangerous than the original infection.”
National File actually reached out to the CDC to inquire as to why the Pfizer vaccine is still being distributed despite these
credible allegations. No response was received prior to publication.
Among participants who received the vaccine and those
who got the placebo alike, the reported rate of serious adverse events is
less than 0.5 percent , with no significant differences between
the two groups.
Four cases of Bell’s palsy have been reported in participants who received the vaccine, while none has been reported in those
who got the placebo.
However, those four cases are consistent with the rate of Bell’s palsy in the general population. In other words, there’s no clear
evidence that the Bell’s palsy was caused by the vaccine.
Severe allergic reactions to vaccines are very rare, but they can happen. The FDATrusted Source recommends that people
who have experienced a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, or to any of its ingredients,
should not receive it.
Reports of lymphadenopathy were imbalanced with 58 more cases in the vaccine group (64) than the placebo group (6); lymphadenopathy
is plausibly related to the vaccine. Lymphadenopathy occurred in the arm and neck region and was reported within 2 to 4 days after
vaccination. The average duration of lymphadenopathy was approximately 10 days.
Bell’s palsy was reported by four vaccine recipients and none of the placebo recipients. The observed frequency of reported
Bell’s palsy in the vaccine group is consistent with the background rate in the general population, and there is no basis upon which
to conclude a causal relationship.
Serious Adverse Events
Serious adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required
inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability/incapacity. The proportions
of participants who reported at least 1 serious adverse event were 0.6% in the vaccine group and 0.5% in the placebo group. The most
common serious adverse events in the vaccine group which were numerically higher than in the placebo group were appendicitis (7 in
vaccine vs 2 in placebo), acute myocardial infarction (3 vs 0), and cerebrovascular accident (3 vs 1). Cardiovascular serious adverse
events were balanced between vaccine and placebo groups.
Two serious adverse events were considered by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as possibly related to vaccine:
shoulder injury possibly related to vaccine administration or to the vaccine itself,
lymphadenopathy involving the axilla contralateral to the vaccine injection site.
Otherwise, occurrence of severe adverse events involving system organ classes and specific preferred terms were balanced between
vaccine and placebo groups.
Keith Speights: Some findings were recently published in Nature magazine that
indicate that the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna vaccines may provide protection for
years.
Many investors are and were hoping for annual recurring revenue from these companies'
vaccines. Brian, how troublesome is this latest data for the prospects for Pfizer, BioNTech,
and Moderna?
Brian Orelli: There's a bit of an extrapolation going on here. The researchers looked at
memory B cells, which tend to provide more long-term protection than, let's say, antibodies.
They looked at those in the lymph nodes and found the cells were there as long as 15 weeks.
Typically, they'd mostly be gone by four to six weeks. So that's the basis of this claim
that it could offer protection for years. If true, that will be a big blow obviously to vaccine
makers, at least for Moderna and BioNTech.
Pfizer would be fine because it's so diversified. It's really hard to make an argument for
the valuations of Moderna and BioNTech right now if these vaccines are one and done over a
couple of years. They really need to have ongoing sales until they can get growth from other
drugs in their pipelines.
Speights: Brian, when I first saw the story, I went to check out to see how the stocks were
performing, and Moderna is up, BioNTech was barely changed, Pfizer barely changed. It seems to
me that investors really aren't making much of this news. Do you think that's the right take at
this point?
Orelli: I think it's still too early to be able to conclude that it's definitely going to
work for years. The other issue is that we're looking at, will those B cells actually protect
against the variants?
If they don't protect against the variants, then it doesn't really matter if you have B
cells in your lymph nodes. If they're not going to protect against the variants then we're
going to have to get a booster shot anyway.
Speights: Right. Obviously, if these vaccines provide immunity for multiple years, these
companies aren't going to make nearly as much money as they expect and a lot of investors
expect. So this is a big story to watch, but like you said, really, really early right now and
too soon to maybe go drawing any conclusions at this point.
That means that 64% of vaccinated can get Delta variant and spread it. This is the last nail
in the coffin of idiotic (in case of coronaviruses) Fauci idea of "herd immunity" and connected
with this fiasco of (1)vaccination of teenagers (and generally people younger then 30), pregnant
women and people who already recovered from COVID-19 and thus has natural immunity
Please note that COVID vaccines are experimental, unproven drugs (or gene therapy in case of
Pfizer and Moderna) and Fauci and other high level medical bureaucrats should be liable for any
negative consequences of this campaign.
The Israeli Ministry of Health announced that an epidemiological analysis had found that
since June 6 there was a "marked decline in the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine in preventing
infection (64%) and symptomatic illness (64%)."
"This decline has been observed simultaneously with the spread of the Delta variant in
Israel," t he
ministry said in a statement .
At the same time, "The vaccine maintains an efficacy rate of about 93% in preventing serious
illness and hospitalization cases," the officials emphasized.
... Professor Nadav Davidovitch, who sits on the government's expert advisory committee on
the coronavirus, told the Financial Times
the new finding was based on "preliminary" figures gathered by health authorities. "Delta is a
lot more infectious, but appears to not lead to as much serious illness and death, especially
given that we now have the vaccine," he said.
It included this kind of statement "Thus, we need to accept that around 16 cases will
develop severe adverse reactions from COVID-19 vaccines per 100,000 vaccinations delivered,
and approximately four people will die from the consequences of being vaccinated per 100,000
vaccinations delivered....Adopting the point estimate of NNTV = 16,000 (95% CI,
9000–50,000) to prevent one COVID-19-related death, for every six (95% CI, 2–11)
deaths prevented by vaccinationwe may incur four deaths as a consequence of or associated
with the vaccination.
Simply put: As we prevent three deaths by vaccinating, we incur two deaths."
Another case of Swiss-paid research (as in the time of Tobacco is good?) or do they have a
point? After all, even Cuba, Russia and Iran see the need for vaccinating their
populations.
Israel was one of the first countries to get the Pfizer-BioNTech treatment some time last
year after then-PM Netanyahu pushed Israel to the front of the queue using means both fair
and foul (but perhaps more on the foul side).
The Israel People's Committee, comprised of people with medical, legal and epidemiological
expertise,
released a summary report of the country's experience with mass inoculation of the
Pfizer-BioNTech treatment in April this year. It does not make for very comforting reading so
maybe I'll allow Doctors 4 Covid Ethics to take up the narrative:
... The data collected by the group paint a grim picture:
- The overall mortality in the January-February vaccination period was higher in 2021
than in any other year within the preceding decade. In the age group of 20–29 years,
mortality in this time period exceeded that of the previous year by 32%.
- 288 deaths overall, mostly within the first 10 days after vaccination, were reported
to the group. This number is more than six times greater than the 45 deaths officially
admitted to by the Health ministry.
- The group gives the following estimates for the mortality among the vaccinated:
overall, 1:5,000; age 20–49 years, 1:13,000; age 50–69 years, 1:6,000; age 70+,
1:1,600.
- Across lethal and non-lethal adverse events there was a relatively high rate of
cardiac-related injuries, 26% of which occurred in young people below the age of 40, a high
prevalence of massive vaginal bleeding, neurological, skeletal and skin damage, and events
directly or indirectly related to coagulopathy (myocardial infarction, stroke,
miscarriages, disruption of blood flow to the limbs and pulmonary embolism).
According to the authors, the compilation of the report was severely hampered by
obstruction on the part of government authorities, involving in particular the shutting
down of all monitoring and tracking systems for adverse events ...
dustbunny,
sorry to say but the list of signatories is very impressive.
for the videos i watched of the 1st name in the list, he is not at all anti-vaxx, as he
states plainly in his talks.
Cheers. I understand part of Israel's sweetheart deal with Pfizer involves keeping most
data collected secret and sharing it only with the company so I'm not surprised data is hard
to come by. The instances of 'coagulopathy' are new to me, likely a different mechanism than
the cause of the AZ/J&J problems. The makers of Sputnik V have identified a possible
cause
of the adenovirus
clotting disorder so hopefully they are looking into the mRNA vaccines also.
Summary paragraph
Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are based on a range ofnovelvaccine platforms, with
adenovirus-based approaches (like ChAdOx1 nCov-19)being one of them.Recently a rare and
novel complication of SARS-CoV-2 targeted adenovirus vaccines has emerged: thrombosis with
thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS). TTS is characterized bylow platelet counts,clot formation
at unusual anatomic sites and platelet-activating PF4-polyanion antibodies reminiscent
ofheparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Here, we employ in vitro and in vivo models to
characterize the possible mechanisms of this platelet-targeted autoimmunity. We show
thatintravenous but not intramuscular injection of ChAdOx1 nCov-19triggers
platelet-adenovirus aggregate formation andplatelet activation. After intravenous
injection, theseaggregates are phagocytosedby macrophagesin the spleenandplatelet remnants
are found in the marginal zone and follicles. This is followed by a pronounced B-cell
response with the emergence of circulating antibodies binding to platelets. Our work
contributes to the understanding of TTS and highlights accidental intravenous injection as
potentialmechanism for post-vaccination TTS. Hence,safe intramuscular injection, with
aspiration prior to injection,could bea potential preventive measurewhen administering
adenovirus-based vaccines.
(emphasis mine.)
This is the very recent research that I mentioned
earlier in the thread but without attribution.
Not sure if the reaction as described in the article is triggered by the protein
impurities that Gamaleya claims to have found in the AstraZeneca vaccine.
mrna vaccines haven't been promoted as experimental... that is indeed what they
are..
Posted by: james | Jul 4 2021 20:56 utc | 41
The idea for mRNA vaccines has been around for about three decades, but until last year
clinical evidence of their efficacy was minimal. I thus was skeptical about the ones
developed for covid but so far it seems that they do work. Still, it remains to be determined
whether they are as good as traditional vaccines.
You are absolutely correct that all new vaccines and drugs are experimental at first
(whether people realize it or not), but the rules are that clinical trials must show safety
and efficacy before these are licensed for use in the general population. Sometimes things
that are useless or even harmful still manage to get pushed through, which is why postmarket
safety surveillance is so important.
... Watching crowds in football stadiums these latest days and reading about athletes
obliged to get vaxxxed to go to the Olympics in Japan further adds to the dismay. Live
experiment for all or house arrest for the rest of life.
The axiom of always taking advantage of a crisis, even if you have to sell the crisis, is
at play here. The facts we are seeing come out support this perspective.
Think about how much money Big Pharma saved by foisting their mRNA research costs off on
the brainwashed public. And if it doesn't work out they have immunity from prosecution....its
all legal as Obama has said about the financial rape by the global private finance
cult.....if it does work out then they have a big new income stream instead of using
out-of-patent therapies.....win-win for the wrong side.
The shit show continues until it doesn't....who is "winning" this week?
The U.K. is among the first governments to set out provisional plans for booster shots,
following advice from specialists who are concerned that possible further Covid-19 outbreaks
over the winter could coincide with
a wave of influenza and put pressure on the country's health system.
The government said the actual rollout would depend on further advice from an expert group
known as the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization, based on a host of new data,
including whether protection from the vaccines
weakens after six months .
As of July 2, 2021 out of 4456 total deaths attributed to vaccination (of them 1890 after
vaccination with Pfizer), it looks like there were at least 36 death of people aged less then 30
years after vaccination with Pfizer vaccine (out of 61 total). Around 136 millions were fully
vaccinated,.
Other sources list higher figure (6113)
CDC- 6,113 DEAD Following COVID-19 Injections ("Besides the 6,113 deaths reported, there are
5,172 permanent disabilities, 6,435 life threatening events, and 51,558 emergency room visits."
)so my method of extracting those data from VAERS database might be wrong or not all death are
reported to VAERS.
Another 5 young people were crippled but survived (67 total).
Each year, more than 165 million Americans get the flu shot. There were 85 reported
deaths following influenza vaccination in 2017; 119 deaths in 2018; and 203 deaths in
2019
Between mid-December 2020 and April 23, 2021, at which point between 95 million and 100
million Americans had received their COVID-19 shots, there were 3,544 reported deaths
following COVID vaccination, or about 30 per day
In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available
vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 -- a period of 15.5 years
As of April 23, 2021, VAERS had also received 12,618 reports of serious adverse events.
In total, 118,902 adverse event reports had been filed
In the European Union, the EudraVigilance system had as of April 17, 2021, received
330,218 injury reports after vaccination with one of the four available COVID vaccines,
including 7,766 deaths
In a May 5, 2021, Fox News report, Tucker Carlson asked the question no one is really
allowed to ask: "How many Americans have died after taking the COVID vaccine?"
1
Then there's not selling Syria the latest S#00 system to help keep Israel out of Syrian
skies. That tells me he's using Syria for personal / State gain and that is where he's wrong.
That's what makes him just another politician.
I totally get it, there are things that are puzzling to those of us in the audience,
watching the moves from afar.
An advanced S-300 or S-400 system could paint every F-16 as it took off from Israel. This
would be a red line for Israel and would bring in Uncle Shmuel.
Syria (and by extension Russia) has been allowing Israel to overfly her territory and bomb
Hezbollah installations.
It's puzzling – why would you allow a foreign power to bomb your territory, especially
if you have S-300's. The answer must be that Syria and Russia are holding back on purpose for
reasons only known to them. I can speculate, in that they don't want to give away military
capability unless the war goes hot.
Think about the situation now, as opposed to the 90's. Russia's military has been
modernized; Military physical fitness is up by 30% (better nutrition?); Foreign exchange is in
good shape; the economy is modernizing; food production is up – so Russia is no longer
food insecure; oil can be extracted at prices that Saudi cannot compete with; the Artic route
is opening up; national economy is more diversified thanks to the western sanctions; Yamal LNG
will be fueling Asia; Nordstream will be fueling Europe.
and if the mRNA vaccines cause the spike proteins to accumulate in the ovaries of women of
childbearing years and younger, this shared concern might play a role.
It's not the spike protein collecting in ovaries. It is the "lipid shell." The lipid is
going to the ovaries and bone marrow according to the Japanese Study. The same study says the
spike protein is going into blood plasma and traveling all over. I'm wondering if it can cross
the blood brain barrier.
Both actions are bad, so your point remains. But, it is possible the body could deal with
the lipid.
So Fauci push toward "herd immunity" was meaningless from the very beginning. In Israel 50%
(which has 85% of adults fully vaccinated with Phizer vaccine) of infected with Delta were
vaccinated.
Both South African variant and the Delta variant (also known as B.1.617.2) changed the
picture of "herd immunity". Official figure is that Two doses of Pfizer's vaccine are still 88
percent effective at preventing symptomatic Delta infections. You can probably cut this figure by
half to get more realistic estimate based on Israel experience with Pfizer vaccine. Israel has
fully vaccinated about 85 percent of adults
Worryingly, a recent study documented several cases during India's spring surge in which
health-care workers who were fully vaccinated with AstraZeneca's vaccine were infected by Delta
and passed it on.
Now there is talk about that vaccinated people
might need booster shots . Which essentally mean re-vaccination with the newer version of
vaccine.
When breakthrough cases do arise, it's not always clear why. The trio of vaccines now
circulating in the United States were all designed around the original coronavirus variant, and
seem to be a bit less effective against some newer versions of the virus. These troublesome
variants have yet to render any of our current vaccines obsolete. But "the more variants there
are, the more concern you have for breakthrough cases," Saad Omer, a vaccine expert at Yale,
told me. The circumstances of exposure to any version of the coronavirus will also make
a difference. If vaccinated people are spending time with groups of unvaccinated people in
places where the virus is running rampant, that still raises their chance of getting sick.
Large doses of the virus can overwhelm the sturdiest of immune defenses, if given the
chance.
The human side of the equation matters, too. Immunity is not a monolith, and the degree of
defense roused by an infection or a vaccine will differ from person to person, even
between identical twins . Some people might have underlying conditions that hamstring their
immune system's response to vaccination; others might simply, by chance, churn out fewer or
less potent antibodies and T cells that can nip a coronavirus infection in the bud.
The effects of vaccination are best considered along a spectrum, says Ali Ellebedy, an
immunologist at Washington University in St. Louis. An ideal response to vaccination might
create an arsenal of immune molecules and cells that can instantaneously squelch the virus,
leaving no time for symptoms to appear. But sometimes that front line of fighters is relatively
sparse. Should the virus make it through, "it becomes a race [against] time," Ellebedy told me.
The pathogen rushes to copy itself, and the immune system recruits more defenders. The longer
the tussle drags on, the more likely the disease is to manifest.The range of vaccine
responses "isn't a variation of two- to threefold; it's thousands," Ellebedy told me.
"Being vaccinated doesn't mean you are immune. It means you have a better chance of
protection."
For these reasons and more, Viviana Simon, a virologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at
Mount Sinai, in New York, dislikes the term breakthrough case , which evokes a barrier
walling humans off from disease. "It's very misleading," she told me. "It's like the virus
'punches' through our defenses."
Vaccination is actually more like a single variable in a dynamic playing field -- a
layer of protection, like an umbrella, that might guard better in some situations than
others. It could keep a lucky traveler relatively dry in a light drizzle, but in a windy
maelstrom that's whipping heavy droplets every which way, another person might be overwhelmed.
And under many circumstances, vaccines are still best paired with safeguards such as masks and
distancing -- just as rain boots and jackets would help buffer someone in a storm.
In some ways, the shots' staggering success in trials -- where
breakthrough cases were also observed, causing appropriately minimal stir -- may have
papered over the inevitability of post-vaccination infections in more natural settings. "The
vaccines exceeded expectations," Luciana Borio, a former acting chief scientist at the FDA,
told me. Now, as we exit what Borio calls the "honeymoon phase" of our relationship with the
jabs, we need to temper our enthusiasm with the right amount of realism, especially as more
data on the shots' strength and longevity accumulate. Even excellent vaccines aren't foolproof,
and they shouldn't be criticized when they're not. "We can't expect it's going to be perfect,
on day one, always," Borio said.
A team at the CDC is tracking breakthroughs and will soon start reporting case counts, as
well as any patterns related to where, or in whom, these infections are occurring, Martha
Sharan, a CDC spokesperson, told me. Details like those matter. They can help experts figure
out why post-vaccination infections happen, and how they might be stopped. "The reassuring part
is, these cases will not go unnoticed," Omer told me.
Most of the time, vaccines are far more likely to offer some help than none. Serious
disease, hospitalization, and even death
will still occur , as will less well-studied outcomes, such as the long-term symptoms that
often arise from less severe disease. But should post-vaccination infections climb to
unexpectedly high rates, backup plans will quickly kick into gear. Some shot recipients might
get second or third shots to bolster their immune response; others might be administered a
tweaked vaccine recipe to account for a new viral variant.
There's something a touch counterintuitive about breakthrough cases: The more people we
vaccinate, the more such cases there will be, in absolute numbers. But the rate at which they
appear will also decline, as rising levels of population immunity cut the conduits that the
virus needs to travel. People with lackluster responses to vaccines -- as well as those who
can't get their jabs -- will receive protection from the many millions in whom the shots
did work. In a crowd of people holding umbrellas, even those who are empty-handed will
stay more dry.
Katherine J. Wuis a staff writer
atThe Atlantic,where she covers science.
As the Delta variant of the coronavirus surges through the U.K., almost half of the
country's recent Covid-19 deaths are of people who have been vaccinated.
.... ... ...
The U.K. is a testing ground for how vaccines are coping. Delta is racing through the
country -- with 146,000 identified cases in the past week, 72% up on the week before. The
country is also a world leader in identifying through testing and genetic sequencing which
versions of the virus are prevalent: By mid-June, 97% of cases were Delta infections. And Delta
is spreading among a population that is among the most highly vaccinated in the world: 85% of
adults have had at least one vaccine shot and 63% have had two.
Data from Public Health England show that there were 117 deaths among 92,000 Delta cases
logged through June 21. Fifty of those -- 46% -- had received two shots of vaccine.
First, vaccines aren't 100% effective. Not everyone who is inoculated will respond in the
same way. Those who are elderly or whose immune systems are faulty, damaged or stressed by some
other illness are less likely to mount a robust response than someone younger and fitter.
Covid-19 vaccines are highly effective but some people will still be vulnerable to the virus
even after receiving their shots.
Second, the risk of dying from Covid-19 increases steeply with age. If a vaccine reduces an
80-year-old's risk of death from Covid-19 by 95%, for instance, that 80-year-old's risk of
death might still be greater than the risk faced by an unvaccinated 20-year-old. Some chronic
illnesses such as diabetes, hypertension and lung disease are also associated with a higher
risk of severe illness and death.
Third, as more of the population gets vaccinated, there are fewer unvaccinated people for
the virus to infect. If the pool of vaccinated people is larger than the pool of unvaccinated
people, then it is possible and even likely that breakthrough infections resulting in death in
the older, vaccinated group would match or exceed deaths in the younger, unvaccinated group.
Consider an imaginary country with 100% of people vaccinated, where the virus can still somehow
spread. All Covid-19 deaths would be in vaccinated individuals.
Of those 50 deaths in fully vaccinated people in England, all were in people aged 50 years
and over, the data show. There have been no deaths recorded in double-vaccinated under 50s.
The data show that, overall, the fatality rate for confirmed cases of Covid-19 has been
lower than it was with the Alpha variant, which was first spotted in the U.K.
... Public Health England, using a variety of statistical analyses, has estimated that
vaccination reduces the risk of hospitalization with the Delta variant in people who have
received two doses by between 91% and 98%, with a central estimate of 96%.
Though vaccines offer substantial protection against severe illness and death, there is
growing evidence from lab studies and real-world data that Delta does have some ability to
bypass vaccines to cause milder infection.
Public Health England says that its analysis of Delta cases in England implies protection
against symptomatic Covid-19 caused by Delta of around 79%. That compares with an 89% reduction
in the risk of symptomatic Covid-19 with Alpha.
In Israel, a senior health official said in late June that in a recent outbreak of 200 or so
Delta cases, about half were in children 15 years old and younger and the other half were in
those aged 16 and above, of whom more than 80% are fully vaccinated.
British data shows Delta is even more adept at evading our immune response after just one
dose of vaccine, highlighting the importance, public health officials say, of getting two
shots. A single dose reduces the risk of symptomatic Covid-19 with Alpha by 49%, according
Public Health England, but only by 35% with Delta.
"... De Garay explained that after receiving the second coronavirus vaccine dose, her daughter started developing severe abdominal and chest pains. Maddie described the severity of the pain to her mother as "it feels like my heart is being ripped out through my neck." ..."
"... The Ohio mother added her daughter experienced additional symptoms that included gastroparesis, nausea, vomiting, erratic blood pressure, heart rate, and memory loss. "She still cannot digest food. She has a tube to get her nutrition," De Garay said to Carlson. "She also couldn't walk at one point, then she could I don't understand why and [physicians] are not looking into why...now she's back in a wheelchair and she can't hold her neck up. Her neck pulls back." ..."
"... De Garay said she had joined a Facebook support group to help people cope with the unexpected events happening from the coronavirus vaccine trial, and she said it was shut down. "It's just not right," she said. ..."
"... Sen. Ron Johnson , R-Wis., has sent letters to the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna seeking answers about adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine following a June 28 press conference with affected individuals. The conference in Milwaukee included stories from five people, including De Garay ..."
"... The Wisconsin senator noted that some adverse reactions were detailed in Pfizer's and Moderna's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA) memorandums following early clinical trials ..."
"... Those reactions included nervous system disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders for the Pfizer EUA memo. The Moderna EUA memo included reactions such as nervous system disorders, vascular disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders, according to Johnson's letter. ..."
"... You missed the whole point! The issue is that the government is not acknowledging and and not reporting these side effects of the vaccine. Instead they are lying about the safety. If you are young, you are much more likely to get sick and injured by the vaccine than COVID. ..."
"... anyone under 25 should not get the vaccine because the percentages are about the same or worse having a negative impact from the vaccine versus the actual virus. ..."
"... With the Covid19 mortality rate among the children why even vaccinate? As a Chemist / Biochemist I learned that there is always unintended consequences. ..."
"... Vaccines may have long term effects that are not known today. ..."
"... The CDC's generic guidelines for getting a vaccine for any reason are very restrictive, first being, the disease you're getting vaccinated against has to pose a real, immediate danger. CV-19 poses virtually no danger whatsoever to kids under 14. Of all the deaths of children 14 and under in the last 18 months only .8% of them had a case of CV-19. That's 367 deaths out of over 46,000. (Data from CDC website) Forcing them to take an experimental vaccine that they absolutely don't need is criminal. As a parent, allowing your child to take the vaccine without spending a few hours doing some research is criminally negligent. This is like some terribly warped Kafka novel but it's real. ..."
Mother Stephanie De Garay joins 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' to discuss how her 12-year-old
daughter volunteered for the Pfizer vaccine trial and is now in a wheelchair.
An Ohio mother is speaking out
about her 12-year-old daughter suffering extreme reactions and nearly dying after volunteering
for the Pfizer coronavirus
vaccine trial.
Stephanie De Garay told "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Thursday
that after reaching out to multiple physicians they claimed her daughter, Maddie De Garay,
couldn't have become gravely ill from the vaccine.
"The only diagnosis we've gotten for her is that it's conversion disorder or functional
neurologic symptom disorder, and they are blaming it on anxiety," De Garay told Tucker Carlson.
"Ironically, she did not have anxiety before the vaccine."
De Garay explained that after receiving the second coronavirus vaccine dose, her daughter
started developing severe abdominal and chest pains. Maddie described the severity of the pain
to her mother as "it feels like my heart is being ripped out through my neck."
The Ohio mother added her daughter experienced additional symptoms that included
gastroparesis, nausea, vomiting, erratic blood pressure, heart rate, and memory loss. "She still cannot digest food. She has a tube to get her nutrition," De Garay said to
Carlson. "She also couldn't walk at one point, then she could I don't understand why and
[physicians] are not looking into why...now she's back in a wheelchair and she can't hold her
neck up. Her neck pulls back."
Carlson asked whether any officials from the Biden administration or representatives from
Pfizer company have reached out to the family. "No, they have not," she answered.
"The response with the person that's leading the vaccine trial has been atrocious," she
said. "We wanted to know what symptoms were reported and we couldn't even get an answer on
that. It was just that 'we report to Pfizer and they report to the FDA.' That's all we
got."
After her heartbreaking experience, the Ohio mother said she's still "pro-vaccine, but also
pro-informed consent." De Garay mentioned she's speaking out because she feels like everyone
should be fully aware of this tragic incident and added the situation is being "pushed down and
hidden."
De Garay said she had joined a Facebook support group to help people cope with the
unexpected events happening from the coronavirus vaccine trial, and she said it was shut
down. "It's just not right," she said.
"They need to do research and figure out why this happened, especially to people in the
trial. I thought that was the point of it," De Garay concluded. "They need to come up with
something that's going to treat these people early because all they're going to do is keep
getting worse."
Sen. Ron
Johnson , R-Wis., has sent letters to the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna seeking answers
about adverse reactions to the COVID-19vaccine
following a June 28 press conference with affected individuals. The conference in Milwaukee
included stories from five people, including De Garay.
The Wisconsin senator noted that some adverse reactions were detailed in Pfizer's and
Moderna's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA) memorandums
following early clinical trials.
Those reactions included nervous system disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue
disorders for the Pfizer EUA memo. The Moderna EUA memo included reactions such as nervous
system disorders, vascular disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders,
according to Johnson's letter.
Pfizer and Moderna did not immediately respond to inquiries from Fox News about Johnson's
letters.
J jeff5150357 6 hours ago
My daughter had the same thing happen to
her after getting a flu vaccine 9 years ago. Within days of getting it, she went from being as
healthy as an ox to years of awful, unexplained illness. The short version is they concluded
that she had a severe adverse reaction to the vaccine, but from the delivery chemicals, not the
flu content itself. Formaldehyde was the likely major cause. Now she is getting ready to begin
college and is being required to get the Covid vaccine by her university and the NCAA for
athletics. It is causing her, my wife and I horrible anxiety and we feel like we are being
railroaded into something that could be very dangerous for her. Any discussion or concern
expressed on social media is immediately blocked. I know from years of working in the research
grants office at Yale University that the big pharma industry is powerful and will go to great
lengths to control the narrative. What I don't understand is why mainstream media and social
media are so willing to help them these days!
jeff5150357 4 hours ago
While the college experience is great for a young adult. I would look at getting a degree
online. Her future earnings will be based on her merit, not where she went to school. If
someone was telling me what to do with my personal health, and I was uncomfortable with their
prescription, I would follow my instincts.
LoraJane92649 jeff5150357 5
hours ago
If her flu vax is well documented she should be able to get a waiver. Hopefully you
have an able bodied family physician or medical team to advocate on your behalf.
G gunvald 7 hours ago
You know when you take it that there can be adverse
reactions. So, in that sense, you are informed. Any one of us could be the odd person. That
said, I have a problem with any child getting these vaccines, especially when most people
recover from the disease. It's one thing for me as an elderly person to make the decision to
take it as covid affects the elderly person more and I wanted to avoid that ventilator. Most of
my life has been lived and that's how I evaluated it. This will always come down to putting it
in God's hands.
TheTruthAsItIs gunvald 6 hours ago
You missed the whole point! The
issue is that the government is not acknowledging and and not reporting these side effects of the
vaccine. Instead they are lying about the safety. If you are young, you are much more likely to
get sick and injured by the vaccine than COVID.
D DontDestoryUSA
gunvald 4 hours ago
It's not being informed when you are forced to take a vaccination that they
clearly had trouble with past vaccination sounds like a lawsuit for the university is on the
horizon. With a big pay day
Tony5SFG 7 hours ago
"Ohio
mother said she's still "pro-vaccine, but also pro-informed consent." " And as a pediatrician
for over 40 yrs (retired now) and a 10 year member of my medical school's Institutional Review
Board (which had to approve all human research), THAT is a problem I have been bringing up As
far as requiring all young people, such as entering or in college, to get the vaccine Children
are a protected class and the informed consent for research on them is much more strenuous than
for adults And, requiring young people to take these new vaccines is the equivalent of doing
research on them. The issue of myocarditis is quite troubling. And while it has been seen in
natural infections, I have not yet seen an adequate risk - benefit evaluation regarding risking
natural infection versus vaccination And people say that the myocarditis is not severe, no one
can be sure of the long term effects of a young person getting it. The vaccines that we give
children have been used for decades and the risks/benefits have been well established
D DallasAmEmail Tony5SFG 6 hours ago
A friends daughter who just went through internship as
Physicians assistant based on the percentages in age groups believes anyone under 25 should not
get the vaccine because the percentages are about the same or worse having a negative impact
from the vaccine versus the actual virus. Yes, older age groups the percent having negative
impact from the virus is much greater than the vaccine, so yes older age groups should get the
vaccine. What really is bothersome is when Youtube removes Dr. Robert Malone video who helped
create the mrna vaccine express concern that normal testing has not happened and be cautious
about taking it, especially for the young.
marinesfather601 Tony5SFG 5
hours ago
With the Covid19 mortality rate among the children why even vaccinate? As a Chemist /
Biochemist I learned that there is always unintended consequences.
Hilltopper9 7 hours ago
Vaccines may have long term effects that are not known
today. The same could be said of all the chemicals we apply to our body daily through shampoos,
hair dyes, body lotions, and suntan lotions. Life's a gamble. It's up to each individual to
make the best decisions possible given the facts available.
A akbushrat
Hilltopper9 6 hours ago
The CDC's generic guidelines for getting a vaccine for any reason are
very restrictive, first being, the disease you're getting vaccinated against has to pose a
real, immediate danger. CV-19 poses virtually no danger whatsoever to kids under 14. Of all the
deaths of children 14 and under in the last 18 months only .8% of them had a case of CV-19.
That's 367 deaths out of over 46,000. (Data from CDC website) Forcing them to take an
experimental vaccine that they absolutely don't need is criminal. As a parent, allowing your
child to take the vaccine without spending a few hours doing some research is criminally
negligent. This is like some terribly warped Kafka novel but it's real.
F
Fauxguy930 Hilltopper9 5 hours ago
☢️ N-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl)nitrosamine is a
nitrosamine that has butyl and 4-hydroxybutyl substituents. In mice, it causes high-grade,
invasive cancers in the urinary bladder, but not in any other tissues. It has a role as a
carcinogenic agent. Ingredient in all shots. How did a carcinogen get FDA approved, oh it was
an emergency.
R RussellRika 6 hours ago
I have a
twelve year old, and not a chance I'd allow her to volunteer for any vaccine trial, and
especially not this one. She very much wanted to get a vaccine, until she started reading about
some of the adverse reactions. Sorry, but I'm a child, the benefit does not outweigh the risk.
MrEd50 6 hours ago
I took the vaccine because I'm 60 years old and work with special ed kids. My 18 year old child
refuses to take it and I support him on this. COVID shouldn't be an issue for most of us.
At an event hosted by a U.S. senator, a mother cried as she recounted how the Pfizer experimental coronavirus vaccine left her
previously healthy, active 12-year-old daughter in a wheelchair.
On Monday, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) hosted a
news
conference
to discuss adverse reactions related to COVID-19 vaccines. Stephanie de Garay tearfully explained that her
12-year-old daughter, Maddie, is now wheelchair-bound after volunteering to take the Pfizer vaccine as part of the vaccine trial.
Since receiving the injection, Maddie has been to the emergency room nine times and hospitalized three times for two months.
Maddie and her parents were excited for her to participate in the vaccine trial, as they identify as "pro-vaccine and pro-science."
However, after receiving her second dose of the Pfizer vaccine on January 20, Maddie immediately experienced pain in her arm where
she had been vaccinated. Within the next 24 hours, she developed severe abdominal and chest pain.
Maddie told her mother that she felt "like my heart is being ripped out through my neck" as she experienced painful electrical
shocks down her neck and spine, forcing her to hunch over to walk.
At the instruction of the vaccine trial nurse administrator, Maddie's parents took her to the ER, where her labs were taken and she
was tested for appendicitis, given an IV with medicine, and then sent home. She was diagnosed with "adverse effect of vaccine
initial encounter."
Over the next 2 1/2 months, Maddie's mother said her abdominal, muscle, and nerve pain became unbearable. Maddie suffered from
gastroparesis, nausea and vomiting, erratic blood pressure, memory loss, brain fog, headaches, dizziness, fainting, seizures, verbal
and motor tics, menstrual cycle issues, lost feeling from the waist down, lost bowel and bladder control, and she had a nasogastric
tube placed because she lost the ability to eat.
"Why is she not back to normal? She was totally fine before this," said Stephanie de Garay, Maddie's mother. Maddie had volunteered
for the Pfizer vaccine trial "to help everyone else and they're not helping here. Before Maddie got her final dose of the vaccine,
she was healthy, got straight As, had lots of friends and had a life."
Some doctors attempted to attribute her neurological condition to anxiety and tried to send Maddie to a mental hospital. This caused
her parents to seek aid from other sources. They met others suffering from similar adverse vaccine reactions who connected them with
competent medical professionals.
"All we want is for Maddie to be seen, heard, and believed because she has not been. And we want her to get the care that she
desperately needs, so she can go back to normal," said de Garay.
LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page.
View
it here.
"Maddie and her parents were excited for her to participate in the vaccine trial, as
they identify as "pro-vaccine and pro-science."
If this is true, who in the world would be excited to let their children participate in
a medical experiment, they are the problem and now her child is paying the price
Authorities doe not telling truth: people who already have COVID do not need to be
vaccinated. Also if Delta varient can infect vaccineted in conserable quantities how any resobale
person can maintain this goal of "herg immunity". How it can be achieved if a vaccinated person
can be infected and thus spread the disease both amoung vaccinated cohort and among the
unvaccinated cohort. The fact the vaccinated people are infected with Delta changes the game and
here Senator Paul is wrong.
Pushing vaccination on chidren in such curcumstances changes nothing is became a very
questionable move both from scientific an from ethical perspective.
America's favourite Chinese lab funding coronavirus doomonger doctor Anthony Fauci announced
Tuesday that there are now two Americas, a vaccinated America and an unvaccinated America.
As Senator Rand Paul noted
earlier this week , there is a boat load of misinformation on the matter coming from a
government that is indiscriminately pushing vaccinations:
There are now two Americas. One that's retarded. And one that wants Fauci on a
lamppost.
liberty2 1 hour ago (Edited)
Note that the officials said there's no such thing as "herd immunity" last year. Now
this year they keep saying that we can reach "herd immunity" if we are 70% vaxxed! Terms
are used if it fits their narrative.
Ride_the_kali_yuga 3 hours ago (Edited)
In the Covidian Cult, there is true believers in one side and heretics on the other
side. Vaxxed and unvaxxed.
Divide and rule strategy, as always. Do not undurestimate the ratio of retarded people
among the population, it has been growing like a cancer for decades. It amazes me how
perfectly coordinated those MSM Covidian propaganda events appears worldwide.
In here France, 2 days ago, most MSM have all simultaneously gone full berserk (without
any reason) blaming the reluctant ones. One of them on TV said something like : "if it was
me, i will use police to drag those who refuse these "vaccines" from their home and force
it on them"
This was priceless, this little man has morbid obesity. We now officialy all live on the
twilight zone on steroids. Land whales dictate how people should consider their own health.
This ride seems to never end.
We now have officialy entered the dehumanization phase of the unvaxxed. The sanitary
gulag is not far from here.
NIRP-BTFD 1 hour ago
There are 2 Americas. The 0.01% (the rulers that own everything) and the serfs.
DemandSider 1 hour ago
Exactly, parasite and host. Fauci would be the former, obviously.
Uncomfortable Truths democrats don't have in their tool kit:
1) Flu is still down 98% and would normally account for a large percentage of the covid
deaths.
2) 20% more babies were born in 1946 than in 1945. Deaths are increasing but not that
much. This is accounts for the rest of the covid deaths.
3) Coronavirus' are among the highest mutating virus types and can not be eliminated by
vaccine.
4) If the COVID symptoms arise from SARS-CoV-2 which came from bats and pangolins: then
vaccinating Humans will have zero effect in eliminating the virus.
5) COVID is a set of symptoms not a virus. The virus is called SARS. This is a
relationship like how AIDS is the symptom set that arises out of HIV. To talk about a
vaccine for COVID as a medical professional is malpractice.
6) 50% of the people getting the "delta" variant are previously vaccinated. In clinical
terms that means the vaccine experimental trial has failed.
If you still believe in mandating masks and vaccines then you are a fascist or your IQ
is too low and should give up your right to vote.
Bacon's Rebellion 9 hours ago (Edited) remove link
//////////////////////////////////////////////
The Delta Variant in the UK
//////////////////////////////////////////////
June 25 th , 2021 - Public Health England
Summary:
Higher rates of "cases" for the "unvaccinated" with higher rates of hospitalizations and
DEATHS for the "fully vaccinated" .
Overnight Hospitalization required:
1.11% of the "Fully Vaccinated"
0.89% of the "Unvaccinated"
Deaths:
50 were "Fully Vaccinated" = 0.69% died
38 were "Unvaccinated" = 0.07% died
Death rate was 9.86 times higher for the vaccinated!
IF - 53,822 "Unvaccinated" cases = 38 deaths
Will - 53,822 "Vaccinated" cases = 375 deaths?
Will - the 142,000,000 "Fully Vaccinated" people in the USA suffer 979,800 Delta variant
Deaths?
(Link downloads a PDF | SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern)
1. Flu deaths have been greatly exaggerated in recent years in order to push the flu
vaccine. Just like Covid, they changed the definition of flu to count more deaths, so they
could push the vaccine. Most of them are general respiratory deaths that can be/were
reclassified to Covid.
2. There was a baby boom in 1946 and that was 75 years ago, so we should start seeing an
acceleration from that about now, but there also has been massive population growth since
then, so the effect will be muted.
3. I don't claim to understand virology, but if these things mutate so fast, they likely
get less virulent rather than more. It certainly calls into question the entire vaccine
program.
4. Vaxx the bats... I thought many of them died off from their own virus a few years
ago, but I saw millions of them fly out from under a bridge in Austin a couple years
ago.
6. This is logic beyond the understanding level of the idiot media folks - they would
never be able to ask the question.
Nathan Hale PREMIUM 10 hours ago
It was a fungal infection that was/is killing bats in the US, for the record
Bacon's Rebellion 8 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Imagine the clusterphuek in the court system if these vaccines are connected with
miscarriages...lawyers are salivating...your employer coerced you into vaccination...your
baby died inside you...geesh...how anyone could take that chance!
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
An experiment on "millions of people"
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Angela Merkel: All of these vaccines are conditionally approved. In the course of this
conditional approval, we are gaining experience for the first time on what happens if
this vaccine is used on millions of people? ...In the phase of the conditional approval
of such a vaccine is then very closely monitored - that is why everything is monitored so
specifically - what side effects can happen or what cases or what certain things can
occur.
Loads in German - Use Chrome to read in English:
Angela Merkel:
Sigh. 11 hours ago remove link
The Delta Strain is supposedly more fearful and deadly and contagious than the
'original' product, why, exactly?
Where are the studies comparing the relative efficacy and methodology of the vectors?
You recall the diagrams, the sneeze in one aisle of a supermarket, the blue haze covering
three aisles? Is the Delta Strain so contagious it now goes seven aisles?
Instead of the diagram of the beachgoer getting virus'd from the airborne particulates
from someone sneezing on a surfboard, are the viruses now coming in from further offshore,
the oil rig 40 miles out?
Instead of just old people, who are easily infected with everything that comes along,
now we must fear that kids and teens are susceptible? (Perhaps that's because they've worn
masks for so long they aren't getting 'natural' immunological defenses?)
This is just another worldwide scare tactic designed to keep the masks on and the
economy slowed. Look to the "Climate Change" set and the "One World Government" set for
reasons why we're facing these "new" strains.
aegis551 11 hours ago (Edited) remove link
CDC says we have nothing to worry about. Covid will never get here.
CDC says we have the ability to defeat this thing they said would never get here.
CDC says dont worry you dont need to wear masks. Because they wont protect you from the
virus.
CDC says some anti-viral medications may work. CDC corrects itself 24hrs later and says
only a vaccine can save us. Dr Fauci admits he and his family have been taking
hydroxychloroquine since the pandemic began. Even though they dont work.
CDC mandates everyone to wear masks because they will stop the spread.
CDC says we need to lock down for 2 weeks to stop the spread. CDC then mandates
lockdowns in perpetuity.
CDC says, etc, etc...
Why the hell is anyone listening to the CDC?
pods 10 hours ago remove link
Usually for any scam if you look under the cover you will find the hand of
government.
Ex. Pfizer has a vested interest of to keep their shots on the market. Profit motive and
to repay their development costs for their mRNA shots. Clinical trials are not cheap.
Pfizer will use contacts to nudge policy in a direction that benefits them. Doesnt have
to be evil, their job is to make stuff and sell it.
Why is Pfizer (could really be any of them) in this position? Because there was a
government policy to rush a product to market, Operation Warp Speed.
If that policy was never enacted none of these companies would have undertaken the
development of these shots with the resources they did. It would merely be pinheads doing
animal studies still at this point because a typical vaccine takes a decade to develop, and
mRNA has not been proven safe, so it would take longer to prove safety in target
populations, including mutagenic/teratagenic studies.
So really it was a government policy that landed us where we are at now. This is not a
political statement. No left/right BS is intended. Just a deductive theory of how the world
works, at a level above the left/right pigpen.
Brushy 10 hours ago remove link
Rand Paul didnt tweet the most important part of that study;
Delta variant deaths;
117 total deaths
44 unvaccinated
23 single dose
50 fully vaccinated
Thats 73 deaths for those who have been fully or partially vaccinated vs only 44 deaths
for the unvaxxed. Its looking more and more like the "Delta variant" is just code for
vaccine injury.
FrankDrakman 10 hours ago remove link
On the one page of data shown, I calculated the following: (rounded)
Unvaxxed: 35,000/34 deaths ~= 1/1000
One shot < 21 days: 4,000/1 deaths ~= 1/4000
One shot > 21 days: 9,000/10 deaths ~= 1/900
Two shots > 14 days: 4,000/26 deaths = 1/150
The second shot's the killer!
Morse_Code 8 hours ago
The virus is a poor excuse for the "Great Reset" into corporate fascism and to check out
the "Chicken Little" theory of the 'Sky is Falling' social syndrome.
They have already convinced society that white people are bad, men are really women, we
don't need police if they take our guns away and inflation is good, the U.S. is better
because of illegal immigration and that Biden won.
RathdrumGal 10 hours ago
I 100% agree. My career was spent in Critical Care nursing. I have seen people die and I
have seen what torture comes from a fear of death. I am much more afraid of a vancomycin
resistant enterococcus than COVID. Two days ago I was jet boating in Hell's Canyon in 117
degree heat. It was red neck heaven, no one on our boat was masked. We stopped for lunch on
the way home in a college town. So many young healthy looking people wearing masks, with
their young children masked! They can't all be on chemo, and I assume if they are that
afraid of COVID they have been vaccinated. What gives?
The key unanswered question is: what benefits for 12 years old vaccine provides. I do not see
any, while risks are real and unknown. At this point we already know that vaccine cause serious
heart problems in some vaccinated young people (say below 30 yours old)
Twelve year-old Maddie was enrolled in the Pfizer vaccine clinical trial. She's now in a
wheelchair, has an NG tube, and is suffering from severe memory loss, along with many other
issues.
I am SO sorry for this girl. She relied on her parents, their job, to protect their minor
children. They failed.
I am very sorry for what's happened, but lady that is exactly what you get by disregarding your
fellow citizens &
relying on the government for your truth. Its been obvious to all those with open minds, that
this entire pandemic is
a huge scam, the worst scam in human history. The old saying comes to mind, "and if the
government told you to go jump
off the roof, would you?" Sadly leftists answer, "how many times?" Karen
The only way I would I "consider" allowing my child to sign up to be a guinea pig in any
clinical trial is if they had a life threating incurable disease and the trial was specific to
their disease & participation was a "chance" to save their life. I worked in a clinical
trial office, you agree to being the guinea pig when you agree that you will never know if
you're injected with
1. a placebo OR
2. the "drug" its self.
You're also informed in advance of how many visits (minimal # of visits) the trial will require
of you to fully participate as it usually requires regularly scheduled bi weekly or monthly
visits. It's in a office setting & your mandated to keep the doctor informed of everything,
even an emergency, because theres a written script "behind the scenes" of what to do along the
way if "this" or "that" happens. That way you collect better data of adverse reactions. Plus
there are the very important (to the medical side anyway) non disclosure agreements.
I noticed here it seems the family reached out to "emercency" facilities when things started
going wrong.
Are these "trials" being conducted standard procedure or not. MAJOR DANGER
What sort of parent would give their kid an untested, un-needed vaccine? There is NO excuse.
None. Zero. Mother should be in tears. 100% well deserved.
Deplored
" in healthcare" means nothing anymore. I've been in healthcare for 25 years and it blows my
mind how many 500,000$ plus educations lined up for the "vax" AND do not know the simple
definition of a vaccine. I watched 1st hand as practically overnight medicine went from being
science based to political weapon. We used to have to have an evidence based system where
doctors would look at the published studies and make decisions based on the best info
available. That's all gone now. You can't even trust the medical journals anymore that at one
time were the pinnacles of scientific medical discovery. The hospital I've worked in for 25
years is going to mandate the vax as soon as the FDA approves it,which means I'm out. 15% of us
are unvaxed and they have plans to get rid of us. The medical tyranny STARTED w the mandating
of the flu shot years ago for HC workers and now it's covid. It's not going to end ,just wait
til the next shit show released on us. Next time they will have the ballz to say ur locked in
ur home until u comply. Then when u can't pay ur property taxes because u cant leave the house
to work u find out who actually owns ur home. Peetoonya
The US "Healthcare" INDUSTRY ranks 37th in the world. John Hopkins put out a report that the
3rd leading cause of death is going to your doctor and doing what he/she says! I remember in
the 90's they ran off or bought out most of the private practices especially in the rural areas
with malpractice claims if they didn't sell out. But these days you can make up to $50,000 a
year just sending people the bill for your inflicted genocide. Medical Billing Specialist
Salary in the United States https://www.salary.com/research/salary/benchmark/medical-billing-specialist-salary
All the cowardly doctors will do as they are told for fear of losing their license. PS The
profession that has the highest rate of suicide is Doctors! I haven't been to a doctor in 21
years. Riseliberty
This is not a vaccine. Do you understand? It is experimental gene therapy. You cannot
compare this with any FDA approved vaccine you've had in the past. Hehe62
Before watching one clip I suggest you watch the entire press conference. ALL of the
participants explained they are pro science and pro vaccine up front.
They have been harmed-most likely permanently by this *vaccine* and as you can see by the
twitter disclaimer they have been silenced, told they are suffering from anxiety versus a
vaccine side effect and our medical community has done NOTHING to follow up on what is going
on.
As an NP who has been thrust into covid from the get go I now daily see covid 19 vaccine
injuries albeit less than those suffered from these victims; depending on how you see it.
Type 1 diabetes in a perfectly healthy 16 year old athletic boy with healthy family members
now requiring insulin for the rest of his life-happened right after 2nd pfizer. Tons of
shingles and herpes viruses, and regular colds that have taken out staff members for 3-4 weeks
versus 2-3 days in the past.
As an NP that started in the military and has all vaccines and vaccinated all my children
and seeing and living in the medical community throughout this I personally will NEVER get
another vaccine the government suggests or requires ever again. I will NEVER go see a
mainstream medical provider ever again unless I'm taken against my will or knowledge.
Sure, tons of people have gotten the vax without issue, but YOU are the phase III clinical
trial for this thing, it has only been about 6 months. Long term effects who knows. I have a
feeling it isn't going to get better. And the fact that these people have been completely
silenced, questioned, and "debunked" by mainstream media and the public as a whole that
suddenly seems to have 100% confidence in their government???? is EXTREMELY concerning. Ron
God bless Maddie and her family. For context, I'd like to know how many children have had
the Pfizer vaccine without serious side effects. We shouldn't fall into the left wing tactics
of using anecdotal emotional cases to distort reality to make a larger point. The fact is that
vaccines have saved millions of lives and prevented millions of crippling side effects from
polio, smallpox, yellow fever, mumps, measles, hepatitis, HPV . Regretfully, some of the
vaccinated have suffered side effects, but the benefit greatly outweighs the risk.
JedWSmith
For perspective, this "vaccine" has caused more deaths than all the other vaccines given
over the last century. Maybe caution is warranted. This little child had an almost ZERO chance
of any complications from the China virus. There's ZERO reason for someone who's had the China
virus and recovered, having natural antibodies, to get the vaccine. The therapeutics work. They
were demonized only because a sitting president, hated by the fake media, big pharma, and the
DC deep state, promoted them. Dillard
Offering up your child for experiments, was it for $$$$$$$?
Remember the Canadian govt with pop up vaccination sites offering children ice cream if they
got the jab, and they did it WITHOUT PARENTS CONSENT? Think about that one. The govt rolls up
and opens a vaccine tent near your home, your child sees FREE ICE CREAM and goes to get free
ice cream and gets injected without your knowledge. That is some real evil there. William
Walker
I'm terribly sorry for the young girl, but I'm inflamed with anger that the stupid parents
put not one, but THREE children through clinical trials giving them the vaccine–all the
while touting the science (oh, the science!) which completely contradicts the claims that young
people are in any way threatened by Covid as a demographic. This is tragic, this is moronic
liberalism, and this is a direct result of the parents swilling all the false idiocy from CNN
and MSNBC without questioning the actual empirical data and science. PALydia
"Trials" are done to determine outcome. The word "trial" is synonymous with the word
"experiment." I.e. you are playing Russian Roulette when you enroll your child in ANY trial.
That IS science. You should NEVER assume something is safe and harmless when it is still in
"trial" phase .never mind these vaccines bypassed animal trials and all previous mRNA vaccines
failed animal trials. My heart breaks for this child but it's criminal for any parent to
subject their child to this. LiberalsRPinworms
Was waiting for the "but we still think you should vaccinate your kids too "
I find it interesting that all these cult members keep saying they're pro science. However,
scientific experiments are based on hypotheses, not already known facts. Why is she upset? Her
kid wanted to provide data to this experiment and did just that. Too bad she wasn't an outlier
considering, if she were, she could probably still eat food on her own. Thanks for your
contribution to the science folks! navi282
I am very sorry about what has happened to Maddie, but the responsibility lies with the
parents who believe in the false religion of "scientism" and have opted into the con-game that
vaccinations are genuine healing methodologies. As an engineer Maddie's mother should have
studied logic and the philosophy of science and then discerned that the politicization of the
medical field in recent years created confirmation bias, poor SPC (statistical process
control), and question-begging fallacies from those who should have known better. Complicity or
Ignorance -- take your pick. Matt Walters
Being pro-science means you base decisions on data. There is not yet a data set for the
short and long-term risks, benefits, and side effects of this vaccine that would allow a
science-based decision to take it or not. Those who are pro science wait for reliable data
before considering taking an experimental vaccine that is not approved by the FDA. constitution
rules
For USA children ages 5 to 18:
Population: ~57,000,000
Covid deaths: 263
Chance: < 1 in 200,000 Para Bellum
I notice a common trend among these child abuser parents .they go online to complain how
their kids were maimed by the experimental mRNA, but then they always have to preface it by
saying "oh but we're pro vaccine and pro science"
Well, I am anti-vaccine and I'm anti-mRNA. Have some conviction you retard. No wonder you
find yourselves in the position you're in.
I sincerely feel bad for your kids. You stole their lives from them and they will never be
the same and while the fallen man part of me wants to say "just deserts", the Catholic part of
me prays the rosary for you and your kids every single night. solome
' .we are pro-vaccine and pro-science'
.these parents make a great case that academia does not necessarily convey common sense it
can convey a buttload of chutzpah ..we know that because Washington DC is full of it excessive
hubris, too and, in turn, they can make decisions that prove disastrous for the future of We
the People Christina
This is a terrible tragedy for this family. I hope this beautiful young girl will eventualy
recover fully. I hope her parents will recover as well.
As for her parents, however, who are obviously very intelligent, did they miss the reams and
reams of scientific studies, white papers, and patent applications available to the public
before they permitted their child to get this not yet approved, experimental gene therapy
injection?
Did they not watch the hours and hours of video interviews and presentations by doctors,
virologists, epidemiologists, etc., who warned, warned, warned us to NOT TAKE IT?
Even after big tech started censoring and scrubbing most of this information off the net and
everywhere else, even before the massive pro-vax propaganda machine cranked up, millions of
people informed themselves about what it really is and thus decided to not be part of the human
trials.
Most of us had our flu shots and regular real vaccines as well, real vaccines are not the
issue, here.
I'm really sorry to tell you this, Mom, but you either ignored the real science or you, too,
were caught up in the propaganda that caused so many people to automatically reject any thing
people on the other side of the debate had to say.
One more red flag when it comes to politics and propaganda: DID YOU NOT QUESTION WHY SO MANY
MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS WHO TRIED TO WARN US HAD THEIR INFORMATION SCRUBBED, CENSORED, LOST THEIR
JOBS, AND RECEIVED DEATH THREATS SIMPLY FOR DOING DUE DILIGENCE AND ENGAGING IN THE ALWAYS
REQUIRED DEBATES AMONG MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS BEFORE APPROVING VACCINES? AND THEN WARNING THE
PUBLIC BEFORE THE POLITIAL CAMPAIGN BEGAN.
This is a very, very sad day in America. It's a very, very sad day for this family.
But maybe other parents will think twice, now, before they sign their children up for
potentailly horrific experiences related to the gene therapy injections. Maria
"Twelve year-old Maddie was enrolled in the Pfizer vaccine clinical trial."
The complete blame belongs on the parents. The tearful mother, an electrical engineer, said
she and her husband were pro-vaccine. If they were so smart, why in the hell would they enroll
their CHILD in a clinical trial for a fast-tracked vaccine, especially when children are not in
a high-risk group, and Covid-19 survival is 99.8 percent? I am furious with these highly
educated people. THEY WERE DUMBER THAN DOORKNOBS TO SACRIFICE THAT GIRL TO THE
GOVERNMENT/PHARMA COMPLEX. Libby ChickenLittle
When I was a 12 year old girl, I didn't even know what a clinical trial was. But then again,
I grew up at time when kids were allowed to be just kids and not political pawns by their
brainwashed parents. Sorry mom – I know comments are going to be harsh – but you
deserve EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. smith. jane smith.
Q. How does a government make a pro-vaccine person turn into an anti-vaccine person?
A. Give them a vaccine that makes them sicker than they were before they got the vaccine,
sicker with the very thing the vaccine was supposed to prevent.
I was told to go get a flu shot by my commander. Being a good USAF airman, I did so. I was
just a kid following orders. Two days later I was in the hospital, so sick with the flu until I
could not take 4 steps without getting so dizzy that I had to stop moving to keep from throwing
up. And it took 5 days before I was able to walk down a hallway without getting dizzy!
That was the last time I ever had a flu shot. Or the flu.
And that was over 35 years ago.
If the vaccine is such a good idea, then why does everybody have to get it in order for it
to work?
How about those who get the vaccine just leave those alone who choose not to get it?
And after what has happened to this lady's kid(s) .
Why the heck is she still PRO‐vaccine ???? 58
I blame the Fauci, Government, and the MSM for brainwashing fear amongst the masses. If you
are repeatedly gaslighted about almost every issue, you begin to believe the lies. You can add
schools also as they indoctrinate instead of teaching critical thinking.
The US Food and Drug Administration added a warning about the risk of myocarditis and
pericarditis to fact sheets for Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccines Friday.
The warning notes that reports of adverse events following vaccination -- particularly after
the second dose -- suggest increased risks of both types of heart inflammation.
Earlier this week, vaccine advisers to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
heard that the agency had received about 1,200 reports of such heart inflammation after 300
million doses of the two vaccines had been given.
"Patients who had had COVID-19 within the past year and people vaccinated with two doses of
Pfizer retained enough antibodies to be protected against the Indian variant, but three to six
times less antibodies than against the UK variant, Schwartz said. The study shows that "this
variant.. has acquired partial resistance to antibodies," Schwartz said." Pfizer jab
less effective, still protects against Indian strain- study
in people who had been fully vaccinated with two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine,
levels of neutralising antibodies were more than five times lower against the B.1.617.2 variant
when compared to the original strain, upon which current vaccines are based.
Importantly, this antibody response was even lower in people who had only received one dose.
After a single dose of Pfizer-BioNTech, 79% of people had a quantifiable neutralising antibody
response against the original strain, but this fell to 50% for B.1.1.7, 32% for B.1.617.2 and
25% for B.1.351.
While antibody
levels decreased with age against all variants, no correlation was observed for sex or
BMI.
More recently, there has been a Delta outbreak at the Foothills Medical Centre in Calgary,
with 16 patients and six staff infected. The majority experienced mild symptoms, though one
required treatment in the intensive care unit. Of the 22, 11 had been fully vaccinated, while
seven had one dose; all were given an mRNA vaccine, communications director Kerry Williamson of
Alberta Health Services told Maclean's . (The province did not disclose whether the one
admitted to ICU had been vaccinated.)
An outbreak of the Delta variant of COVID-19 in Israel has spread to some vaccinated people
-- with about half of the adults infected fully inoculated with the Pfizer shot, a health
official said.
This is a fiasco for Fauci "herd immunity" campaign and the US goverment official strategy --
full, if necessary compulsive, vaccination of population with the first generation of vaccines.
It means that people vaccinated with the the first generation vaccines can become infected with
Delta variant and spread the virus much like unvaccinated people.
An Israeli receives a coronavirus vaccine in Tel Aviv, Israel, on January 6. Sebastian
Scheiner/AP As many as half of new COVID-19 cases in Israel are vaccinated people, a health
official suggested. The Delta variant, not as easily beaten by vaccines as other variants, is
driving Israel's surge. The figure is likely an estimate, as the health ministry is still
analyzing the cases. As Israel faces a surge in cases driven by the Delta variant, its health
officials suggested that as many as half of new cases were among people who'd been
vaccinated.
Fully vaccinated people who've come into contact with the Delta variant have no immunity and
have to quarantine, Chezy Levy, the director-general of Israel's health ministry, said on
Wednesday, Haaretz reported. Levy told the state broadcaster Kan Bet that about 40% to 50% of
new cases appeared to be people who had been vaccinated, Haaretz reported.
He did not appear to specify a time frame for the new cases. The figure is likely an
estimate, as the ministry is still analyzing the cases. On Monday, Levy said that a third of
the new daily cases were people who had been vaccinated.
This is a fiasco for Fauci "herd immunity" campaign. It means that vaccinated people can
become infected and spread the virus much like unvaccinated people.
Cases of the Delta variant of coronavirus have almost doubled in a week
with 73 people now confirmed to have died after testing positive for the variant, 26 of whom
had had both vaccine doses.
Public Health England (PHE) said that as of Monday, the UK has seen 75,953 confirmed cases
of the Delta variant first identified in India, up 33,630 - or 79% - from the previous
week.
While just 26 people died more than two weeks after their second COVID-19 vaccine dose from
the Delta variant, more than 30.6 million in the UK have had both jabs, according to the
latest
government figures .
PHE said a total of 806 people in England have been admitted to hospital with the Delta
variant as of 14 June, a rise of 423 on the previous week.
So we have real problems with vaccines as Delta mutation puts the end of Fauci and company
fake dream about herd immunity -- it infects vaccinated people, but we can't discuss that the US medical establishment is corrupt,
in bed with Big Pharma and failed us.
This "medical bolshevism" should better be stopped.
Notable quotes:
"... Johnson said Sheryl Ruettgers will detail "severe neurological reactions that still inhibit her ability to live a normal life, including muscle pain, numbness, weakness and paresthesia" that she experienced after getting the COVID-19 vaccine earlier this month. ..."
Wisconsin Republican Senator Ron Johnson announced plans to hold a news conference to
discuss adverse reactions related to the COVID-19 vaccine, drawing backlash from health care
experts who view the move as "dangerous" and a way to promote misinformation.
In a statement Friday, Johnson said he plans to give a platform to six people from across
the country who claim to have had negative health reactions after receiving the coronavirus
jab. Johnson said the conference will take place Monday to allow the individuals to tell their
stories and discuss issues that have been "repeatedly ignored" by the medical community,
according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
The Republican senator, who has been a vocal critic of vaccine mandates and has previously
advocated for alternative and unproven drug treatments to COVID-19, faced immediate backlash
from critics who feel the event will be a platform for spreading misinformation about the
safety of vaccines.
Dr. Jeff Huebner, a doctor in Madison, Wisconsin, said that Johnson was "promoting dangerous
and unfounded claims" about the vaccine that contradict medical research and analysis.
"As a member of the Wisconsin medical community I'm gravely concerned about the impact his
event and remarks will have on our ability to return to normal and protect Wisconsinites from
COVID-19.," Huebner said in a statement, the Journal Sentinel reported .
Joanna Bisgrove, a Wisconsin primary care doctor, told FOX6 that Johnson's statements and
event are "putting people at risk and already hurting people."
Tony Evers, the state's Democratic governor, added Friday that Johnson was being "reckless
and irresponsible" and said the event was "jeopardizing the health and safety" of the state's
vaccine rollout and economic recovery.
.@SenRonJohnson, you're being reckless and irresponsible. The #COVID19 vaccine is safe and
effective and based on years of science and research. Every time you suggest otherwise,
you're jeopardizing the health and safety of the people of our state and our economic
recovery.
-- Governor Tony Evers (@GovEvers) June 25, 2021
In defense, Johnson said Friday that he is "just asking questions" and isn't against the
vaccine.
"We're all supporters of vaccines. As I've repeatedly said, I'm glad that hundreds of
millions of Americans have been vaccinated, but I don't think authorities can ignore and censor
some of the issues," Johnson said in a tweet responding to Evers. "On Monday, we'll bring light
to stories that deserve to be seen, heard & believed."
Monday's event in Milwaukee will include statements from former Green Bay Packers player Ken
Ruettgers and his wife, Sheryl.
Johnson said Sheryl Ruettgers will detail "severe neurological reactions that still inhibit
her ability to live a normal life, including muscle pain, numbness, weakness and paresthesia"
that she experienced after getting the COVID-19 vaccine earlier this month.
Additional testimonies will be heard from individuals from Ohio, Missouri, Utah, Michigan
and Tennessee.
The medical community has long stressed that the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine far
outweigh the risks of possible side effects. Earlier this week, top U.S. health officials, medical agencies, laboratory and hospital
associations issued a statement reiterating the benefits by stating that getting vaccinated is
the "best way to protect yourself, your loved ones, your community, and to return to a more
normal lifestyle safely and quickly."
Newsweek contacted Johnson for additional comment, but did not hear back in time for
publication.
Newsweek, in partnership with NewsGuard, is dedicated to providing accurate and
verifiable vaccine and health information. With NewsGuard's HealthGuard browser extension,
users can verify if a website is a trustworthy source of health information. Visit the Newsweek
VaxFacts website to learn more and to download the HealthGuard browser extension.
The German company BioNTech
partnered with Pfizer to develop and test a coronavirus
vaccine known as BNT162b2 , the generic name tozinameran or the brand name Comirnaty . A
clinical trial demonstrated that the vaccine has an efficacy rate
of
over 90 percent in preventing Covid-19.
The SARS-CoV-2 virus is studded with
proteins that it uses to enter human cells. These so-called spike proteins make a tempting
target for potential vaccines
and treatments
.
The vaccine uses messenger RNA, genetic material that our cells read to make proteins. The
molecule" called mRNA for short "" is fragile and would be chopped to pieces by our natural
enzymes if it were injected directly into the body. To protect their vaccine, Pfizer and
BioNTech wrap the mRNA in oily bubbles made of lipid nanoparticles.
Lipid nanoparticles
surrounding mRNA
Because of their fragility, the mRNA molecules will quickly fall apart at room temperature.
Pfizer is building special containers with dry ice, thermal sensors and GPS trackers to ensure
the vaccines can be transported at ""94°F (""70°C) to stay
viable.
Entering a Cell
After injection, the vaccine particles bump into cells and fuse to them, releasing mRNA. The
cell's molecules read its sequence and build spike proteins. The mRNA from the vaccine is
eventually destroyed by the cell, leaving no permanent trace.
VACCINE
PARTICLES
VACCINATED
CELL
Spike
protein
mRNA
Translating mRNA
Three spike
proteins combine
Spike
Cell
nucleus
Spikes
and protein
fragments
Displaying
spike protein
fragments
Protruding
spikes
Some of the spike proteins form spikes that migrate to the surface of the cell and stick out
their tips. The vaccinated cells also break up some of the proteins into fragments, which they
present on their surface. These protruding spikes and spike protein fragments can then be
recognized by the immune system.
Spotting the Intruder
When a vaccinated cell dies, the debris will contain many spike proteins and protein
fragments, which can then be taken up by a type of immune cell called an antigen-presenting
cell.
Debris from
a dead cell
Engulfing
a spike
ANTIGEN-
PRESENTING
CELL
Digesting
the proteins
Presenting a
spike protein
fragment
HELPER
T CELL
The cell presents fragments of the spike protein on its surface. When other cells called
helper T cells detect these fragments, the helper T cells can raise the alarm and help marshal
other immune cells to fight the infection.
Making Antibodies
Other immune cells, called B cells, may bump into the coronavirus spikes on the surface of
vaccinated cells, or free-floating spike protein fragments. A few of the B cells may be able to
lock onto the spike proteins. If these B cells are then activated by helper T cells, they will
start to proliferate and pour out antibodies that target the spike protein.
HELPER
T CELL
Activating
the B cell
Matching
surface proteins
VACCINATED
CELL
B CELL
SECRETED
ANTIBODIES Stopping the Virus
The antibodies can latch onto coronavirus spikes, mark the virus for destruction and prevent
infection by blocking the spikes from attaching to other cells.
ANTIBODIES
VIRUS Killing Infected Cells
The antigen-presenting cells can also activate another type of immune cell called a killer T
cell to seek out and destroy any
coronavirus-infected cells that display the spike protein fragments on their
surfaces.
ANTIGEN-
PRESENTING
CELL
Presenting a
spike protein
fragment
ACTIVATED
KILLER
T CELL
INFECTED
CELL
Beginning
to kill the
infected cell Remembering the Virus
The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine requires two injections, given 21 days apart, to prime the
immune system well enough to fight off the coronavirus. But because the vaccine is so new,
researchers don't know how long its protection might last.
First dose
0.3ml
Second dose
21 days later
A preliminary study found that the vaccine seems to offer strong protection about 10
days after the first dose , compared with people taking a placebo:
Cumulative incidence of Covid-19
among clinical trial participants
2.5%
2.0
People taking
a placebo
1.5
1.0
Second
dose
First
dose
People taking the
Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine
0.5
0
1
2
3
4
8
12
16
Weeks after the first dose
It's possible that in the months after vaccination, the number of antibodies and killer T
cells will drop. But the immune system also contains special cells called memory B cells and
memory T cells that might retain information about the coronavirus for years or even
decades.
Each vial of the vaccine contains 5 doses of 0.3 milliliters. The vaccine must be thawed
before injection and diluted with saline. After dilution the vial must be used within six
hours.
A diluted vial of the vaccine at Royal Free Hospital in London. Jack Hill/Agence France-Presse
Vaccine Timeline
January, 2020 BioNTech begins work on a
vaccine after Dr. Ugur Sahin, one of the company's founders, becomes convinced that the
coronavirus will spread from China into a pandemic.
Dr. Ugur Sahin of BioNTech. BioNTech
March BioNTech and Pfizer agree to collaborate.
May The companies launch a Phase
1/2 trial on two versions of a mRNA vaccine. One version, known as BNT162b2, had fewer side
effects.
The first trial participant being vaccinated in Germany. BioNTech
July 22 The Trump administration awards a
$1.9 billion contract for 100 million doses to be delivered by December, with an option to
acquire 500 million more doses, if the vaccine is authorized by the Food and Drug
Administration.
July 27 The companies launch a Phase 2/3
trial with 30,000 volunteers in the United States and other countries, including Argentina,
Brazil and Germany.
Sept. 12 Pfizer and BioNTech
announce they will seek to expand their U.S. trial to 44,000 participants.
A vial of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Pool photo by Andy Stenning
Nov. 9 Preliminary data indicates the Pfizer vaccine is over 90
percent effective , with no serious side effects. The final data from the trial shows the
efficacy rate is 95 percent.
Dec. 2 Britain gives emergency
authorization to Pfizer and BioNTech's vaccine, becoming the first Western country to give
such an approval to a coronavirus vaccine.
Dec. 8 William
Shakespeare , age 81, is among the first people to receive a shot of the vaccine in
Britain, on the first day of vaccinations for at-risk health care workers and people over
80.
Dec. 9 Canada
authorizes the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
Dec. 11 The F.D.A. grants Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine the first emergency use
authorization for a coronavirus vaccine in the United States.
Mexico also approves the vaccine for emergency use.
Dec. 21 The European Union
authorizes the vaccine.
Dec. 31 Pfizer expects to produce up to
50 million doses by the end of the year, and up to 1.3 billion doses in 2021. Each
vaccinated person will require two doses.
The comments were made on Sky News by Special Envoy on Covid for the World Health
Organisation (WHO). Dr David Nabarro.
Nabarro suggested that there would be a long list of mutations of the Indian variant which
would in some cases evade the protection offered by vaccines.
"We will go from Delta to Lambda and then on to the other Greek letters, that's inevitable,
and some of these variants will be troublesome," he said.
"I'm basically saying variants are going to go on coming. That's part of life, we need to
pick them up fast, we need to move quickly if we see them in a certain location, we need to
build the management of variants into what we call our Covid-ready strategy, which is going to
be the pattern for the foreseeable future," he added.
According to Nabarro, mask mandates and social distancing need to remain in place for the
foreseeable future "as part of our defence" against COVID , particularly in regions which have
high infection rates.
y_arrow
Roacheforque 2 hours ago
[For those who already had Covid-19] the variants are a nothing burger according to Dr.
Yeadon, who is censored and cancelled , just like ivermectin and HCQ.
Crimes against humanity.
trailer park boys 1 hour ago
I was going to bring up Dr. Mike Yeadon also. As the former VP and respiratory research
head globally for Pfizer, he has the knowledge to call Bullshiit! on this variant crap. He
was on The Highwire a week or so ago and it is the best hour and a half to clue you in on
the Covid scam that you'll ever see.
https://thehighwire.com/videos/pfizer-vp-the-thing-to-be-terrified-of-is-your-government/
BLOTTO 1 hour ago
' the idea of mutations of SARS-CoV-2 is based only on an interpretation of the fact
that all DNA is constantly changing. Or more generally formulated, the idea of the virus
mutation arises only because one still works with completely outdated, long since disproved
scientific hypotheses.
With this obsolete approach, new mutations of SARS-CoV-2 can be found/invented for all
eternity. This can quickly become a catastrophic self-perpetuating vicious circle, and it
appears that many scientists have already fallen into this.'
Confidential Documents reveal Moderna sent mRNA Coronavirus Vaccine Candidate to
University Researchers weeks before emergence of Covid-19
Tap News / Weaver
U.S. Gov't Sent "mRNA Coronavirus Vaccine Candidates" to University Researchers WEEKS
BEFORE "COVID" Outbreak in China
Virgil Krenshaw PREMIUM 2 hours ago remove link
AKA the plan from the beginning.
Permanent lockdown is one way to keep the people from rising up. Or it might cause them
to rise up. Flip a coin, oligarchs. You feel lucky?
HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 2 hours ago
The twisted part is the dumb people that are followers are the ones getting vaxxed and
wearing a mask. Both of which have serious health implications. Oh well. Not my problem if
the dumb ones, as usual, win the Darwin Award.
williambanzai7 PREMIUM 2 hours ago
Your papers please
Rectify77 PREMIUM 2 hours ago
Total mind control. Fear only works until people realize that the bogeyvirus isn't
really dangerous to the 99.8%. Wake up people!
pods 1 hour ago remove link
This guy [who advocates social distancing] needs to be ventilated. You know how many
people will die from lack of socialization? More than from the boogeyman virus.
These psychopaths need to be removed from society. We've lived and died for a long time
with communicable diseases. We aren't going dystopia cyborg life now.
Nope, "2 ropes to stretch his neck".
hegger 2 hours ago (Edited)
The WHO lost its scientific relevance and whatever psychological authority it had left
when it changed its version of "herd immunity" such that herd immunity could now only be
possible through vaccines. (I'm too lazy to provide a link, but look it up; it
happened.)
The WHO and its scientists have betrayed the light of logos for the short-term dopamine
hits provided by power and money. They are quite literally a net negative to the human
species and, hopefully, history will prepare an appropriately excruciating conclusion of
their miserable lives.
GeezerGeek 1 hour ago
I suspect that the narrowly targeted mRNA jabs do a really poor job of developing herd
immunity. They only potentially address one of the many ways -> our immune systems
normally work. Or so I've read.
But what do I know? I'm not a doctor and it's been decades since I last "played doctor"
with anyone.
SuperareDolo 2 hours ago (Edited)
SARS is only 80% identical to Covid, versus 99.99% identical for these stupid variants.
Survivors of SARS have robust T-cell immunity today, including against Covid, 17 years
after having the disease. Antibodies don't do the heavy lifting against viruses, and
surface antigens like spike protein are often not the principal immune targets. So useless
vaccines might indeed allow endless variants to spread. But all those people who've had the
virus now have the gold standard of immunity, and don't need to give another thought to
it.
KittyAW 2 hours ago remove link
The Earth is inundated w/ viruses, bacteria, fungi & other microorganisms. They are
everywhere; the air, soil, oceans - THIS is the environment in which humans evolved. Those
whose immune systems were inadequate early on, died early on; those whose immune systems
degenerated died later.
In the more recent centuries sanitation & improved diets have enabled very many to
overcome infections who would have died in centuries past. Far more recently tho, many ppl
have ruined their immune systems via life-style practices, among them poor eating habits
leading to obesity. Those who have kept themselves truly healthy - or regained good health
- which always includes a strong immune system, should not be penalized (nor penalized
themselves) bc of the many who have let themselves become immune-wise dysfunctional.
These new "variants" are not much different from the original & the prevention
measures of serious illness are the same. But this WHO "Special Envoy on Covid" is NOT
going to say that. The financial backing from the likes of Bill Gates is all promulgated on
Pushing "Vaccines", even tho they will have little to no diminishing effect on anything but
general health over the next few years as data is likely to show..... But a diminished
population is exactly what certain parties want.
trailer park boys 2 hours ago
Dr. Mike Yeadon has given the most insightful explanation of all the nefarious goings on
this past year plus. As the former VP and respiratory research head globally for Pfizer, he
has the knowledge to call Bullshiit! on this variant crap. He was on The Highwire a week or
so ago and it is the best hour and a half to clue you in on the Covid scam that you'll ever
see.
https://thehighwire.com/videos/pfizer-vp-the-thing-to-be-terrified-of-is-your-government/
YouThePeople 2 hours ago
The WHO...We Won't Get Fooled Again!
Able Ape 2 hours ago (Edited)
I think he's a moron... Him and that midget Fauci make quite a pathetic pair...
Schroedingers Cat 2 hours ago
He's not stupid. He either brainwashed, blackmailed or in all likelihood a greedy
genocidal psychopath who puts his career and income before the future of the entire human
race..
WeNamedTheDogIndiana 1 hour ago
mask mandates and social distancing need to remain in place for the foreseeable future
"as part of our defence" against COVID
Just like getting groped at airports by TSA goons, warrantless surveillance, warrant
applications approved almost 100% of the time by a shadowy court, and renewal of the
Patriot Act....all for our safety. Sure.
liberty2day 2 hours ago
the only ugly face that needs a muzzle is faoxi's
dockw 2 hours ago
Could you reference some studies, like in scientific, that demonstrate Masks are
effective in blocking the Covid? -- which virons are smaller than the material in a mask I
didn't think so.
Here's the Danish study done last year which shows they don't make a difference https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
According to Nabarro, mask mandates and social distancing need to remain in place for
the foreseeable future "as part of our defence" against COVID , particularly in regions
which have high infection rates.
Social distancing seems rather silly. If a person remains the required distance away
from another person this does not mean they may not be breathing the same air. The air does
not abide by social distancing. Air moves. People move. If people move through contaminated
air yet keep the proper social distancing space with other persons yet people are still
passing through contaminated air. Even if there is no one around and a person is perfectly
social distanced from the entire human race thus they can still be breathing in
contaminated air that was previously contaminated by an infected person even a few moments
before. I just don't get the whole folly of social distancing thing.
Further, it's a talking virus that is spread by talking. So if one is perfectly socially
distanced from another and yet talking or one is talking on their cell and the other not
talking... well it still comes down to masks and contaminated air.
People should generally tend to wear masks when venturing out especially as to high
pedestrian traffic areas or high traffic sites such as big box stores or grocers or even
neighborhood small stores that receive a lot or constant foot traffic/patronage.
The shots are "safe and effective," the propagandists proclaim.
That's absolutely true. Until some woefully ignorant, or psychopathic imitation of a human
being injects them into someone.
Anyone with two or more brain cells that get along, and has paid the slightest attention
knows that those under 20 are virtually immune to the virus, and those under 40 are no more at
risk than they are from the common cold, and those under 60 with no other serious co-morbidity
are only at slight risk. There is no logical reason to vaccinate ANYONE under 20. Very little
reason regarding those 20-40, and choose your poison if you are 40-whatever. At 67 I've chosen
to take my chances without participating in a medical experiment.
Regarding safety, they are the most dangerous vaccine ever produced, much less deployed,
even by the woefully inadequate results of under reporting to VAERS. By those results, the
COVID vaccines have already killed about 6,000 Americans. More than all other vaccines combined
for the last 10-30 years, and the year is only half over. Some of those other vaccines were
pulled from the market because of as few as 50 deaths. Why do the COVID vaccines get a pass for
6,000? And that's just deaths. There are abundant other side effects, including mounting
evidence of mental disability, and definite reproductive damage.
VAERS data: "5,888 deaths", "19,597 hospitalizations", "43,891 urgent care", "58,800
office visits", "1,459 anaphylaxis", "1,737 Bell's palsy", "2,190 heart attacks" and "652
miscarriages". CDC says data is "unreliable". You choose who to believe.
WarrenLiz 16 hours ago
Over 15,472 dead from Jab in 27 EU countries, about half of Europe's 50 countries.
The EudraVigilance database reports that through June 19, 2021 there are 15,472 deaths
and 1,509,266 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19
shots:
The answer to Carlson's question is because.. it's a money grabbing death cult!.
Natural immun system is destroyed... just wait till next flu season or the next virus
they relase and see what death numbers we see!
racing_flowers 17 hours ago
Isn't it curious that the 3 big pharma Corps (think Vacc pushers) and the big 2 MSM
Corps are BOTH controlled by Blackrock Partners Hedge Fund...
Nona Yobiznes 18 hours ago remove link
Them going after the children makes me deeply suspicious. Nobody under 50, unless
they're made of blubber, dies from this. In 2020, there was practically zero excess death
for people younger than 70 years old in Sweden. These are their official statistics. For
the vast majority of people it's basically a flu you get for a couple days and you're over
it. What the **** is all this about? If the vaccine is only really good for preventing
hospitalizations, and doesn't stop you from spreading or from catching variants, what in
the hell are we giving kids vaccines when they are more likely to die from the regular flu?
It's freaky, and it stinks.
Having been caught delivering some fact-base 'science' that does not
jibe with the establishment's message that all kids should be jabbed immediately, The WHO has
rapidly 'adjusted' its science-based recommendations for whether children should get
vaccinated... or not...
Gone is the big headline - "Children should not be vaccinated for the moment."
The new guidance is as follows: (emphasis ours... in case you are confused by their
guidance)
Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults, so unless they
are part of a group at higher risk of severe COVID-19, it is less urgent to vaccinate them
than older people, those with chronic health conditions and health workers.
More evidence is needed on the use of the different COVID-19 vaccines in children to be
able to make general recommendations on vaccinating children against COVID-19.
WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) has concluded that the Pfizer/BionTech
vaccine is suitable for use by people aged 12 years and above. Children aged between 12 and
15 who are at high risk may be offered this vaccine alongside other priority groups for
vaccination.
Vaccine trials for children are ongoing and WHO will update its recommendations when the
evidence or epidemiological situation warrants a change in policy.
So to clarify... children aren't really at risk of this virus so no hurry on the jab... more
evidence is needed on its usefulness in kids... oh but the Pfizer vax is suitable?
So is there evidence or not? Is the vaccine worthwhile for kids? If you have to ask, you
aren't following the science.
Color us not entirely surprised at this farce... but one thing we are sure of, this will
simply be dismissed as a coincidence and WHO had planned on adjusting its guidance the whole
time (it was just waiting to get caught in a disagreement with Fauci and friends).
* * *
As The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity's Adam Dick noted yesterday, in
America, national, state, and local governments are pulling out all the stops to advance giving
experimental coronavirus shots to children down to the age of 12.
Up next, babies and children up to age 11.
The shots are "safe and effective," the propagandists proclaim.
Meanwhile, the World Health Organization (WHO) has a different approach. The WHO says do not
vaccinate children, at least not yet.
At its website, the WHO offers this advice regarding giving experimental coronavirus
vaccines, some of which are not even vaccines under the normal meaning of the term, to
children:
Children should not be vaccinated for the moment. There is not yet enough evidence on the
use of vaccines against COVID-19 in children to make recommendations for children to be
vaccinated against COVID-19.
Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults.
However, children should continue to have the recommended childhood vaccines.
Choose accordingly.
Kugelhagel 18 hours ago
Conspiracy theorist = heretic ... they couldn't use that word anymore, because everyone
would understand that this is about silencing the truth.
Ride_the_kali_yuga 17 hours ago
Nice analogy.
JimmyJones 17 hours ago remove link
Yep, women with their periods messed up, their babies allergic to their breast milk,
young people with heart inflammation, people having partial paralyzed limbs. I know there's
more.
We don't even know what 6-12 months has in-store or 1-2 years.
Alice-the-dog 13 hours ago
I'm always on the look out for new conspiracy theories, because my old ones all turned
out to be accurate.
It was a brilliant psyop by the CIA to invent the term to cover up the murder of JFK.
But if one takes a cursory look at it, how is a conspiracy ever to be exposed without a
theory that there is one? If every time someone proposes a theory regarding this or that
possible conspiracy, they are swept into the kook dust bin, how will any conspiracy ever be
exposed? Hence they aren't, unless iron clad evidence of their existence is encompassed by
the theory.
WarrenLiz 15 hours ago
Over 15,472 dead from Jab in 27 EU countries, about half of Europe's 50 countries.
The EudraVigilance database reports that through June 19, 2021 there are 15,472 deaths
and 1,509,266 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19
shots:
...Too many people are stuck in normalcy bias and are too trusting of the modern elite
class. You don't have to look back very far to see the unspeakable atrocities powerful
people are willing and able to commit.
Ride_the_kali_yuga 17 hours ago (Edited) remove link
My guess was depopulation due to lower EROIE on petroleum. Deathcross of the fossil
energy (oil) available was near to us, maybe we already are behind peak oil. Eolians, solar
panels and EV are an energical leftist joke and will never be an alternative to nuclear/
charchoal power plants and thermic motors.
I was thinking about it for quite some time. Why all this Covidian Cult was necessary
for? What does it produce? Lockdowns was a main response worldwide.
Was it usefull? absolutely not. No more planes in the sky, economic slowdown, a lot less
of enegy used . I guess this sanitary madness was all about cheap energy we can get from
oil. The human population exploded due to the industrial revolution, the machines, their
capacities and -in fine- oil made it possible. If you do not have enough cheap oil and the
EROIE is way to high, then the industrial technology we live in can no longer be.
The Covidian Cult produced what an energy crisis would have made...
The_Dude 16 hours ago
Evil is narcissism run amok...
Rose Marie PREMIUM 15 hours ago
Intelligence without wisdom. Always looking at what, how, when, where, but no interest
in asking why. Running thought processes without examining the meaning.
uncle_duke 18 hours ago remove link
An age of unlimited information, and a population too dumb and lazy to do anything with
it. Reality has become Pythonian.
DAVOS-19 14 hours ago
Not so fast. Remember, they lie, probably also about history.
Now Voyager 14 hours ago
What happens when you stop natural selection and substitute unnatural selection.
Ride_the_kali_yuga 13 hours ago
Yeah, the gene pool is over crowded with genetics defects. See diabetics, i mean
"genetical" ones since a young age. Insuline was a great discovery, it saves a lot of
people at some point. Then without the natural selection they had kids of their own and has
a consequence they spread their genetic defect in the gene pool. Sometimes great inventions
make unintended results.
Diseases are a way for nature to get rid of the olders and the weak. It is not moral,
there is no justice in this, this is just the way nature works. Human tried damn hard to
break nature's law, the thing is, there is consequences playing god.
"Delta is driving surges around the world, and I suspect it's going to be the same here,"
said William Lee, the vice president of science at Helix. Delta is growing more than twice as
fast as gamma, the variant first seen in Brazil, in undervaccinated communities.
Meanwhile, the gamma variant, which appears better at evading vaccines, was found to be more
prevalent in counties with higher inoculation rates.
People who have received the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine have fewer antibodies targeting the
Indian COVID-19 variant compared to other strains, new data suggests.
Levels of these antibodies are lower with increasing age and decline over time, the analysis
of blood samples from 250 healthy people also suggests.
This provides even more evidence in support for vaccine boosters for the vulnerable come
autumn, researchers believe.
The data, from the Francis Crick Institute and the National Institute for Health Research
(NIHR) UCLH Biomedical Research Centre, also supports current plans to reduce the dose gap
between the jabs.
It found that after just one dose of the Pfizer jab, recipients were less likely to develop
antibody levels against the Indian variant, also known as Delta, as high as those seen against
the UK variant, now known as Alpha.
...researchers at Emory University performed similar studies with antibodies taken from 15
people who have been vaccinated with either the Pfizer or Moderna shots. In these studies, the
antibodies could still neutralize the B.1.617 variant, but the potency of the antibodies
dropped by about sevenfold on average, the authors reported .
"Despite this reduction, all vaccine blood samples ... still maintained the ability to block
the B.1.617 variant," said immunologist Mehul Suthar
at Emory, who led the study.
Together the data suggests the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines will still work well against
B.1.617, just as they do for the variant from South Africa, known as B.1.351. In both cases,
the shots will likely offer high protection from death and severe illness, but they may lose
some ability to stop mild or asymptomatic infections.
European health authorities have more or less confirmed that adenovirus-vector vaccines
produced by AstraZeneca and J&J can, in rare instances, cause potentially deadly cerebral
brain clots in patients with low blood-platelet counts. These findings, which were hinted at
during the late-stage trials for the AstraZeneca vaccine (which saw its US trials halted for a
month over safety issues) have
led to some European governments imposing restrictions on the vaccines.
... ... ...
The FT reports that the CDC
has found a "likely association" between a handful of cases of heart inflammation and the mRNA
COVID-19 vaccines. The reactions were documented in adolescent patients, which might explain
the delay in detection since teenagers have only just become eligible.
There were 323 confirmed cases among people who received the vaccine of certain types of
heart inflammation in the US up to June 11, with 309 people requiring hospital treatment.
Nearly 80% of the people with confirmed cases have fully recovered, according to the CDC's
Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group.
The cases have prompted the agency to start monitoring for new instances of myocarditis and
pericarditis, two different types of heart inflammation, to see if any new cases or potential
links emerge. The demographic group that's most vulnerable so far appears to be men under the
age of 30 (by contrast, the rare side effect for the AstraZeneca jabs mostly impacted young
women). Right now, the cases of heart inflammation have occurred at a rate of 4.4 per million
vaccine doses after the first dose, then rising to 12.6 per million after the second dose,
which is still exceedingly rare.
If an adolescent patient experiences heart inflammation after their first dose, the CDC
recommends deferring the second dose.
"This is an extremely rare side-effect, and only an exceedingly small number of people
will experience it after vaccination," doctors from the US health department, CDC and others
said in a statement following the meeting. "Most cases are mild, and individuals recover
often on their own or with minimal treatment. In addition, we know that myocarditis and
pericarditis are much more common if you get Covid-19 , and the risks to the heart from
Covid-19 infection can be more severe," they added.
In the US and Israel, high vaccination rates have prompted authorities to start vaccinating
younger and younger patients, with Israel now vaccinating patients as young as 12 . Anyone who
objects is quickly reminded of the threat of "variants" like the mutant strain "Delta".
Meanwhile, the developing world is still woefully undersupplied, leaving even the most
vulnerable patients without access.
Stinkbug 1 20 hours ago remove link
He's not being judgmental, just stating the facts as he sees them.
The young men who submit to the shot are cannon fodder for big Pharma. The young men who
went to war for causes that turned out out be lies were also cannon fodder. Part of the
tragedy is that their anger cannot be channeled into healthy change since they are either
disabled or no longer with us.
If you were forced to take this shot, focus your anger on the system, not those who
point out the corruption.
ohm 16 hours ago remove link
Who is being forced to take the shots? Unless they have people holding you down or a
gun at your head, you are not forced.
You are being forced in certain countries like Indonesia and the Philippines. In the
rest of the world your are being coerced. Either way, it is a violation of the Nuremberg
code. Libtards, Fauci, Collins and the rest of the public health authorities prove again
that Mengele was just ahead of his time.
WHO's Swaminathan said that scientists still needed more data on the variant, including its
impact on the efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines. How many are getting infected and of those how many
are getting hospitalized and seriously ill?
Some countries, like the U.S. and U.K., have already signaled that they could
roll out Covid-19 booster shots within a year . Now, pressure is building on governments to
mobilize booster shot programs" no easy task given the ongoing uncertainties surrounding the
pandemic, vaccines and variants.
As talk of booster shots grow, here's what we know so far: What?
First of all, there are question marks over whether we actually need a third dose of any
Covid-19 vaccine given that we don't know how long immunity currently lasts.
WATCH NOW VIDEO 01:22 Dr. Scott Gottlieb on whether people will
need Covid booster shots
There are also unknowns regarding whether people should get a booster shot that's the same
as the vaccines they originally had. And also whether the shots need to be tweaked to deal with
variants, much like the flu vaccine, or whether they can remain as they are.
This report claims that people who had been fully vaccinated with two Pfizer doses had
antibodies that were 6 times lower against the B.1.617.2 variant (aka Indian variant, aka Delta
variant). Other reports claim that two doses of the Pfizer vaccine provided about 88% protection.
Analysis from Public Health England released last week showed that two doses of the
Pfizer-BioNTech or Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccines are highly effective against
hospitalization from the delta variant.
This is the most transmissible of all the variants that we've seen. But now a mutation of
that variant has emerged, called "delta plus," which could potentially be more transmissible. The
variant appears to cause alarmingly severe symptoms, scientists say. Stomach pain, nausea,
vomiting, loss of appetite, hearing loss, and joint pain are among the symptoms now being seen in
India, according to six doctors treating patients across India, Bloomberg News reports.
The delta plus variant has three worrying characteristics. These are, it said: increased
transmissibility, stronger binding to receptors of lung cells and the potential reduction in
monoclonal antibody response (which could reduce the efficacy of a lifesaving monoclonal antibody
therapy given to some hospitalized Covid patients).
The Delta variant, as it's now called, has swept across the UK, all but replacing the Alpha
variant first identified there late last year.
As of June 19 20.6% of the cases in the USA are Delta. This number has roughly doubled every
two weeks, he added.
Currently, 62.5% of Americans 12 and up have gotten at least one dose of a vaccine, according
to CDC.
June 4, 2021 -- The Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine produces lower
levels of antibodies against the Delta variant, known as B.1.617.2 and discovered in India,
according to a new
study published Thursday in The Lancet .
The antibody levels also appear to be lower in older people and decline over time, which
could mean that some vaccinated people will need a booster shot this fall.
"This virus will likely be around for some time to come, so we need to remain agile and
vigilant," Emma Wall, PhD, the lead study author and an infectious diseases specialist at the
Francis Crick Institute in London, said
in a statement .
"The most important thing is to ensure that vaccine
protection remains high enough to keep as many people out of hospital as possible," she said.
"And our results suggest that the best way to do this is to quickly deliver second doses and
provide boosters to those whose immunity
may not be high enough against these new variants."
The research team analyzed antibodies in the blood of 250 healthy people, ages
33-52, up to 3 months after receiving their first dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine . The team looked for
"neutralizing antibodies," or the ability of antibodies to block the virus from entering
cells.
The researchers tested five variants: the original strain discovered in China, the dominant
strain in Europe during the first wave in April 2020, the B.1.1.7 variant discovered in the
U.K., the B.1.351 variant first seen in South Africa, and the newest variant of concern, which
is the B.1.617.2 variant discovered in India.
The team compared the concentrations of the neutralizing antibodies among the variants.
They found that people who had been fully vaccinated with two Pfizer doses had antibodies that
were 6 times lower against the B.1.617.2 variant, 5 times lower against the B.1.351 variant,
and 2.6 times lower against the B.1.1.7 variant when compared to the original strain.
The antibody response was even lower in people who had received only one dose. After a
single Pfizer dose, 79% of people had neutralizing antibodies against the original strain,
which fell to 50% for the B.1.1.7 variant, 32% for the B.1.617.2 variant, and 25% for the
B.1.351 variant.
The study group plans to continue its research on neutralizing antibodies and the variants,
including in people who have been vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine.
"New variants occur naturally, and those that have an advantage will spread. We now have the
ability to quickly adapt our vaccination strategies to maximize protection where we know people
are most vulnerable," David Bauer, PhD, the senior study author and group leader of the Francis
Crick Institute's RNA Virus Replication Laboratory, said in the statement.
"Keeping track of the evolutionary changes is essential for us to retain control over the
pandemic and return to
normality," he said. "This work "¦ can help us to navigate changes in this new phase of
the pandemic."
" Low-certainty evidence found that ivermectin prophylaxis reduced COVID-19 infection by
an average 86% (95% confidence interval 79%""91%).
--
Conclusions:
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible
using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers
progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is
likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally."
What happens after the concentrations of the vax nanoparticles accumulate in the bone
marrow, which they are doing? Perhaps leukemia? We don't know. But for some, it is more
important to virtual signal that you and your children got the vaccine rather than its
unknown consequences.
Robert Malone, MD, inventor of mRNA vax technology, is dismayed by Pfizer's study for
Japan showing the vax nanoparticles accumulate in the bone marrow, ovaries, spleen, and
lymph nodes.
He says there needs to be monitoring of vaccine recipients for leukemia and lymphomas
because of these concentrations in the bone marrow and lymph nodes. He says these signals
often don't show up for six months to 3-9 years down the road.
Malone says the FDA knew the COVID spike protein was biologically active and could
travel from the injection site and cause adverse events, and that the spike protein is
very dangerous.
He says there should have been 2-3 year trials to monitor for potential autoimmune
consequences of the vaxxes, but of course that didn't happen. He says they also didn't
conduct proper animal studies.
Inventor of mRNA Technology: Vaccine Causes Lipid Nanoparticles to Accumulate in 'High
Concentrations' in Ovaries
On the "Dark Horse Podcast," Dr. Robert Malone, creator of mRNA vaccine technology, said
the COVID vaccine lipid nanoparticles -- which tell the body to produce the spike protein
-- leave the injection site and accumulate in organs and tissues (particularly the ovaries
and bone marrow). O6/17/21
See my comments below on dendritic cells. That's what the mRNA is supposed to target,
and even doing that is messing with immune system mechanisms that scientists don't even
understand in the first place , before they mess with it.
Jim in MN 15 hours ago
While a COVID-19 vaccine will prevent serious illness and death, we still don't know the
extent to which it keeps you from being infected and passing the virus on to others.
Sooooooooo.......all the databases and vaccine requirements to do this and that
are........not based on anything?
Anything.........at all?
That's what I thought. Thanks for clearing that up.
Giant Meteor 15 hours ago
" While a COVID-19 vaccine will prevent serious illness and death, it may also create
serious illness and death!"
Hmmm decisions decisions ..
Volga Boat Man 15 hours ago remove link
Only a flaming moron would allow themselves to take the Zombie Jab when both the
Gruberment AND the Manufacturer claim NO liability for anything that happens as a result,
i.e., dying.
Some facts that have not changed since 2019 outbreak
It's a bioweapon not a naturally occurring virus - gain of function confirmed
It's a gene modifying cell therapy not a vaccine - first time used on humans
It's only approved an emergency authorization; it's not FDA approved
It's unproven read as potentially unsafe since over 5,500 Americans have died after
getting the jab
It's not effective since Pfizer and Moderna claim it's not stopping transmission
Pfizer former VP Dr. Michael Yeadon warns people not to take the jab
TQRock 16 hours ago
Unclear how an experimental "vaccine" authorized for emergency use only could be
proclaimed "safe and effective."
BAG 18 hours ago remove link
The covid-19 EUA should be changed to make the vaccine manufactures liable for damages
to anyone under the age of 50 years old. Then they can tell us how safe it is.
My uncle believes everyone should be vaccinated, while I will never accept the lethal
injection. The difference between us is he watches MSM and reads the daily newspaper, while I
cut the cord seven years ago.
COVID/vaccine is psychological warfare by the globalist elite and banksters against the
people using the propaganda media. The MSM viewership will soon be too low to broadcast as
their viewers are the mind controlled vaccine takers.
There is not yet enough evidence on the use of vaccines against COVID-19 in children to
make recommendations for children to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Children and
adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults. However, children should
continue to have the recommended childhood vaccines.
Simpson 19 hours ago
According to Dr. Michael Yeadon kids are 50 times more likely to die from the shot then
they are from the WuFlu.
Parents who give their kids this toxic ****e deserve a shot right between the eyes.
walküre 19 hours ago
"doing their part"
"nobody is safe, until we're all safe"
Hail Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Gates & Fauci!
walküre 19 hours ago (Edited) remove link
About fking time!
HANDS OFF THE KIDS!
There's going to be blood in the streets if they keep pushing us further and
further!
Our kids are not some cannon fodder for the elite's wars! Only despots and tyrants do
this when they're running out of options. Feeding kids into the lines of fire. We have a
Nuremberg code and a Geneva convention for a REASON!
The vax is garbage!
Absolutely NIL benefit for your health, only benefit to your social credit score.
Go ahead, get vaxxed if you feel like it. Know the risks, and inform yourself what the
ridiculous and negligible advantages are of having the synthetic toxins injected into your
system.
The side effects FAR outweigh the risks of potentially getting sick from whatever it is,
circulating out there. If your body is too weak or your system is responding badly to the
"virus", it will also respond negatively to the injections. When your time has come, your
time has come. Life is meant to be lived. Longevity is a God given privilege or curse, but
it is not a competition.
Samual Vimes 19 hours ago
Let them change genders and compete against girls in peace.
PrivetHedge 14 hours ago remove link
Number of verified covid test methods: Zero
Number of children dead from 'covid': Zero
Number of children damaged by the vaccine: Hundreds, soon to be Millions.
Emergency experimental drugs are never given to children, pregnant women or the old with
health issues. Doesn't happen, full stop.
And yet its happening with the covid gene therapy shots, the official name alone
warrants that it would never be given to kids and the pregnant. One can only assume the
greed of Pharma companies and their lackeys at regulatory agencies knows no bounds, they
know there are issues with the drugs. However they have indemnity from being sued, as such
they want to sell as much as they can before the ignorant masses catch on.
You wonder how these killers can sleep at night.
NoPension 17 hours ago
Trump's out. They sleep like babies.
Person familiar with the situation 17 hours ago
It's NOT about money. People keep making that baseless assumption just because most
everything else is about money in their own little world. The criminals here have printing
presses in every country and create money out of thin air.
Yamaoka Tesshu 9 hours ago (Edited)
"Show me your incentives and I will tell you the outcome". - Charlie Munger
He is Uncle Warren's longtime lieutenant. Look at AIDS. "If we make up a fake disease we
will get a fortune in funding." And they did. They prescribed lethal drugs that killed
people with the express purpose of creating hysteria. Murder for money.
Man on the Silver Mountain 19 hours ago
A demand that kids shouldn't be injected with this experimental shot is almost a
sideways admission the mRNA potion is detrimental to natural immunity, yet there's an
obsessively urgent need to stab adults? In the US I'd suspect the source of this motivation
is politics and a grasping greed for profit.
UselessEater 6 hours ago
NEW: Former Head Scientist at PFIZER Says Covid Threat is 100% FAKE
Prior to forming his own biotech company in 2011, Michael Yeadon was the Vice President
and Chief Scientific Officer for Allergy & Respiratory Research at Pfizer
Pharmaceutical.
He is a top scientist in the world of drugs and vaccines in the treatment of respiratory
diseases such as Covid. In this video he declares that the Covid pandemic is a fraud. He
explains why masks are useless, why distancing is absurd, why PCR tests are meaningless,
why quarantining healthy people is stupid, why variants of virus strains are no threat, and
why Covid vaccines should be rejected.
Yeadon says many of his colleagues privately agree with this appraisal but remain silent
to protect their salaries and research grants. It's all about money.
He concludes that, because of the massive number of deaths that will follow within a few
years of vaccination, there clearly is an agenda to deliberately eliminate billions of
people from the Earth and to enslave those who remain ..... plus much more.
[This scientist is such a good, brave man. He loves humanity. His voice is being
silenced on mainstream media and he is putting out this info to the public despite being
smeared and attacked (though they don't address his facts at all). So:
Pse share this video out to at least 5 other people as he gives simple scientific
explanations for all his statements.
archipusz 19 hours ago (Edited)
Giving this gene therapy called a vaccine to kids is worse than shutting down an economy
based on pcr tests run at 45 cycles.
Tao 4 the Show 11 hours ago remove link
I don't do Facebook or twitter, but someone should do an experiment:
Post something condemning vaccination in children and reference the WHO and link.
Did you know that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines aren't vaccines in the medical and legal
definition of a vaccine? They do not prevent you from getting the infection, nor do they
prevent its spread. They're really experimental gene therapies.
I discussed this troubling fact in a recent
interview with molecular biologist Judy Mikovits , Ph.D. While the Moderna and Pfizer
mRNA shots are labeled as "vaccines," and news agencies and health policy leaders call them
that, the actual patents for Pfizer's and Moderna's injections more truthfully describe
them as "gene therapy," not vaccines.
Picked up this article and pasted it in an MS Word docx. Interestingly you can't find it
by Google search - Censored
Bank_sters 13 hours ago remove link
Ok so Fauci and the cdc telling colleges and schools to push for experimental poison to
be given as a condition for young people to return to school. Now the myocarditis,
reproductive health, blood clotting cases are EXPLODING.
TheABaum 13 hours ago remove link
There are school districts demanding vaccination as a condition to return to live
instruction.
Hello Wilkes Barre, PA
One of the worst in the state.
Sparehead 15 hours ago remove link
Children are not lab rats and CANNOT make their own decisions about potentially
life-altering treatments for various reasons. Children are at essentially ZERO risk unless
they get jabbed.
ToSoft4Truth 15 hours ago
The parents did it.
Sparehead 15 hours ago
That not really the point, and there's many places that are allowing children to get
jabbed without parent consent, even in the US.
Things that go bump PREMIUM 14 hours ago remove link
I've read that they are planning to go into schools in the fall and make sure all the
kids get their shots. Parental consent is not required.
almost 16 hours ago
WHO ~ World Health Organization sounds like The Ministry of Love in George Orwell's
novel 1984
It's more like World Death organization nowadays
Enraged 17 hours ago remove link
A 13-year old boy died three days after the 2nd Pfizer injection. The autopsy results
show an enlarged heart and there was some fluid surrounding it. He had no health problems
and was on no medications.
📌📌📌📌For the 9,999th time. TRIALS FOR 'CRIMES AGAINST
HUMANITY' please.
The Nuremberg Code 1947 Permissible Medical Experiments
The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical
experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to
the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human
experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for
the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree,
however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical
and legal concepts:
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that
the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to
be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force,
fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and
should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter
involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter
element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental
subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the
experiment ; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and
hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may
possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
2. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon
each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment . It is a personal
duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
3. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society,
unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in
nature.
4. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal
experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem
under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the experiment.
5. The e xperiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and
mental suffering and injury.
6. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that
death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the
experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
7. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the
humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
8. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the
experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.
9. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The
highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of
those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
10. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring
the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation
of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
11. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to
terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise
of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation
of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental
subject.
Lou Saynis 12 hours ago
I'd like to see the people responsible for gain of function research, that led to
KNOWINGLY creating a dangerous infectious agent, be publicly held responsible . If they are
not and the masterminds of this doomsday device are allowed to vanish behind a veil of
bureaucracy... then it will result in all global powers engaging in an arms race similar to
nuclear weapons in the 20th century.
The difference is, a significant degree of action is required to fire off a nuke where a
virus can be accidentally or intentionally released with a much larger blast radius and
much more difficult to identify the source. There must be consequences for Covid19.
The reason the vaccine is a different subject is that a large portion of the civilized
world have already been inoculated. The consequences of that will be apparent in all of our
lifetimes and it's too early to start blaming people for it's known faults.
CheapBastard 15 hours ago (Edited)
13-Year-Old Dying Days After COVID Vaccine
13-year old nephew died three days after receiving a second dose of Pfizer's coronavirus
vaccine.
Things that go bump PREMIUM 14 hours ago remove link
Vaccine companies are always shielded from lawsuits. If your kid dies or is disabled
from the MMR (it does happen), you have to apply to the government for compensation. The
risks are well know and considered acceptable for public health. If your kid is among the
unlucky ones, well, you must bear that burden and thank you for your service to the cause
of public health.
realitybiter 16 hours ago remove link
I'm no lawyer, but I do know that the law protects Big Pharma. The law does not protect
anyone else who has demanded that anyone get the vaccine in order for them to conduct their
lives. -Go to school, go to work,etc. This is a Nuremberg violation:
The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the
person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be
able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force,
fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and
should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter
involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.
Sue them into oblivion.
Start with the BLUE STATE GOVERNORS
"hang em high"
Gunston_Nutbush_Hall 16 hours ago (Edited)
You do realize our founders had no check and balance against the National/State
Government(s) performing eugenic medical/science theory fraud experimentation upon the
people, under criminal false pretenses for private profit and control, except one.
There is no Court or law enforcement/cops coming to halt these crimes against
Americans/humanity.
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no
resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is
paramount to all positive forms of government , and which against the usurpations of the
national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against
those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted
with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of
which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures
for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without
system, without resource; except in their courage and despair. The usurpers, clothed with
the forms of legal authority, can too often crush the opposition in embryo- Alexander
Hamilton; The Federalist Papers : No. 28
Incontrovertible "data" was available and known to the WHO/NIH/CDC/NIAID that children
under 14 have a negligible risk of death or serious injury from Covid19 in March 2020. The
risks have actually diminished since then. Given these facts, the original recommendation
to vaccinate the entire population, including the young, amounts to medical malpractice. If
your clueless family doctor or pediatrician is recommending this experimental "vaccine" for
your children, find another medical provider. The politicized agenda driven WHO is playing
both sides, as usual, rather than following the science and common, reasonable, tried and
trusted practices. Remember: The Government can't even get 40 percent of the workers at the
CDC/NIH/FDA to take their "jab" despite enormous pressure. Keep this uppermost in your mind
and decision making.
A Doctor Reacts to Bills Receiver Cole Beasley's Refusal to Get the Covid Vaccine
Cole Beasley , wide receiver with the Buffalo Bills, caused a stir on Friday when he
shared a statement on Twitter in which he asserted that he would not be getting the Covid
vaccine. "Hi, I 'm Cole Beasley and I 'm not vaccinated!," he wrote. "I will be outside
doing what I do. I'll be out in the public. If your scared of me then steer clear, or get
vaccinated. Point. Blank. Period. I may die of covid, but I'd rather die actually
living."
"I 'm not going to take meds for a leg that isn't broken, " he continued. "I'd rather
take my chances with Covid and build up my immunity that way. Eat better. Drink water.
Exercise and do what I think is necessary to be a healthy individual. That is MY CHOICE
based on MY experiences and what I think is best ... If I 'm forced into retirement, so be
it."
check the picture of Cole Beasley the MSN link is using .. nice framing job there,
propaganda ministry of truth apparatschicks.
put "Dr" Mike Hansen on the list of accused for the Nuremberg trials
"There's really only one valid medical reason why someone shouldn't get the vaccine,"
he added. "If someone has a severe allergy history when it comes to getting a vaccine,
that could be a legit medical reason."
While Beasley has made a personal choice, Hansen explains that when it comes to the
vaccine, the decisions we make about our own health affect outcomes for others.
"What's going to happen is you're going to have other variants of the coronavirus,
like the Delta variant which originated in India and is all across the globe and is in
the United States," he said. "Not only does it spread easier, it's thought to be more
infectious, more dangerous. Over time that has the potential to overcome those who are
vaccinated. It could be that the vaccines work for a little while, but because we don't
reach that herd immunity, that virus never goes away. The other aspect of not getting
herd immunity is, those who can't get the vaccine, like children, then you're making them
more prone to the virus."
His scientific statement is utter garbage. The "virus" isn't likely to effect more
unvaxxed, because of a higher rate of vaxxed. That's the "new normal" logic and it's failed
like so many other arguments they're making.
The vax doesn't provide herd immunity. PERIOD. At best, if the "spike protein" theory is
correct, it will provide marginally better chances to beat the severe symptoms. That's a
big IF. Double vaxxed are now dying in larger numbers, months after they completed the
experiment. That was predictable.
Guys like Mike Hanson need to be paid a visit. At minimum, a proper dead horse's head on
this guy's pillow. If he doesn't stop, he needs to be taken out into the woods.
I'm not joking. Real men need to start doing real God's work.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional
Freedoms represents Dr. Francis Christian, Clinical Professor of General Surgery at the
University of Saskatchewan and a practising surgeon in Saskatoon .
Dr. Christian was called into a meeting today, suspended from all teaching responsibilities
effective immediately, and fired from his position with the University of Saskatchewan as of
September 2021.
There is a recording of Dr.
Christian's meeting today between Dr. Christian and Dr. Preston Smith, the Dean of Medicine
at the University of Saskatchewan, College of Medicine, Dr. Susan Shaw, the Chief Medical
Officer of the Saskatchewan Health Authority, and Dr. Brian Ulmer, Head of the Department of
Surgery at the Saskatchewan College of Medicine.
In addition, the Justice Centre will represent Dr. Christian in his defence of a complaint
that was made against him and an investigation by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of
Saskatchewan. The complaint objects to Dr. Christian having advocated for the informed consent
of Covid vaccines for children.
Dr. Christian has been a surgeon for more than 20 years and began working in Saskatoon in
2007. He was appointed Director of the Surgical Humanities Program and Director of Quality and
Patient Safety in 2018 and co-founded the Surgical Humanities Program. Dr. Christian is also
the Editor of the Journal of The Surgical Humanities.
On June 17, Dr. Christian
released a statement to over 200 doctors which contained his concerns regarding giving the
Covid shots to children. In it he noted that he is pro-vaccine, and that he did not represent
any group, the Saskatchewan Health Authority, or the University of Saskatchewan.
"I speak to you directly as a physician, a surgeon, and a fellow human being."
Dr. Christian noted that the principle of informed consent was sacrosanct and noted that a
patient should always be "fully aware of the risks of the medical intervention, the benefits of
the intervention, and if any alternatives exist to the intervention."
"This should apply particularly to a new vaccine that has never before been tried in
humans"¦ before the vaccine is rolled out to children, both children and parents must
know the risks of m-RNA vaccines," he wrote.
Dr. Christian expressed concern that he had not come across "a single vaccinated child or
parent who has been adequately informed" about Covid vaccines for children.
Among his points, he stated that:
The m-RNA vaccine, is a new, experimental vaccine never used by humans before.
The m-RNA vaccines have not been fully authorized by Health Canada or the US CDC, and
are in fact under "interim authorization" in Canada and "emergency use authorization" in
the US. He noted that "full vaccine approval takes several years and multiple safety
considerations "" this has not happened."
That in order to qualify for "emergency use authorization" there must be an emergency.
While he said there is a strong case for vaccinating the elderly, the vulnerable and health
care workers, he said, "Covid does not pose a threat to our kids. The risk of them dying of
Covid is less than 0.003% "" this is even less than the risk of them dying of the flu.
There is no emergency in children."
Children do not readily transmit the Covid virus to adults.
M-RNA vaccines have been "associated with several thousand deaths" in the Vaccine
Adverse Reporting System in the US. "These appear to be unusual, compared to the total
number of vaccines administered." He called it a "strong signal that should not be
ignored."
He noted that vaccines have already caused "serious medical problems for kids"
worldwide, including "a real and significantly increased risk" of myocarditis, inflammation
of the heart. Dr. Christian notes the
German national vaccine agency and the UK vaccine agency are not recommending the
vaccine for healthy children and teenagers.
The Saskatchewan Health Authority/College of Medicine wrote a letter to Dr. Christian on
June 21, 2021, alleging that they had "received information that you are engaging in activities
designed to discourage and prevent children and adolescents from receiving Covid-19 vaccination
contrary to the recommendations and pandemic-response efforts of Saskatchewan and Canadian
public health authorities."
Dr. Christian's concerns regarding underage Covid vaccinations are not isolated to him. The
US Centre for Disease Control had an "emergency meeting" today to discuss the growing cases of
myocarditis (heart inflammation) in younger males after receiving the Covid-19 vaccines.
The CDC released
new data today that the risk of myocarditis after the Pfizer vaccine is at least 10 times
the expected rate in 12 "" 17 year old males and females. The German government has issued
public guidance against vaccinating those under the age of 18.
The World Health Organization posted an update to its website on Monday, June 21, which
contained the statement in respect of advice for Covid-19 vaccination that " Children should not be
vaccinated for the moment ." Within 24 hours, this guidance was withdrawn and new
guidance was posted which stated that "Covid vaccines are safe for those over 18 years of
age."
Dr. Christian says there is a large, growing "network of ethical, moral physicians and
scientists" who are urging caution in recommending vaccines for all children without informed
consent. He said, physicians must "always put their patients and humanity first."
Dr. Byram Bridle, a prominent immunologist at the University of Guelph with a sub-speciality
in vaccinology, recently participated in a Press Conference on Parliament Hill on CPAC organized by MP
Derek Sloan, where he discussed the censorship of scientists and physicians. Dr. Bridle
expressed his safety concerns with vaccinating children with experimental MRNA vaccines.
Justice Centre Litigation Director Jay Cameron also has concern over the growing censorship
of medical professionals when it comes to questioning the government narrative on Covid.
"We are seeing a clear pattern of highly competent and skilled medical doctors in very
esteemed positions being taken down and censored or even fired, for practicing proper science
and medicine," says Mr. Cameron.
The Justice Centre
represented Dr. Chris Milburn in Nova Scotia, who faced professional disciplinary
proceedings last year after a group of activists took exception to an opinion column he wrote
in a local paper. The Justice Centre provided
submissions to the College on Dr. Milburn's behalf, defending the right of physicians to
express their opinions on matters of policy in the public square and arguing that everyone is
entitled to freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, as guaranteed by the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms "" including doctors. The Justice Centre noted that attempting
to have a doctor professionally disciplined for his opinions and commentary on matters of
public interest amounts to bullying and intimidation for speaking out against the
government.
Last week, Dr. Milburn also faced punishment for speaking out with his concerns about public
health policies, as he was removed from his
position as the Head of Emergency for the eastern zone with the Nova Scotia Health
Authority. In an unusual twist, a petition has been started to have Dr. Milburn replace Dr.
Strang as the province's Chief Medical Officer.
"Censoring and punishing scientists and doctors for freely voicing their concerns is
arrogant, oppressive and profoundly unscientific", states Mr. Cameron.
"Both the western world and the idea of scientific inquiry itself is built to a large extent
on the principles of freedom of thought and speech. Medicine and patient safety can only
regress when dogma and an elitist orthodoxy, such as that imposed by the Saskatchewan College
of Medicine, punishes doctors for voicing concerns," Mr. Cameron concludes.
Mr. Apotheosis 4 hours ago
These mother f'ers are seriously evil. To the bone evil.
high5mail 3 hours ago
I'm Canadian and the sooner they throw Trudeau and Manitoba's Pallister out of office
won't be too soon.
It is effen ridiculous what this country turned into. Makes California appear to be a
free place compared to here and that is saying something.
I am jealous of people living in Florida, Texas and South Dakota. They don't know how
lucky they are that some people in power there are not only intelligent but have
cajones...
No_Pretzel_Logic 2 hours ago
The Davos crowd is clutching most of the Western countries by the short hairs.
Yank....how does that feel, plebe?
Delta Variant Outbreak in Israel Infects Some Vaccinated Adults
Government reimposes indoor mask requirement in light of preliminary findings
The government of Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett moved to reimpose some coronavirus restrictions on
Friday.
PHOTO:
KOBI WOLF/BLOOMBERG NEWS
By
Dov Lieber
Updated June 25, 2021 11:39 am ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
Listen to Article
4
minutes
00:00 / 04:25
1x
Queue
This article is in your queue.
Open Queue
TEL AVIV -- About half of adults infected in an outbreak of the Delta variant of Covid-19 in Israel were fully
inoculated with the
Pfizer
Inc.
vaccine,
prompting the government to reimpose an indoor mask requirement and other measures to contain the highly
transmissible strain.
Preliminary findings by Israeli health officials suggest about 90% of new infections were likely caused by the Delta
variant, according to Ran Balicer, who leads an expert advisory panel on Covid-19 for the government. Children under
16, most of whom haven't been vaccinated, accounted for about half of those infected, he said.
The government this week expanded its vaccination campaign to include all 12- to 15-year-olds after a jump in
infections among schoolchildren in a town in central Israel. It has since quickly spread geographically and to
other groups of the population.
Israel is now reassessing its Covid-19 regulations after moving to open up its society and economy following
multiple lockdowns last year.
"The entrance of the Delta variant has changed the transmission dynamics," said Prof. Balicer, who is also the
chief innovation officer for Israel's largest health-management organization, Clalit.
The Delta variant,
which
first emerged in India in late 2020
and is also known as B.1.617.2, has now been detected in more than 70
countries.
In
the U.S.
, public-health experts expect it to soon become the dominant strain.
These so-called breakthrough cases -- defined as positive Covid-19 test results received at least two weeks after
patients receive their final vaccine dose -- are broadly expected as the Pfizer vaccine is highly effective but not
100% foolproof, according to Mr. Balicer.
Israeli health officials are optimistic that even if the variant does spread, evidence from countries such as the
U.K. indicate the vaccine will prevent a large increase in severe illness and hospitalizations that plagued the
country's health system in previous outbreaks. Israel has only recorded five severe cases in the past 10 days,
Prof. Balicer said, but whether more will emerge is too early to tell.
The number of cases in Israel is relatively low by global standards. New cases of Covid-19 rose to over 200 on
Thursday from around 10 a day for most of June.
Those exempt from the mask requirement included children under seven, people with disabilities that prevent them
from wearing a mask or two workers who work regularly together. The government had canceled the indoor mask
requirement 10 days ago and dropped most other preventive measures after running one of the world's fastest
vaccination campaigns. About 80% of Israelis of age 16 and above have received two doses of the vaccine that was
developed by Pfizer and German partner
BioNTech
SE
.
The Israeli government earlier this week recommended that all 12- to 15-year-olds be vaccinated to protect
against the Delta variant.
PHOTO:
NIR ALON/ZUMA PRESS
Israel was an early
test
case for the effectiveness
of the vaccine after outbreaks last year at one point gave it one of the world's
highest per-capita infection rates. Since the start of the pandemic, 840,522 of the country's 9.3 millions
citizens have been infected, of which 6,429 died.
Israeli health officials said the highly contagious strain had likely entered the country through its main
international airport, near Tel Aviv, where a system meant to vet every new arrival through testing was overloaded
in recent days amid a surge in foreign travel.
On Wednesday, the government delayed allowing foreign nationals to enter into the country for tourism from July 1
to Aug. 1 and reimposed a mask requirement inside airports.
"Our goal at the moment, first and foremost, is to safeguard the citizens of Israel from the Delta variant that is
running amok in the world," Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said Wednesday.
Related Video
Delta Variant Likely to Spread World-Wide
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
UP NEXT
0:00
/
1:46
1:23
Delta Variant Likely to Spread World-Wide
The Covid-19 strain known as Delta is in at least 60 countries including the U.S. and likely to spread
world-wide, Covid-19 Genomics UK Chair Dr. Sharon Peacock tells WSJ's Betsy McKay at the WSJ Tech Health event.
(Video from 6/9/21)
Corrections & Amplifications
About half of adults infected in an outbreak of the Delta variant of Covid-19 in Israel were fully inoculated with
the Pfizer vaccine, according to a clarification by Prof. Balicer of an earlier statement. An earlier version of
this article incorrectly said about half of people infected in the outbreak were fully inoculated. (Corrected on
June 25)
An independent panel of experts advised the CDC and FDA to add a warning to the Pfizer and
Moderna vaccines after over 300 cases of Myocarditis have been reported and linked to the
shots. Plus, there is no evidence for the need of booster shots to defend against the virus,
NBC's Erika Edwards has the story.
"... Noorchashm also called on Pfizer and Modern to institute "clear recommendations to clinicians that they delay immunization in anyone recently recovering from COVID, as well as any known symptomatic or asymptomatic carriers -- and to actively screen as many patients with high cardiovascular risk as is reasonably possible, in order to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2, prior to vaccinating them." ..."
"... 'It's a colossal error to vaccinate people who have had prior infections, and this is totally avoidable harm we are causing. Why are we rushing to vaccinate people who we know are immune and don't stand to gain any benefit? If I do anything medically unnecessary to someone as a doctor, I'm opening them up to potential harm. If you've had a recent infection and you have viral antigens in your tissues, you can literally and immunologically cause tissue damage." ..."
"... "We know that natural SARS CoV-2 virus can affect the heart. It can cause blood clots that can lead to heart attacks and strokes and myocarditis. The virus can trigger an immune response or inflammation to the heart. Anywhere the virus goes the immune system will target that tissue and cause problems. If you've had a prior infection and you have antigens in the tissues where the virus goes, like the heart, and you activate the immune response [with a vaccine], you're going to activate damage." ..."
In an interview with The Defender, Marie Follmer said no one warned her that her 19-year-old son -- a healthy, elite athlete
who had recovered from COVID -- shouldn't get the Pfizer vaccine because it would put him at greater risk of developing myocarditis.
The Defender is experiencing censorship on many social channels. Be sure to stay in touch with the news that matters
by
subscribing to our top news of the day . It's free .
Greyson Follmer, an Ohio State University (OSU) student, was an elite athlete and member of the university's chapter of the Reserve
Officers' Training Corps (ROTC).
But, according to his mother, the 19-year-old from Ohio is looking at a very different future now, after he developed severe
heart complications following his second dose of Pfizer's COVID vaccine.
In an exclusive interview with The Defender , Marie
Follmer said nobody warned her about the potential for increased risks of COVID vaccine-related adverse events for people like her
son, who already had COVID and had acquired
natural immunity.
Greyson has played sports since he was 4 years old. He was an athlete who played in the state soccer championship in high school
and then went on to OSU and started college during the COVID pandemic. He also joined ROTC his freshman year and was very active
-- running several miles every day with heavy packs on his back.
Greyson was perfectly healthy and had no underlying conditions except for asthma -- which didn't affect his athletic abilities
-- and food allergies.
Like most students early on in the year, Greyson and his friends got COVID.
Though most had no symptoms, Greyson experienced mild flu symptoms -- though they were nothing like his post-vaccine symptoms,
Follmer explained.
The university required students who had COVID to quarantine. It also required them to get a heart MRI before they could return
to school. Follmer thought that was strange, but she made sure her son got one.
When the cardiac MRI came back it showed Greyson's heart was enlarged with slight inflammation. The cardiologist thought it could
be related to being an elite athlete, and signed a release for Greyson to return to school.
"He wasn't 100%, but he was recovering. He was able to go skiing, return to ROTC and went on spring break," Follmer said.
Follmer and her husband got vaccinated first with
Moderna . When a friend of Follmer secured appointments for the kids to be vaccinated, she drove to OSU, picked up Greyson and
told him he was going to get vaccinated.
Greyson received his first dose of
Pfizer
on April 16, and a second dose on May 7. After the first dose Greyson experienced minor symptoms, but his mother didn't connect them
to the COVID vaccine.
It was after his second dose that things really changed, Follmer said.
'My son feels like he's having a heart attack 24/7," Follmer said. "He now has high blood pressure, severe chest pains, back pain,
elevated kidney levels, hypothyroidism, inflamed lymph nodes in different areas of his body, and he can't work or exercise."
Follmer said Greyson feels like he's dying and has to sleep all the time. He likely won't be able to go back to ROTC and doesn't
know if he will be able to return to school in August. Greyson experienced broken feet from soccer and said nothing compares to the
chest pain he feels now.
'A perfectly healthy kid has gone downhill," his mom said.
Doctors initially attributed the heart problems Greyson experienced in May, after the vaccine, to the COVID he had in September
2020. Believing he was a "long-hauler," they referred her son to the Ohio COVID Clinic.
According to the
Harvard
Gazette , "COVID long-haulers" is a term used to describe those who continue to feel symptoms of COVID long after the expected
recovery time. Patients tend to be younger, and in some cases, initially experienced only mild symptoms.
On June 15, Greyson was taken by emergency medicine services to Ohio Health
. Follmer said she knew her son's symptoms were connected to the Pfizer vaccine, but nobody knew how to help him.
Greyson has seen numerous doctors and specialists. His family has spent more than $12,000 in one month. Lab work is covered by
insurance but his other treatments are not. Greyson is doing stem cell treatments, taking Ivermectin and numerous supplements to
support his condition.
Doctors project it will take him two years to fully recover, though there's no research or information on how to treat
myocarditis
brought on by a COVID vaccine.
In the meantime, Greyson can't mow the grass, work or go to school. He walks around holding his chest and is in counseling to
cope with the effects this has had on his life, his mother said.
Follmer said she's not an
anti-vaccine
person, especially because she has a young daughter who could get sick. None of her children had ever had reactions to vaccines.
Follmer's 11-year-old daughter is immunocompromised. Even though all of her children had been exposed to COVID, she thought she
was protecting her daughter by having her son vaccinated.
Follmer explained:
'I think what's frustrating to me right now is that nobody told me that if you have an enlarged heart or heart inflammation, don't
get the shot. Not one person ever told us this. I never would have thought in a million years my kid would get sick.
'I was ready to give my daughter the vaccine -- she is going to be 12 in August and has one lung and a reconstructive airway.
There is no way on this planet I would give her the vaccine now. Greyson's twin brother will also not be getting the vaccine after
seeing what his brother has gone through."
Follmer said no one told her about reporting her son's
adverse reaction to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Vaccine
Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). "If I hadn't put it on Facebook and someone hadn't told me to put it in VAERS, I would
have never known to do it."
Follmer said she has since reported her son's
adverse reaction to VAERS (ID1395886), but no one has followed up on her son's case nor has the report been added to the system.
She also tried calling the CDC to see if someone there could help them.
'I just want him better. That's the bottom line," Follmer said. I just want everyone to know -- don't be naive like I was and
think that this can't happen to your kids."
Cardiothoracic surgeon warns against vaccinating people who've already had COVID
Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, a surgeon , immunologist
and patient safety advocate, wrote
several letters to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) shortly after the agency granted Pfizer and Moderna
Emergency Use Authorization for their COVID vaccines.
In his letters, Noorchashm urged the FDA to require pre-screening for SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins in order to reduce COVID vaccine
injuries and deaths.
Noorchashm also
called on Pfizer and Modern to institute "clear recommendations to clinicians that they delay immunization in anyone recently
recovering from COVID, as well as any known symptomatic or asymptomatic carriers -- and to actively screen as many patients with
high cardiovascular risk as is reasonably possible, in order to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2, prior to vaccinating them."
According
to Noorchashm , it is scientifically established that once a person is naturally infected by a virus, antigens from that virus
persist in the body for a long time after viral replication has stopped and clinical signs of infection have resolved.
When a vaccine reactivates an immune response in a recently infected person, the tissues harboring the persisting viral antigen
are targeted, inflamed and damaged by the immune response.
"In the case of SARS-CoV-2, we know the virus naturally infects the heart, the inner lining of blood vessels, the lungs and the
brain,"
explained Noorchashm . "So these are likely to be some of the critical organs that will contain persistent viral antigens in
the recently infected. Following reactivation of the immune system by a vaccine, these tissues can be expected to be targeted and
damaged."
In an interview with The Defender , Noorchashm said
Greyson's case reminded him of
Everest Romney -- the all-American basketball player who was hospitalized after his second dose of Pfizer for blood clots in
his brain.
According to Noorchasm, both Romney and Greyson had acquired natural immunity because they'd been infected with COVID, and they
likely did not stand to
gain any benefit from a COVID vaccine.
Noorchashm explained:
'It's a colossal error to vaccinate people who have had prior infections, and this is totally avoidable harm we are causing. Why
are we rushing to vaccinate people who we know are immune and don't stand to gain any benefit? If I do anything medically unnecessary
to someone as a doctor, I'm opening them up to potential harm. If you've had a recent infection and you have viral antigens in your
tissues, you can literally and immunologically cause tissue damage."
Medical necessity is on the ground floor of everything doctors do in regards to safety, Noorchasm said. "If you want to be a safe
hospital, doctor, practitioner or health agency you would not do anything that's not necessary to people or fundamentally not beneficial.
There's only a probability of harm if there's no medical necessity," he said.
When asked specifically about myocarditis, Noorchashm said this is the original prediction and prognostication he made to the
FDA.
Noorchashm said:
"We know that natural SARS CoV-2 virus can affect the heart. It can cause blood clots that can lead to heart attacks and strokes
and myocarditis. The virus can trigger an immune response or inflammation to the heart. Anywhere the virus goes the immune system
will target that tissue and cause problems. If you've had a prior infection and you have antigens in the tissues where the virus
goes, like the heart, and you activate the immune response [with a vaccine], you're going to activate damage."
Noorchashm, who is pro-vaccine, said shots need to be spread out for people who are not immune and want to be vaccinated, and
the FDA and CDC should think carefully about limiting the shot to one dose, especially in young people, or increasing the duration
between first and second doses.
In his
letter to the FDA , Noorchashm recommended actively screening as many patients with high cardiovascular risk as is reasonably
possible, in order to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2, prior to vaccinating them.
"If someone has a known history of COVID, there should not be any rush to get them vaccinated," Noorchashm said. "That should
be our national policy.
If you've either had COVID, or you have laboratory evidence of immunity, you shouldn't rush into getting vaccinated ."
On Covid, Israel, which used Pfizer vaccines, and had only last week removed indoor mask
mandates, has now reinstituted them, and is asking its citizens not to go abroad over concerns
the Delta variant is surging
A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) safety panel said there is a "likely
association" of mild heart inflammation in adolescents and young adults after they were
vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.
The
initial cases of myocarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, inflammation
of the membrane surrounding the heart, reported on the federal government's tracking system
were generally mild, especially compared to traditional myocarditis, scientists said.
Most cases have been mild, with symptoms like fatigue, chest pain and disturbances in heart
rhythm that quickly clear up within a day or so. CDC scientists said they will need to follow
up with patients in the months ahead in order to get a complete picture of the impact.
"Clinical presentation of myocarditis cases following vaccination has been distinct,
occurring most often within one week after dose two, with chest pain as the most common
presentation," said Grace Lee, chairwoman of the CDC's vaccine safety committee.
Officials said they are tracking about 1,200 initial reports of the rare heart inflammation
following doses of mRNA coronavirus vaccines have been filed with the federal government's
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), though they have not yet been definitively
linked to the vaccines.
Most reports came from people in their late teens and early 20s, and many more occurred
after the second dose than the first.
...There were more cases in males than females, and the cases essentially disappeared in
older age groups.
The agency said there have been 267 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis reported after
receiving one dose of the mRNA vaccines and 827 reported cases after two doses through June
11.
But the reports are preliminary, and do not mean the health issues have been linked to the
vaccine. The database is meant as a repository of all events observed after vaccination.
There were 323 confirmed reports of myocarditis and pericarditis for people under the age of
29, which is the group CDC is investigating. Among those confirmed, 218 people have fully
recovered. Nine people were hospitalized, with two in intensive care as of June 11, according
to the CDC.
There have been about 300 million vaccine doses administered nationwide.
Scientists have emphasized this occurrence is rate - for both mRNA vaccines combined, there
were 12.6 heart inflammation cases per million doses.
The highest confirmed rate of myocarditis and pericarditis was about 20 cases per 1 million
doses with Moderna's vaccine, compared to 8 cases per million for Pfizer's.
Officials emphasized that the benefits of vaccines outweigh the risks, and noted that for
every million doses of mRNA vaccine given, there are far more COVID-19 cases and
hospitalizations prevented compared to the number of potential myocarditis cases.
@Peripatetic Itch pregnant the first time, my obgyn hands me a list of common foods and
drinks to avoid, and now the government wants to inject an experimental drug into me? No
thanks. You don't even need to go to conspiracies and shadowy research for that one. I have
to avoid caffeine, but untested drug is OK?
I don't even want the J&J one (when I'm done with babymaking) even though it seems
closer to a traditional vaccine. I read it was something already existing from efforts to
develop an HIV shot, but they seem to have a recurring issues with contamination where they
manufacture it. Too many diversity hires, maybe.
On the other hand, the MSM seems to downplay the mRNA complications and overplay the
J&J ones, which is curious.
J&J also creates spike proteins, it just does it with a viral vector instead of mRNA.
Sputnik and Sinovac are traditional vaccines if you can get them.
Does WHO try to fearmonger the importance of vaccination using Delta (Indian) mutation as the
"eminent threat". While that real problem is that vaccines are much less effective against this
train (although probably not to the extent South African mutation wiped out the credibility of
the first generation vaccines from the USA, especially Moderna and Johnson & Johnson (
Moderna Developing Vaccine Booster Shot for Virus Strain Identified in South Africa - WSJ
"Moderna said its vaccine induced production of neutralizing antibodies against the strain first
identified in the U.K., known as B.1.1.7, at levels comparable to prior variants. Yet
neutralization decreased sharply in the case of the strain in South Africa, known as
B.1.351,"
A weak protection against the South Africa variant suggests the flow of "total vaccination"
propaganda and clear deficiencies of several first generation vaccines.
As the mutant COVID-19 strain known as "Delta" picks up steam across Europe and the US, one
of the WHO's leading doctors has just expressed concern about recent research published in the
Lancet showing that the first generation of COVID-19 vaccines aren't as effective at protecting
against "Delta".
Answering a question from a reporter during the organization's regular Monday briefing in
Geneva, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove said that there is data "showing a reduction in neutralization"
for the Delta variant, but not as much as the "Beta" variant - better known as the mutant
strain that was first discovered in South Africa.
play_arrow
Johnny Walker 1 minute ago
"Asking the CDC to look into vaccine safety is like asking the fox to guard the chicken
coop."-- Dr Rimland Ph.D.
Unbelievabubble 40 seconds ago
Less WHO doctor, more WITCH doctor.
Mike Rotsch 2 minutes ago
It's kinda like a never-ending Henry Kissinger interview. On one hand, we're told that
he's some kind of a genius and master of political science. On the other hand, he has
absolutely nothing but a lifetime of consistent and predictable failure to show for it.
As scientists start to assess the impact that COVID-19 has had on patients and the American
medical system more broadly,
Bloomberg reports that hospitals across the US have seen a surge in patients receiving
single- and double-lung transplants.
Transplants are necessary for only the most serious COVID-19 cases. In these patients -
pretty much always patients with comorbidities - COVID-19 ravages the lung tissue, leaving
nodules in the lungs incapable of absorbing oxygen from the air and transmitting it to the
blood stream. For many patients, the grueling procedure may be the only solution after
experiencing the worst lung damage caused by the virus - when the body fails to properly
respond to, and heal from, the hyper-inflammatory response provoked by COVID-19.
... ... ...
Fortunately, COVID-19 vaccines supposedly offer "100% protection" against "severe" COVID-19
symptoms. Though patients with comorbiditis may still be at risk as variants like the "delta"
strain continue to spread.
DanishViking 7 hours ago (Edited)
Fear mongering article sourced from Bloomberg (surprised?), pushing the jab
narrative
ohm 4 hours ago
If your dumb enough to believe the vaccines are 95% or 100% effective against anything,
I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Although the RRR considers only participants who could benefit from the vaccine, the
absolute risk reduction (ARR), which is the difference between attack rates with and
without a vaccine, considers the whole population. ARRs tend to be ignored because they
give a much less impressive effect size than RRRs: 1·3% for the
AstraZeneca–Oxford, 1·2% for the Moderna–NIH, 1·2% for the
J&J, 0·93% for the Gamaleya, and 0·84% for the Pfizer–BioNTech
vaccines.
Agreed, watch Dr. (cardiologist) Peter McCullough testifying to the Texas Senate.
Essentially he said 85% didn't have to die if treated early and properly. Lung damage would
have been avoided as well. I would add massive (30-50 grams, initially and repeated daily
until symptoms alleviated) doses of IV vitamin C to the protocol. IV C has been used
successfully for more than 70 years on Polio and other viruses. Look up Dr. Klenner.
As I have described before for
Forbes
,
your myocardium is a term for your heart muscles because "myo" stands for "muscle" and "cardium" stands for "heart." Your
pericardium is the thin membranous sac that surrounds your heart. The suffix "-itis" stands for being "inflamed." Therefore,
myocarditis means that your heart muscles are inflamed. Pericarditis means that your sac is inflamed, the sac around your heart that
is.
Typically, you don't want any parts of your heart to be inflamed, unless it is just some kind of metaphor for love. Inflammation can
interfere with your heart's ability to pump blood to the rest of your body and lead to abnormal heart rhythms as well. While milder
cases can resolve without longer-lasting problems, such conditions could lead to more severe, long-lasting, and even
life-threatening consequences. So myocarditis or pericarditis shouldn't be like a mild case of indigestion. You shouldn't say during
a date, "oh, it's nothing. Just my myocarditis acting up. What do you want to do after we've finished this pile of oysters?"
In June 10 presentation to a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee
, Tom Shimabukuro, MD, MPH Deputy
Director of the CDC's Immunization Safety Office, summarized reports of these conditions from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting
System (VAERS) as of the end of May. Maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the VAERS allows anyone to
enter a report of a problem after getting a vaccine, any vaccine. Note that this vaccine safety system accepts all reports from
anyone. So in theory, you could report that you became a pink unicorn after receiving the Covid-19 vaccine. That's why all reports
ultimately need to be reviewed and vetted by medical experts before being taken seriously. For example, you'd have to prove that you
are indeed a pink unicorn and that there isn't some other obvious reason for your transformation.
As of May 31, 2021, the VAERS had 789 reported cases of myocarditis or pericarditis in people after they've received doses of either
the Pfizer/BioNTech or the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine. Most (573) of these reports were from after the second dose. The median times
to first noticing symptoms was three days after the first dose and two doses after the second dose, meaning that half of the time
symptoms started within a few days of vaccination. Although there were reports of symptoms starting as far as 33 days after the
first dose and 80 days after the second dose.
Over half (475) of the 789 reported cases have been among those 30 years and younger. However, so far, only 226 of the 475 cases
have met the CDC working case definition, meaning that they indeed seemed to be legitimate cases of myocarditis or pericarditis
after the vaccination event. Most (81%) of these cases have had a documented full recovery. The rest either have ongoing symptoms or
currently lack follow-up information to determine what's happened.
Of course, this still doesn't mean that all 226 cases were caused by the vaccines. But the 226 is higher than the number of cases
that you'd expect among this age group if you just account for other possible causes of myocarditis and pericarditis. As Paul A.
Offit, MD,
the
Director of the Vaccine Education Center and a Professor at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
, explained in the following
video, a number of different viruses can cause myocarditis and many of these tend to circulate during the Spring:
In fact, as mentioned earlier, one of the viruses that could cause myocarditis or pericarditis is the Covid-19 coronavirus.
As
described by a recent publication in
JAMA
Cardiology
, a study used cardiac testing to screen competitive athletes in the Big 10 conference who had Covid-19 for any
evidence of myocarditis. When just checking for symptoms and not using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 0.31% ended up
being diagnosed with myocarditis. Adding cardiac MRIs bumped this number up to 2.3%, meaning that many athletes had myocarditis
without having noticeable symptoms.
So keep these numbers in mind when looking at the myocarditis cases after vaccination against Covid-19. A total of 226 cases after
vaccination would still make such events very rare and lower than the numbers that might be expected after a Covid-19 coronavirus
infection. After all, over 4.85 million doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and over 4.03 million doses of the Moderna vaccine had
already been administered by May 29. Using your abacus and finger and toes to make the appropriate calculates would yield rates of
about 2.8 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis per one million first doses administered and 16.1 cases per million second doses
administered. Again this is like beef cooked at 120 to 130º F, still quite rare.
Still, though, this situation merits further investigation. Again, myocarditis or pericaditis are not just "dust yourself off and
walk it off" conditions. If you have symptoms of either condition such as chest pain, rapid or abnormal heart rhythms, shortness of
breath, or swelling of your legs, ankles and feet, contact your doctor as soon as possible. Of course, these should be unexplained
symptoms. So momentary heart palpitations after seeing BTS or a bowl of mac-n-cheese may not count.
For the upcoming ACIP meeting
, you do have the opportunity to submit written comments by June 18, 2021, or submit a request to
make an oral comment at the meeting no later than 11:59 p.m., EST, on June 16, 2021
.
Of
course, just because you submit a request doesn't mean that you be allotted the up to three minutes to speak at the meeting. The CDC
will have to determine how many of the requests are legitimate versus the "how do I order a hamburger" or "keys seem to stick to my
head after vaccination, what are you going to do about it" comments that are unverifiable and not related to the topic at hand. Of
the requests that seem to fall within the scope of the meeting, CDC will conduct a lottery to determine who will be able to speak.
After all, time will be limited.
At this point, just because the CDC is investigating these cases doesn't mean that you should not get vaccinated. Again myocarditis
and pericarditis have been rare occurrences. No one has established cause and effect yet. It remains to be seen whether there were
other possible reasons behind the myocarditis and pericarditis cases.
Nevertheless, once again, the CDC and FDA must take all potential serious adverse events seriously. Otherwise, the risk is losing
the public's trust.
The Pfizer and BioNTech
SE shot is 96% effective against hospitalization after two doses, while the AstraZeneca and
University of Oxford Covid inoculation is 92% effective, according to an analysis announced
Monday by Public Health England. Those results are comparable with the protection offered
against the alpha variant, which first emerged in Britain, the data show.
...
Findings in May showed the effectiveness of both vaccines against symptomatic disease from
the delta variant was 33% three weeks after the first dose.
That study found the Pfizer shot was 88% effective two weeks after the second dose, and
that two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were 60% effective.
Japanese research showed that the Pfizer lipid nano-particle package, presumably with its
mRNA cargo intact, did NOT remain in situ in the deltoid muscle, but within hours had spread
via the circulation to most of the body, including bone marrow, and, most markedly, the
ovaries.
My understanding is that Sputnik is an adenovirus vector vaccine, not really a
"traditional" vaccine. The Chinese vaccine is a traditional attenuated virus vaccine and
there is a SANOFI protein fragment vaccine in Phase III trials, which I think also uses a
proven technology. While I think that Sputnik is better than the messenger RNA genetic
treatments, which creep me out, I still prefer to wait for more traditional vaccines to be
approved, if I have to be vaccinated at all.
But why design a biological weapon that works best against the elderly and already
infirm?
It is an adenovirus viral vector vaccine – a "neutered" adenovirus is used as a
vector to inject DNA coding for viral proteins in the cells and make them produce/present
them to the immune system. In fact it's somewhat similar to what Pfizer or Moderna do with
lipidic nanoparticules as vector and mRNA as "source code" for protein synthesis.
This vaccine technology is fairly recent and IIRC only used in four CODID-19 (Suptnik V,
AstraZenecca, J&J and one of the Chinese vaccines – maybe two) and two Ebola
vaccines.
If you want "traditional", you should look into the sub-unit – for the moment it's
Russian EpiVacCorona and CoviVac – or inactivated virus based vaccines, IIRC chinese
only for the moment.
The primary goal of the response to SARS-Cov-2 was to have everyone in the World forced to
have a vaccine on a regular basis. The lies reached mountainous proportions.
I am no more interested in Russia's vaccine than anyone else's. Perhaps it will prove to
be somewhat safer, although it also directs the patients cells to produce the spike protein.
Perhaps it is not as likely to go everywhere, including the circulatory system, which may
make it safer.
But, I see no reason for vaccines for anyone under 70, and for those over 70 and everyone
else there are effective treatments, like HCQ and Ivermectin the ban on these will probably
end someday, just like the ban on discussing the origins of SARS-Cov-2.
@Ultrafart the Brave he
"spike protein", they actually inject it directly, encapsulated in said adenovirus envelope.
You may be misunderstanding how adenovirus vector vaccines work. You are right that these
vaccines do not instruct human cells to synthesize the protein (as mRNA vaccines do) but they
are not delivering the protein directly, what they do is to carry the gene that synthesizes the
protein, the gene is carried in the genetic make up of the adenovirus. The foreign gene is
inserted into the adenovirus. Usually a crucial gene for replication of the adenovirus is
replaced (gene swapping) with the foreign gene that synthesizes the protein of interest
rendering the adenovirus impotent.
Covid-19 also causes pericarditis in a small number of the people infected.
The problem with the data is that we have no ways of knowing how many of those people had been
exposed to coronavirus in the weeks before getting the vaccine, or were people who had the
long-term covid-19 problem.
Here is a case of someone for whom pericarditis was the only symptom of infection.
Definitely false, at least for COVID, can't comment about the vaccine but I strongly suspect
it doesn't apply there. There are multiple cases of people who were perfectly healthy that
ended up with severe pulmonary fibrosis, requiring a lung transplant, solely because of COVID.
If the patient wasn't otherwise healthy before getting COVID, odds are super high that they
wouldn't have even been eligible for transplant anyways as they likely would not even survive
the surgery.
Azfamily.com is the joint website for KTVK and KPHO television stations based in Phoenix,
Arizona. The website covers local news, sports, weather, entertainment, crime and TV
programming information.
Factual Reporting: HIGH
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180 (2020)
Overall, we rate azfamily.com Least Biased based on balanced story selection and minimal
editorializing. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean
Re:
Anecdotes aren't scientific proof of anything. There are super-healthy firefighters and
special ops soldiers falling dead of coronary and lung disease all the time. I had a family
member like that, died at the age of 30 due to an unknown and underlying heart condition,
super-fit, was just sitting in the sun one afternoon and dropped dead. You don't need an
underlying heart condition...
Any serious disturbance of the immune system homeostasis may result with a secondary
streptococcal infection of the heart muscle - i.e. inflammation of the heart muscle.
I.e. Myocarditis.
I've had that twice.
Once due to influenza resulting in a high fever, as a teenager.
The night of the fever I could barely catch my breath to speak and in the morning mom had to
take me by the hand to the local health center which was literally down the road from us.
I can't speak to the vaccine review process, but this is completely false for the drug
review process. I would in the drug research sphere (I'm in IT, but I have been in it for over
20 years so I know how it works) and you are 100% incorrect. Phase 1 trials are conducted on
healthy people. These are usually first in man studies looking for any side effects from the
drug, so they want healthy people who are not on other medication. It then goes on to phase 2
trials, which are designed to see if the drug works. So if it is a high blood pressure drug, it
is given to people with high blood pressure to see if the drug actually works and does what
they want it to. These people are often on other medications. There is not a requirement they
not be on other medications unless they know of negative interactions or the other drugs also
may do something similar to the drug they are testing (which means the results could be
skewed). Then the drug goes onto phase 3 trials which compare the drug to other drugs used for
the same thing to see if the new drug performs better.
So as you can see, no, drugs are not "only ever tested on otherwise healthy people who
aren't taking other medications or have other pre-existing health conditions". It is true they
cannot test the interaction witha ll other drugs or conditions, since that would be practically
impossible, but the idea that drugs are not tested on people with any other conditions is
completely wrong.
Reply to This Parent Share Flag as InappropriateRe:
Actually, no. But for rare side-effects, there is only "phase 4" testing, i.e. you vaccinate
the target population and check what happens. The numbers from the article are too low to be
found in any systematic test, simple statistics already gives you that. Nobody can run a drug
test on about 10M people and that is what you would need here. Re:Did they cut
corners? (
Score: 5 , Insightful) by Xest (
935314 ) on Thursday June 10, 2021 @05:47PM ( #61474896 )
I don't think so; typically medicines are always updated post approval when they're in the
open market and new side effects are found because realistically if you're talking about a 1 in
500,000 issue the ability to even get 500,000 test subjects for most medicines is flat out
impossible because a lot of the time you're talking about medicines for conditions that there
just aren't even that many people suffering from it at any given time. The only reason it's
making headlines this time is because we're talking about medicines that everyone is getting,
so those rare case are, in absolute numbers, more obvious.
If you have a vaccine for something that isn't given as broadly, it's possible you'd simply
never see such rare outcomes even though they're theoretically possible. So this isn't really a
function of lack of testing prior to release as it is business as usual making headlines
because it's relevant to everyone. If for example rabies, or Japanese encephalitis vaccines had
side effects like this you wouldn't expect the UK's medicines regulator to even notice because
the rarity with which those vaccines are given out in the UK is small, but that doesn't mean
that rare side effects not found during testing like this aren't a possibility.
IMO it's only really an issue when for example as with the AZ vaccine the British government
tried to bury it out of nationalist pride - first by saying it wasn't a real issue and Europe
as just bitter about Brexit, then lying and saying it's only a 1 in 1 million chance, before
finally admitting a few weeks back it's a 1 in 60,000 chance of getting a blood clot and
effectively, in real terms, phasing out the AZ vaccine in the UK because no one else after that
point is now getting it in the UK other than for second doses.
So all we're really doing here is seeing everything happen at high speed - whereas with many
vaccines or medicines it might take many years before millions of people are treated with them
for enough cases of a rare side effect to be noticed, here we're just seeing it in a much
shorter time frame - that's not because rushing it has made things less safe, it's just made
issues that are typically noticed over years or even decades in classically vetted medicines
get noticed within months instead because of the sheer numbers involved.
Reply to This Parent Share Flag as Inappropriate
2 hidden commentsRe:
> Sure but that's a function of what people like Trump have done to politics
Wait, now we're blaming Trump for making politics political?
The parent isn't blaming Trump and those of his ilk for making politics "political". He/She
is blaming them for making politics a completely toxic winner take all game where those you
disagree with are enemies. Trump didn't start this trend (arguably it goes back to the 1960s),
but he did accelerate it.
Politics can be about thoughtful compromise, but that requires a certain kind of politician,
one who is in very short supply in the current political climate in the US.
It's really not our ex-president (who lost .. and lost and lost.. he's really one of
the biggets losers ever).
It started with Mitch McConnell and the republican senate in 2007 when they told
incoming VP Biden, the republicans intended to vote "no" to everything Obama proposed- even if
they had proposed it themselves under bush.
McConnell and what's left of the republican party (most the sane conservatives have
left now) are a real threat to our democratic republic.
Simply, if you test by giving it to 10,000 but the adverse event happens in 1 in
12,000, you probably won't see it. And if adverse events just end up sporadically reported,
maybe or maybe not, and just go undiagnosed, who knows when you'll see it.
This is why, regardless of politics, beliefs, pro/anti-vax, etc., the only real test
of what will happen to 100,000,000 people is when you give it to 100,000,000 people (and then
pay very close attention). We're not firing projectiles which follow precise mathematical laws,
these are living systems.
Vaccine companies are like, you want to give this to hundreds of millions of people?
Fine, we want complete absence of liability. You want to advise the public that it is safe?
Fine, say what you want, make sure we can never be sued, because we can't humanly know what
will actually happen when you roll it out en masse. We can't and it would be irrational and
unreasonable to expect that we could.
This is pure empiricism--safe vaccines are known safe because they're been out there
for may years, decades even, and been given to hundreds of millions. Safe because we know from
experience, not because we extrapolated from small tests and principles. Actually a lot of the
scares around vaccines are from theoretical ideas, i.e. still science, just difference of
opinions. ("anti-vax" plays on the notion that they're all quacks, but it is easy to pay
attention and find all the ones which have impressive credentials -- it is intellectually
honest to try to find the best and most qualified people on the opposing side, rather than just
point to the worst).
The technology is amazing. mRNA as a platform is an amazing technology. Imagine you go
to the doctor, and they diagnose something, and they just tap a few keys on the PC, and a
machine prints some molecules into a solution, and they inject you right there and
then--replacing pills, chemo, radiation, you name it. Totally customised health treatments
which your body can manufacture itself. As they say on their website, it is an operating system
with many potential apps to run on it.
But there's no magic crystal ball to substitute for real world, give it to a billion
people, and wait 100 years to study the long term effects. Unless you think you're god. If you
want to play god, you can say, well let's just give it to everyone--we think it'll probably be
ok, based on data so far, and we can fix the bugs later.
Reply to This Parent Share Flag as InappropriateRe:Did they cut
corners? (
Score: 5 , Insightful) by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Thursday June 10, 2021
@05:51PM ( #61474904 ) There
have been 226 cases of these side effects out of 140M+ persons vaccinated in the US. Your
explanation for rare occurrences of side effects: "Those drug companies must have cut corners
or lied!" How about the 0.00016% chance of the side effect is by definition of the word "rare"?
Reply to This Parent Share Flag as InappropriateVery possible many are
not reported Not everyone rushes to the hospital if they feel slightly ill after the
shot. In most cases, the inflammation maybe mild enough where people don't even know something
is not right. Re: Yes not
all cases may have been reported; however, 226 out of 140+M is still a ridiculously low number.
Also heart inflammation is not heart burn. It is a serious condition. Re:
Just wait until they find out the fatality rate of Aspirin. ›
Wildtype Covid has an overall Infection Fatality Rate of about 0.8% in the US (based
on our age/demographics).
With the latest variants such as Delta (Indian) you're needing about 80-90% immunity
to stop the spread. And that's assuming it wouldn't mutate further with that high of levels of
infection.
0.008 IFR * 140 million Americans have now been fully vaccinated * 0.8 herd immunity
factor * 0.9 vaccine effectiveness. = 800,000 deaths have been prevented by the
vaccines.
3 people of those 140 million vaccinated Americans have gone into the ICU for
treatment. 0 have died.
Even if all 3 die... even if those 3 are 1% of the actual number who developed
problems in died. Even if you wildly inflated the assumptions about how many will die you're
looking at 300 deaths vs 800,000 deaths.
What they're going to do is review the data and confirm that everybody receiving a
vaccination is still less likely to die from the vaccine than Covid or if there are any groups
they should carve out to not be recommended to receive vaccine. If it's only a problematic side
effect in people with families who have a history of severe heart disease and if you're under
18 and have no risk factors for severe covid side effects they might say "Ok this 1% of the
population should take the vaccine, but they should carefully monitor their
condition."
U.S. public health advisers will meet to discuss a potential link between Covid-19 shots
that use messenger RNA technology and heart inflammation after hundreds of vaccinated people
experienced a condition called myocarditis.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization
Practices will gather on June 18 to discuss an increase in reported cases of the condition,
particularly among adolescents and young adults. Covid vaccines made by Moderna Inc. and
partners Pfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE's use mRNA technology.
Since April, the CDC has seen a spike in reports of myocarditis along with pericarditis, an
inflammation of the membrane around the heart. The cases, while rare, have occurred mostly in
male teens and young adults.
The CDC has identified a total of 216 cases of heart inflammation after the first dose of an
mRNA shot, and another 573 cases after the second dose. The median age of people with
myocarditis or pericarditis following the first dose was 30, and 24 among the second-dose
cases. There were 475 cases identified among those under the age of 30.
Most patients have responded well to treatment and rest, according to the agency, and more
than 8 in 10 have had full relief from their symptoms. The agency is further examining the
cases by age.
About 130 million Americans have received the full two-dose regimen of one of the two
authorized mRNA vaccines. Many teenagers have now received their first dose of the
Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, which was cleared for adolescents 12 and older on May 10.
"We're still learning about the rates of myocarditis and pericarditis," Tom Shimabukuro, a
safety expert of CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, said
Thursday in a Food and Drug Administration panel meeting. "As we gather more information we'll
begin to get a better idea of the post-vaccination rates and hopefully be able to get more
detailed information by age group."
Shimabukuro said the U.S. data is consistent with findings from Israel's vaccinated
population.
"It's hard to deny that there's some event that seems to be occurring," said Cody Meissner,
head of the Pediatric Infectious Disease Division at Tufts Medical Center, at the FDA's
advisory committee meeting on Thursday.
Genome sequencing has confirmed the cases in Victoria are from the variant that was first
detected in India.
Merlino said in a separate statement on Wednesday that authorities had discerned that
one in 10 current cases had caught the variant of the virus now spreading in Victoria from
a stranger.
Will insurance companies charge higher life insurance premiums to those who were
vaccinated?
Kelley 28 minutes ago (Edited)
It's the CDC's version of the Plunge Protection Team.
If anyone assumes the 'emergency' is about protecting the public, this is my message to
you: harharharharhar!
Divide_And_Conquer 38 minutes ago remove link
Satanists must be eliminated at all costs
Just a Little Froth in the Market 6 minutes ago
"Another 1,260 were reported in people 65 or older through claims data from Medicare
claims data. Neither number raised safety signals, Steve Anderson, director of the FDA's
Office of Biostatistics and Epidemiology said."
Of course there were no safety signals. Nothing's more important than Joetard reaching
his July 4th goal
on target 34 minutes ago
Why is the CDC even recommending this vaccine for the young, the immune, and those with
antibodies. Unethical. Unscientific. No bang for buck. Why wait a week. Why not meet
tomorrow. Answer--it takes a week to get their cover stories together. Zero confidence now
in the CDC and anything they say. It is all political Science.
"... Dr. Makary is a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Bloomberg School of Public Health and Carey Business School. He is author of "The Price We Pay: What Broke American Health Care""and How to Fix It," just out in paperback. ..."
The news about the U.S. Covid pandemic is even better than you've heard. Some 80% to 85% of
American adults are immune to the virus: More than 64% have received at least one vaccine dose
and, of those who haven't, roughly half have natural immunity from prior infection. There's
ample scientific evidence that natural immunity is effective and durable, and public-health
leaders should pay it heed.
Only around 10% of Americans have had confirmed positive Covid tests, but four to six times
as many have likely had the infection. A February study in Nature used antibody
screenings in late summer 2020 to estimate there had been seven times as many actual cases as
confirmed cases. A similar study , by the University of Albany and New
York State Department of Health, revealed that by the end of March 2020""the first month of New
York's pandemic""23% of the city's population had antibodies. That share necessarily increased
as the pandemic spread.
The contribution of natural immunity should speed up the timeline for returning fully to
normal. With more than 8 in 10 adults protected from either contracting or transmitting the
virus, it can't readily propagate by jumping around in the population. In public health, we
call that herd immunity, defined broadly on the Johns Hopkins Covid information webpage as
"when most of a population is immune." It's not eradication, but it's powerful.
Without accounting for natural immunity, we are far from Anthony Fauci's stated target of
70% to 85% of the population becoming immune through full vaccination. But the effect of
natural immunity is all around us. The plummeting case numbers in late April and May weren't
the result of vaccination alone, and they came amid a loosening of both restrictions and
behavior.
In Los Angeles, 45% of city residents were found to have antibodies in February. Once
vaccines were introduced, the seven-day average of daily Covid cases fell from a peak of more
than 15,000 on Jan. 11 to 253 four months later, even as people became more mobile. That sharp
decline, which came far faster than health officials expected, can't be accounted for by
vaccination rates, which were below 50% during that time.
Natural immunity is durable. Researchers from Washington University in St. Louis reported last month that
11 months after a mild infection immune cells were still capable of producing protective
antibodies. The authors concluded that prior Covid infection induces a "robust" and "long-lived
humoral immune response," leading some scientists to suggest that natural immunity is probably
lifelong. Because infection began months earlier than vaccination, we have more follow-up data
on the duration of natural immunity than on vaccinated immunity.
Washington University's lab findings are consistent with physicians' bedside observations.
After treating Covid for 16 months, we haven't seen significance incidence of re-infection. In
Italy no re-infection clusters have been observed . In a
large study
from Denmark, less than 0.7% of people who tested positive for Covid, including those who were
asymptomatic, ever tested positive again""a "breakthrough infection" rate similar to that of
vaccines. These numbers are especially low considering the sensitivity of Covid PCR tests,
which can sometimes detect a single viral particle in a blood sample. It often takes thousands
to make you sick.
Skeptics of natural immunity point to Manaus, capital of the Brazilian state of Amazonas,
where reports in January suggested a wave of re-infections despite herd immunity. But the
initial estimate of those infected was incorrect because
it was based on antibody testing among those who donated convalescent plasma""an
unrepresentative subgroup of the population. A follow-up study
debunked the re-infection hypothesis and found only three confirmed re-infections in the entire
state, whose population exceeds four million. Other studies have confirmed that re-infections
are rare and usually asymptomatic or mild.
Some health officials warn of possible variants resistant to natural immunity. But none of
the hundreds of variants observed so far have evaded either natural or vaccinated immunity with
the three vaccines authorized in the U.S.
Should the previously infected be vaccinated? My clinical advice to healthy patients with
natural immunity is that one shot is sufficient, and maybe not even necessary, although it
could increase the long-term durability of immunity. A University of Pennsylvania
study of people previously infected with Covid found that a single vaccine dose triggered a
strong immune response, with no increase in that response after a second dose. A separate
study from New York's Mount
Sinai School of Medicine concluded that "the antibody response to the first vaccine dose in
individuals with pre-existing immunity is equal to or even exceeds the titers found in
naïve"""never-infected"""individuals after the second dose."
Researchers from the Cleveland Clinic published a study this week of 1,359
people previously infected with Covid who were unvaccinated. None of the subjects subsequently
became infected, leading the researchers to conclude that "individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2
infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination."
What's the harm of underestimating or disregarding the protection afforded by natural
immunity? It almost certainly cost American lives by misallocating vaccine doses earlier this
year, and is still doing so in countries where Covid is prevalent and shots are scarce. It
continues to delay full reopening and prolongs the state of fear that has many people wearing
masks even when there's no mandate, or reason, to do so.
Dr. Fauci said last Aug. 13 that when you have fewer than 10 cases per 100,000, "you should
be able to open up safely and clearly." The U.S. reached that point in mid-May. It's time to
stop the fear mongering and level with the public about the incredible capabilities of both
modern medical research and the human body's immune system.
Dr. Makary is a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Bloomberg School of
Public Health and Carey Business School. He is author of "The Price We Pay: What Broke American
Health Care""and How to Fix It," just out in paperback.
New study to enroll thousands of children below 12 years at dozens of sites across the US, Finland, Poland and Spain.
The
Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has already been approved for adolescents in the EU [Andreea Alexandru/AP Photo]
8 Jun 2021
Pfizer has said it will begin testing its COVID-19 vaccine in a larger group of children below 12 years of age after selecting a
lower dose of the shot in an earlier stage of the trial.
The study will enrol up to 4,500 children at more than 90 clinical sites in the United States, Finland, Poland and Spain, the
pharma company said.
The vaccine made by Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech is already authorised for emergency use in anyone 12 and older in the US,
Canada and the European Union. They receive the same dose as adults: 30 micrograms.
Enrolment of five- to 11-year-olds for the new study began this week. Based on safety, tolerability and the immune response
generated by 144 children in a phase I study of the two-dose shot, Pfizer said it will test a dose of 10 micrograms in children
between five and 11 years of age, and 3 micrograms for the age group of six months to five years.
A Pfizer spokesperson said the company expects data from five-to-11-year-olds in September and would likely ask regulators for
emergency use authorisation later that month. Data for children two to five years old could arrive soon after that, he said.
Pfizer expects to have data from the six-month to two-year-old age group sometime in October or November.
Nearly seven million teens have received at least one dose of the vaccine in the US, according to the US Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC).
Inoculating children and young people is considered a critical step towards reaching "herd immunity" and taming the COVID-19
pandemic.
Still, scientists in the US and elsewhere are studying the possibility of a link between heart inflammation and mRNA vaccines,
particularly in young men. Both Pfizer and Moderna Inc's vaccines are mRNA shots.
Israel's Health Ministry said last week it had found the small number of myocarditis cases observed mainly in young men who received
the Pfizer vaccine there were probably linked to their vaccination. The cases were generally mild and did not last long.
Pfizer has said it is aware of the Israeli observations of myocarditis and that no causal link to its vaccine has been established.
Separately on Tuesday, the European Union's drug regulator said it expects to give a verdict on the use of Moderna's COVID-19
vaccine in 12- to 17-year-olds next month, following an application by the drugmaker.
The two-dose vaccine is already being used in the EU for people above 18 years of age in several countries. The company has also
sought approval in Canada for use in adolescents and plans for a US application.
If approved, Moderna's vaccine would become the second shot cleared for use in teenagers in the EU after Pfizer and BioNTech's
vaccine was given the green light last month.
A European Medicines Agency (EMA) committee would speed up the assessment of data submitted with the application, the regulator
said, adding that a delay would happen if the EMA required any additional information.
Emergency meeting in eight more days.. ??? An emergency meeting would be something held
tonight; an emergency meeting that can wait days needs to call it differently --"out of schedule
meeting" or something like that.
What happens when you have inflammation and damage? You get scar tissue. Do you really think
that this doesn't have lasting effect? These guys will have problems ater in life with their
hearts and it won't because of McDonalds....
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced Thursday that it will convene an
"emergency meeting"
of its advisers on June 18th to discuss rare but higher-than-expected reports of heart
inflammation following doses of the mRNA-based Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.
The new details about myocarditis and pericarditis emerged first in presentations to a
panel of independent advisers for the Food and Drug Administration, who are meeting
Thursday to discuss how the regulator should approach emergency use authorization for using
COVID-19 vaccines in younger children.
As CBS reports, the CDC previously
disclosed that reports of heart inflammation were detected mostly in younger men and
teenage boys following their second dose, and that there
was a "higher number of observed than expected" cases in 16- to 24-year-olds. Last month,
the CDC urged providers to "ask about prior COVID-19 vaccination" in patients with symptoms of
heart inflammation.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.464.0_en.html#goog_595720652 Wall Street
Bounces, After Selloff Fed Boosts Liquidity NOW PLAYING SoftBank Said to Plan $14 Billion Sale
of Alibaba Shares China's Companies Have Worst Quarter on Record, Beige Book Says U.S.-Saudi
Oil Alliance Under Consideration, Brouillette Says ETF Volumes Surge in Current Market
Environment Investors Have Given Up on a V-Shaped Recovery, BNY's Young Cautions
We'll leave the judgment up to someone far more qualified...
Does anyone else not find it odd that after discovering 800 cases in the VAERS database the
"emergency" meeting is in 7 days ? ... and in the meantime, every public health authority
figure is encouraging parents to get their young children vaccinated ?
The reports of myocarditis or pericarditis were submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, a passive
reporting system run jointly by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the
Food and Drug Administration, through May 31.
The bulk of the reports described heart inflammation appearing after the second of two doses
of either the Pfizer of Moderna vaccines, both of which utilize messenger RNA technology.
Authorities stress that anybody can submit reports through the reporting system but
authorities have already verified that 226 of the reports meet the CDC's working case
definition, Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, a deputy director at the agency, said during a presentation of
the data. Followup and review are in progress for the rest.
Of the 285 case reports for which the disposition was known at the time of the review, 270
patients had been discharged and 15 were still hospitalized, officials said. Myocarditis
typically requires hospital care. No deaths were reported.
A slide on myocarditis reports post-COVID-19 vaccination is shown during the Food and Drug
Administration's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting on June
10, 2021. (FDA/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
The CDC
announced last month that it was investigating reports of heart inflammation in teenagers
and young adults who received a COVID-19 vaccine, though it took no definitive action besides
saying it would continue reviewing case data.
An advisory committee to the agency, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, said
in a little-noticed update published dated May 24 and published on June
1 that data from VAERS showed that in the 30 days following the second dose of mRNA
vaccinations, "there was a higher number of observed than expected myocarditis/pericarditis
cases in 16""24-year-olds."
Data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, an active reporting system that relies on nine
healthcare organizations in seven states, did not show higher than expected cases, it
added.
"However, analyses suggest that these data need to be carefully followed as more persons
in younger age groups are vaccinated," the advisory committee's vaccine safety workgroup said
in its report.
Israel's Health Ministry
said that same day that it found 275 cases of heart inflammation among the more than 5
million people in the country who received a vaccine between December 2020 and May. An Israeli
study found "a probable link" between receiving the second dose of the Pfizer jab "and the
appearance of myocarditis among men aged 16 to 30," the ministry said.
Shimabukuro said the U.S. passive surveillance data "are consistent with the surveillance
data that emerged from Israel."
The figures are also consistent with other case reports and data from the Department of
Defense.
The vast majority of the U.S. reports deal with male patients. Approximately 300 preliminary
reports indicated the patients suffered chest pain, with nearly as many having elevated cardiac
enzymes.
Family members watch as a 12-year-old is inoculated with Pfizer's vaccine against COVID-19
at Dekalb Pediatric Center in Decatur, Ga., on May 11, 2021. (Chris Aluka Berry/Reuters)
A case report
examining myocarditis in seven adolescents following vaccination with Pfizer's jab,
published in Pediatrics, the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, this month, said
all seven developed the inflammation within 4 days of receiving the second dose, did not have
evidence of COVID-19 infection, and did not meet the criteria for MIS-C, a rare disease.
The seven males, between the ages of 14 and 19, all required hospital care but each was
eventually discharged.
Authors, who did not respond to requests for comment, said no link has been established
between the vaccines and myocarditis and that the benefits of the vaccines outweigh the risks.
But they also urged healthcare workers "to consider myocarditis in the evaluation of
adolescents and young adults who develop chest pain after COVID-19 vaccination."
A
commentary on the study published in the same journal, said "there are some concerns
regarding this case series that might suggest a causal relationship and therefore warrant
further analysis through established surveillance systems."
"First, the consistent timing of symptoms in these seven cases after the second
vaccination suggests a uniform biological process. Second, the similarities in clinical
findings and laboratory characteristics in this series suggest a common etiology. Finally,
these cases occurred in the context of a dearth of circulation of common respiratory viruses
known to be associated with myocarditis, and thorough diagnostic evaluations did not identify
infectious etiologies," they added.
The expected number of myocarditis/pericarditis cases in those aged 16 or 17, based on
background incidence rates and the number of doses administered to that population through May
31, is between two and 19. But based on the VAERS reports, the number is 79.
Likewise, the expected number for cases among young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 is
eight to 83. The number based on the reports is 196.
"In the 16- to 17 year-olds and the 18- to 24-year-olds, the observed reports are exceeding
the expected based on the known background rates that are published in literature," Shimabukuro
told members of a Food and Drug Administration vaccine advisory committee in the meeting on
Thursday, though he cautioned that not all the reports will "turn out to be true
myocarditis/pericarditis reports."
" Of note, of these 528 reports after second dose with symptom onset within 30 days, over
half of them were in these younger age groups, 12""24 years old , whereas roughly 9 percent of
total doses administered were in those age groups, so we "clearly have an imbalance there," he
added later.
A slide on myocarditis reports post-COVID-19 vaccination is shown during the Food and Drug
Administration's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting on June
10, 2021. (FDA/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
Data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, which comes from nine healthcare groups that have
collectively administered over 8.8 million doses""only some 284,000 of those have been given to
12- to 17-year-olds""did not indicate safety concerns, with just 60 myocarditis or pericarditis
events reported through May 29, the doctor continued.
A Food and Drug Administration surveillance system, the Biologics Effectiveness and Safety
Initiative, which utilizes claims data from CVS and two other partners, has detected 99 cases
of myocarditis/pericarditis in the 42 days following vaccination among some 3.1 million shots
given to people between the ages of 12 and 64, the panel was told earlier by an official from
the drug regulating agency.
Another 1,260 were reported in people 65 or older through claims data from Medicare claims
data.
Neither number raised safety signals, Steve Anderson, director of the FDA's Office of
Biostatistics and Epidemiology said.
Dr. Cody Meissner, chief of the Division of Pediatric Infectious Disease at the Tufts
Children's Hospital, and a member of the panel that heard from Shimabukuro and others, said
after the presentations that he was "struck by the fact" that myocarditis "occurs more commonly
after the second dose."
"It's a pretty specific interval of time, it's primarily after the mRNA vaccines as far as
we know, we know that the consistent age, there's a lack of alternative explanations even
though these patients have been pretty well worked up, and it's a widespread occurrence
because, as you said, Israel has found a pretty similar situation," he said during the
meeting.
He asked Shimabukuro about the rates of blood clots seen in women between the ages of 30 and
49 after vaccination""most of the clots appeared in that population after getting a Johnson
& Johnson shot, though officials ultimately lifted a pause,
saying the benefits outweighed the risks ""and to restate the rate of incidence of
myocarditis in adolescents after a jab.
Shimabukuro said that in contrast with the clotting situation, when data showed "strong
evidence of a causal relationship fairly early on," further study is needed on heart
inflammation.
"At this point, I think we're still learning about the rates of myocarditis and
pericarditis. We continue to collect more information both in VAERS and continue to get more
information in VSD, and I think as gather more information we'll begin to get a better idea of
the post-vaccination rates and hopefully will be able to get more detailed information by age
group," he said.
"It's still early," he added, noting that authorization for a vaccine for 12- to
-15-year-olds didn't come
until mid-May while immunization of older adolescents largely came later than shots for
adults.
"I believe that we will ultimately have sufficient information to answer those questions,"
he said.
A general view of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters in
Atlanta, Ga., on Sept. 30, 2014. (Tami Chappell/Reuters)
Another panel member, Dr. Jay Portnoy, director of the Division of Allergy, Asthma, &
Immunology at Children's Mercy Hospitals & Clinics, asked for a comparison between the
adverse events in vaccinated versus unvaccinated persons, saying if the adverse event rate was
lower in those who are vaccinated, then it would still be worth getting a jab.
Shimabukuro said a risk-benefit assessment would be provided by the CDC's advisory panel,
known as ACIP, on vaccines during a meeting next week.
A CDC spokeswoman also referenced the upcoming meeting, which will take place on June 18,
after saying reports of myocarditis remain rare, given that over 300 million doses have been
administered in the United States.
"Given the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses administered, these reports are rare. More
than 18 million people between ages 12-24 have received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine
in the United States," she told The Epoch Times via email.
"CDC continues to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for everyone 12 years and older. Getting
vaccinated is the best way to help protect yourself and your family from COVID-19."
A Pfizer spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email that the company is aware of federal
data indicating "rare reports of myocarditis and pericarditis, predominantly in male
adolescents and young adults, after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination." It noted that federal officials
have not concluded that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines cause either condition, before expressing
support for an assessment of suspected adverse events.
"With a vast number of people vaccinated to date, the benefit risk profile of our vaccine
remains positive," the spokesperson added.
Moderna did not return an inquiry.
Dr. Monica Gandhi, professor of medicine and associate chief at the University of
California, San Francisco, told The Epoch Times in an email that in light of the increased risk
of myocarditis above expected rates among young people, especially after the second dose,
parents should keep a close eye out for when guidance is issued by federal authorities.
"Possibilities include only vaccinating children without prior infection as there is an
association between prior COVID and this adverse effect; giving 1 dose instead of 2 below the
age of 20; addressing the dosage of the vaccine (currently at 30 micrograms down to the age
of 12, which is the same dose as in adults); and extending the duration between doses 1 and 2
for younger people," she said.
"I look forward to ACIP guidance on this over the next few weeks."
BugMan 13 minutes ago
"The infamous spike protein of the coronavirus gets into the blood where it circulates
for several days post-vaccination and then accumulated in organs and tissues including the
spleen, bone marrow, the liver, adrenal glands, and in quite high concentrations in the
ovaries"; "a large number of studies has shown that the most severe effects of SARS-CoV-2,
the virus that causes COVID-19, such as blood clotting and bleeding, are due to the effects
of the spike protein of the virus itself."
I don't see how the CDC, Fauci, Wuhan (CCP), Fort Detrick, Ralph Baric, Peter Daszak and
the WHO are going to get out of this: the 'vaccine' mRNA spike protein is toxic, it is a
pathogenic protein that causes clotting, heart problems and may be associated with
infertility...
bringonthebigone 1 hour ago
The heart has almost no repair capability. Even mild damage at that age likely takes
years or decades off life expectancy. Seems likely the number of undiscovered cases far far
exceed the number reported.
I Write Code 1 hour ago
"Possibilities include only vaccinating children without prior infection as there is
an association between prior COVID and this adverse effect; giving 1 dose instead of 2
below the age of 20; addressing the dosage of the vaccine (currently at 30 micrograms
down to the age of 12, which is the same dose as in adults); and extending the duration
between doses 1 and 2 for younger people," she said
No kidding Doctor Obvious.
BUT extending the duration is probably the wrong move, or if you do, cut the second dose
by 90%.
Hear me now, believe me later.
MRob 5 minutes ago remove link
Watching latest Brett Weinstein interview, Dark Horse, guest claimed the numbers of
complications from the vaccine could be anything up to 100x the official figures. Unlikely,
but emphasises that the error bar is massive. Above reporting system is voluntary, and
people have been censored from knowing what to even look for, and propagandised from
considering their issues could be due to the vaccine. Vaccine complication groups of fb
were deleted, with 70k or 120k people in them. Such a screwed up situation. With the
suppression of ivermectin etc, this is nuremberg trials level for sure.
1. The vaccine is not tailored to the individual and therefore never 100% safe it is not
possible when working with statistics and probability as your guide.
2. The reporting system is next to non-existent even under vaers because that is the
measure of liability for those making people take gene therapies / vaccines.
Therein lies your two fundamental problems ... too fix it though you have too destroy
the whole system it should never have been put in place that way.
hoytmonger 36 minutes ago
In Idaho, the Idaho National Guard is "assisting" vaccination of students at their
middle school...
So the commenter on here, vasilievich mentioned he and his wife got the vax and his wife
went into cardiac arrest shortly after (4 days ago)...they are in their 80's...(God help
them)...several others have noted they knew people that went into cardiac arrest after the
vax...seems to be much, much more common than they are letting on...
Seabass120 36 minutes ago
My wife got her second Pfizer vacc and now cannot go into the sun without breaking out
into hives. Prior to the jab, she was outside daily.
JoKe Biden 27 minutes ago
Yep so predictable, some of the statements will read something like this.
The FDA and CDC have confidence that the vaccine is safe and effective in preventing
COVID-19.
The FDA has determined that the available data show that the vaccine's known and
potential benefits outweigh its known and potential risks in individuals 18 years of age
and older.
At this time, the available data suggest that the chance of heart inflammation
occurring is very low, but the FDA and CDC will remain vigilant in continuing to
investigate this risk.
_Rorschach 25 minutes ago
its not a vaccine
its gene therapy
ebworthen 38 minutes ago
An untested genetic experiment and not a "vaccine" in any sense of the word.
toady 19 minutes ago
"Just say no"
-Nancy Reagan
RawDrum 20 minutes ago
Imagine being a parent who got their teenage child injected with an experiment jab for
something they are at trivial risk of any impact from, that has no-one liable should it go
wrong, in an American for profit health insurance system, doing zero research and
outsourcing critical thinking to media, big tech and pharma corporations engaged in obvious
censorship and obfuscation, and that resulted in your child having an enlarged heart
impacting the rest of their shortened life.
YOLO!
LetThemEatRand 1 hour ago
"The chances of dying from COVID for the young are almost impossible to measure they are
so small" - doesn't matter. Any risk is too much. You must wear a mask and stay home and be
vaccinated when we're ready for that.
"The chances of dying from the COVID vaccine are unknown and documented cases of serious
side effects are growing." - it's a tiny risk, doesn't outweigh the benefit of the
vaccine.
RedSeaPedestrian 43 minutes ago
From Pfizer: "With a vast number of people vaccinated to date, the benefit risk profile
of our vaccine remains positive," the spokesperson added.
Tell that to the families that have had a loved one die from the "jab".
Farmer Dave 24 minutes ago
My dad has been fighting this for a month. He got the jab and ended up in the hospital
with blood clots and the heart inflammation. He is a tough old man and seems to be getting
better. I told him if he would have heeded my warnings about the jab he wouldn't be sick.
Anyone who gives this jab to a child is an idiot.
fackbankz 44 minutes ago (Edited)
If any other product killed 5000 people and injured 200,000, it would be pulled, not
pushed.
There is no such thing as "mild" myocarditis, especially in juveniles. If they live,
they will have a lifetime of heart problems and will likely never be able to enjoy fun
activities like sports or sex. I'm only saying this to inoculate you against the incoming
PR blitz of, "Oh, it's just a few mild cases of heart inflammation."
We must avenge this crime against humanity. My hope is that it is done through courts
and due process, but if ends up just being heads on pikes, so be it.
Dr. Gonzo 47 minutes ago
Biden is giving away 500,000 of these serums to our lucky Vassals. Eh hem. I mean
Allies. For a special thank you from the Empire.
nowhereman 19 minutes ago remove link
After asking yourself a couple more questions like that, and you begin to understand
that it's never been about a "virus" it's about the jab.
"Population decimated by rare blood clots", "Extremely rare side effects devastate
many", "Benefits far outweigh risks as die off causes labor shortages", "Scientists explain
how lab created viruses evolve naturally", "New variants cause only mild symptoms in
vaccinated travelers", "Annual vaccination necessary for return to new normal, CEO of
CALPERS says."
Headlines in a mentally ill society.
TieOneOn 47 minutes ago
Looks like 'Gain of Function' is full steam ahead......
Befits 10 minutes ago (Edited) remove link
They are not panicked. They will do a farce meeting and declare " the benefits of the
Covid 19 vax outweigh the risks". Even for the young men who " in very small number of
cases where there is no clear causal link between the Covid vax and myocarditis". Then when
the microphone is off and the transcription is ended they will laugh their asses off "
these fools will buy it
🤣🤣🤣🤣
". Cha Ching...
boyplunger7777 10 minutes ago
By late summer, should the general public begin to experience serious side effects, the
nation will go into full blown panic...
You_Cant_Quit_Me 9 minutes ago
They'll just say it's a variant of COVID-19 and blame that
Cabreado 38 minutes ago (Edited)
The CDC has been sufficiently exposed, and they're trying to save face with the
masses.
Good luck finding any non-corrupt oversight to resolve this situation... that of a rogue
CDC.
Otherwise it would've happened a long, long time ago.
Rubicon727 1 hour ago
What the CDC refuses to admit is the EU system, that keeps far more accurate deaths,
severe illnesses can be looked at any time of the day. Link to EUdraVigilance.com . They've shown many examples of severe
repercussions from the different kinds of Covid vaccines that have harmed, or killed people
for weeks now.
Now you tell us, how is it this is just NOW emerging from the CDC? Explain that.
Lt. Shicekopf 4 minutes ago
Why are kids getting jabbed? In the off chance they contract this virus there is a 99.8%
chance of recovery. I just do not get it.
AriusArmenian 3 minutes ago
Money.
allfactsmatter 21 minutes ago
The mrNA technology is a new technique for vaccine development.
Despite this, the Pfizer and Modern "vaccines" have been tested LESS than traditional
vaccines. Yet the FDA and CDC says the risks from these shots are acceptable.
Keep in mind that healthy young men have almost NO mortality risk from COVID, and
receive no benefit from these shots as a direct consequence.
Big Government and Big Pharma are gambling with people's lives with these Frankenvirus
vaccines.
liberty2 27 minutes ago
Not a vaccine, they label it as a vaccine to have immunity to lawsuits, no pun intended.
They also call it a vaccine to get emergency authorization. It's not APPROVED, only
authorized, there's a difference. There's NO law mandating the vax, NONE. Your employer can
be sued for discrimination or you can claim Workman's Comp if you should suffer side
effects.
Danoc 29 minutes ago
Can't wait for Fauci's next round of explanation.
opaopaopa 26 minutes ago
all rounds are the same:
"it's the Science"
fackbankz 10 minutes ago
"A few minor cases of heart inflammation, nothing to worry about. Benefits outweigh the
risks."
You know the drill.
Any other product that caused 800 cases of lifelong heart problems in young people would
have been pulled, not pushed, and it's probably a lot more than 800.
TonTon 58 minutes ago
Looks like they are hardly even checking for Myocarditis in the 50+ age bracket and
especially in the 65+ age bracket given it's less than the normal rate for this age group.
I'm sure they are just putting it down to some of the many coincidences happening after
people get the 'jab.' Given that the rate is less than normal though you could be forgiven
for thinking that they are ACTIVELY SUPPRESSING information on side effects. We are
experiencing and epidemic of coincidences these days.
"... Singapore found that the mutation accounted for 95% of the local Covid samples linked to variants of concern. ..."
"... Higher rates of transmission and a reduction in the effectiveness of vaccines have made understanding the strain's effects especially critical. ..."
"... Some patients develop micro thrombi , or small blood clots, so severe that they led affected tissue to die and develop gangrene , said Ganesh Manudhane , a Mumbai cardiologist ..."
"... Doctors are also finding instances of clots forming in blood vessels that supply the intestines , causing patients to experience stomach pain -- their only symptom, local media have reported. ..."
"... But with emerging evidence delta and at least one other variant may be adept at evading vaccine-induced antibodies, pharmaceutical companies are under pressure to tweak existing shots or develop new ones. ..."
The coronavirus variant driving India's devastating Covid-19 second wave is the most
infectious to emerge so far. Doctors now want to know if it's also more severe.
Hearing impairment, severe gastric upsets and blood clots leading to gangrene, symptoms not
typically seen in Covid patients, have been linked by doctors in India to the so-called delta
variant. In England and Scotland, early evidence suggests the strain -- which is also now
dominant there -- carries a higher risk of
hospitalization .
Delta, also known as B.1.617.2, has spread to more than 60 countries over the past six
months and triggered travel curbs from Australia to the
U.S . A spike in infections, fueled by the variant, has forced U.K. to
reconsider its plans for reopening later this month, with a local report saying it may be
pushed back
by two weeks. Singapore found that the mutation accounted for 95% of the local Covid
samples linked to variants of concern.
Higher rates of transmission and a reduction in the effectiveness of vaccines have made
understanding the strain's effects especially critical.
... ... ...
"˜New Enemy'
"Last year, we thought we had learned about our new enemy, but it changed," Ghafur said.
"This virus has become so, so unpredictable."
Stomach pain, nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite, hearing loss and joint pain are among the
ailments Covid patients are experiencing, according to six doctors treating patients across
India. The beta and gamma variants -- first detected in South Africa and Brazil respectively --
have shown little or no evidence of triggering unusual clinical signs, according to a
study
by researchers from the University of New South Wales last month.
Some patients develop
micro thrombi , or small blood clots, so severe that they led affected tissue to die and
develop
gangrene , said Ganesh Manudhane , a
Mumbai cardiologist , who has treated eight patients for thrombotic complications at the
Seven Hills Hospital during the past two months. Two required amputations of fingers or a
foot.
"I saw three-to-four cases the whole of last year, and now it's one patient a week,"
Manudhane said.
India has reported 18.6 million Covid cases thus far in 2021, compared with 10.3 million
last year. The delta variant was the "primary cause" behind the country's deadlier second wave
and is 50% more contagious than the alpha strain that was first spotted in the U.K., according
to a
recent study by an Indian government panel.
The surge in cases may have driven an increase in the frequency with which rare Covid
complications are being observed. Even still, Manudhane said he is baffled by the blood clots
he's seeing in patients across age groups with no past history of coagulation-related
problems.
"We suspect it could be because of the new virus variant," he said. Manudhane is collecting
data to study why some people develop the clots and others don't.
Doctors are also finding instances of clots forming in blood vessels that supply the
intestines , causing patients to experience stomach pain -- their only symptom, local media
have reported.
Some Covid patients are also seeking medical care for hearing loss, swelling around the neck
and severe tonsillitis, said Hetal Marfatia, an ear nose and throat surgeon at Mumbai's King
Edward Memorial Hospital.
The unusual presentations for delta and a closely related variant known as kappa, whose
spread led to a fourth lockdown in the Australian city of Melbourne, are still being confirmed,
said Raina MacIntyre, a professor of global biosecurity at the University of New South Wales in
Sydney. "In the meanwhile, it is important to take note of this and be aware of possible
atypical presentations," she said.
The most alarming aspect of the current outbreak in India is the rapidity with which the
virus is spreading, including to children, said Chetan Mundada, a pediatrician with the
Yashoda group
of hospitals in Hyderabad.
... But with emerging evidence delta and at least one other variant may be adept at
evading vaccine-induced antibodies, pharmaceutical companies are under pressure to tweak
existing shots or develop new ones.
@Bacon's Rebellion We'll see soon enough. The India/Delta variant is in the US and the
British say that it's more infectious than the British variant. If it's here, it will spread
fast and that means that a lot of people who have taken the vaccine will be exposed.
"... In today's world, brimful as it is with opinion and falsehoods masquerading as facts, you'd think the one place you can depend on for verifiable facts is science. You'd be wrong. Many billions of dollars' worth of wrong. ..."
"... A few years ago, scientists at the Thousand Oaks biotech firm Amgen set out to double-check the results of 53 landmark papers in their fields of cancer research and blood biology. The idea was to make sure that research on which Amgen was spending millions of development dollars still held up. They figured that a few of the studies would fail the test -- that the original results couldn't be reproduced because the findings were especially novel or described fresh therapeutic approaches. But what they found was startling: Of the 53 landmark papers, only six could be proved valid. ..."
"... "Even knowing the limitations of preclinical research," observed C. Glenn Begley, then Amgen's head of global cancer research, "this was a shocking result." ..."
"... A group at Bayer HealthCare in Germany similarly found that only 25% of published papers on which it was basing R&D; projects could be validated, suggesting that projects in which the firm had sunk huge resources should be abandoned. ..."
"... "The thing that should scare people is that so many of these important published studies turn out to be wrong when they're investigated further," ..."
"... Eisen says the more important flaw in the publication model is that the drive to land a paper in a top journal -- Nature and Science lead the list -- encourages researchers to hype their results, especially in the life sciences. Peer review, in which a paper is checked out by eminent scientists before publication, isn't a safeguard. Eisen says the unpaid reviewers seldom have the time or inclination to examine a study enough to unearth errors or flaws. ..."
"... Eisen is a pioneer in open-access scientific publishing, which aims to overturn the traditional model in which leading journals pay nothing for papers often based on publicly funded research, then charge enormous subscription fees to universities and researchers to read them. ..."
"... But concern about what is emerging as a crisis in science extends beyond the open-access movement. It's reached the National Institutes of Health, which last week launched a project to remake its researchers' approach to publication. ..."
"... PubMed Commons is an effort to counteract the "perverse incentives" in scientific research and publishing, says David J. Lipman, director of NIH's National Center for Biotechnology Information, which is sponsoring the venture. ..."
"... The demand for sexy results, combined with indifferent follow-up, means that billions of dollars in worldwide resources devoted to finding and developing remedies for the diseases that afflict us all is being thrown down a rathole. NIH and the rest of the scientific community are just now waking up to the realization that science has lost its way, and it may take years to get back on the right path. ..."
In today's world, brimful as it is with opinion and falsehoods masquerading as facts, you'd think the one place you can depend
on for verifiable facts is science. You'd be wrong. Many billions of dollars' worth of wrong.
A few years ago, scientists at the Thousand Oaks biotech firm Amgen set out to double-check the results of 53 landmark
papers in their fields of cancer research and blood biology. The idea was to make sure that research on which Amgen was spending
millions of development dollars still held up. They figured that a few of the studies would fail the test -- that the original
results couldn't be reproduced because the findings were especially novel or described fresh therapeutic approaches. But what
they found was startling: Of the 53 landmark papers, only six could be proved valid.
"Even knowing the limitations of preclinical research," observed C. Glenn Begley, then Amgen's head of global cancer research,
"this was a shocking result."
Unfortunately, it wasn't unique. A group at Bayer HealthCare in Germany similarly found that only 25% of published
papers on which it was basing R&D; projects could be validated, suggesting that projects in which the firm had sunk huge
resources should be abandoned. Whole fields of research, including some in which patients were already participating in clinical trials, are based
on science that hasn't been, and possibly can't be, validated.
"The thing that should scare people is that so many of these important published studies turn out to be wrong when they're investigated
further,"
says Michael Eisen, a biologist at UC Berkeley and the
Howard Hughes Medical Institute. The Economist recently estimated spending on biomedical R&D; in industrialized countries at $59
billion a year. That's how much could be at risk from faulty fundamental research.
Eisen says the more important flaw in the publication model is that the drive to land a paper in a top journal -- Nature
and Science lead the list -- encourages researchers to hype their results, especially in the life sciences. Peer review, in which
a paper is checked out by eminent scientists before publication, isn't a safeguard. Eisen says the unpaid reviewers seldom have
the time or inclination to examine a study enough to unearth errors or flaws.
"The journals want the papers that make the sexiest claims," he says. "And scientists believe that the way you succeed is having
splashy papers in Science or Nature -- it's not bad for them if a paper turns out to be wrong, if it's gotten a lot of attention."
Eisen is a pioneer in open-access scientific publishing, which aims to overturn the traditional model in which leading journals
pay nothing for papers often based on publicly funded research, then charge enormous subscription fees to universities and researchers
to read them.
But concern about what is emerging as a crisis in science extends beyond the open-access movement. It's reached the
National Institutes of Health, which last week launched a project to remake its researchers' approach to publication. Its new
PubMed Commons system allows qualified scientists to post
ongoing comments about published papers. The goal is to wean scientists from the idea that a cursory, one-time peer review is enough
to validate a research study, and substitute a process of continuing scrutiny, so that poor research can be identified quickly and
good research can be picked out of the crowd and find a wider audience.
PubMed Commons is an effort to counteract the "perverse incentives" in scientific research and publishing, says David J. Lipman,
director of NIH's National Center for Biotechnology Information, which is sponsoring the venture.
The Commons is currently in its pilot phase, during which only registered users among the cadre of researchers whose work appears
in PubMed -- NCBI's clearinghouse for citations from biomedical journals and online sources -- can post comments and read them.
Once the full system is launched, possibly within weeks, commenters still will have to be members of that select group, but the
comments will be public.
Science and Nature both acknowledge that peer review is imperfect. Science's executive editor, Monica Bradford, told me by email
that her journal, which is published by the American Assn. for the Advancement of Science, understands that for papers based on
large volumes of statistical data -- where cherry-picking or flawed interpretation can contribute to erroneous conclusions -- "increased
vigilance is required." Nature says that it now commissions expert statisticians to examine data in some papers.
But they both defend pre-publication peer review as an essential element in the scientific process -- a "reasonable and fair"
process, Bradford says.
Yet there's been some push-back by the prestige journals against the idea that they're encouraging flawed work -- and that their
business model amounts to profiteering. Earlier this month, Science published a piece by journalist John Bohannon about what happened
when he sent a spoof paper with flaws that could have been noticed by a high school chemistry student to 304 open-access chemistry
journals (those that charge researchers to publish their papers, but make them available for free). It was accepted by
more than half of them.
One that didn't bite was PloS One, an online open-access journal sponsored
by the Public Library of Science, which Eisen co-founded. In fact, PloS One was among the few journals that identified the fake
paper's methodological and ethical flaws.
What was curious, however, was that although Bohannon asserted that his sting showed how the open-access movement was part of
"an emerging Wild West in academic publishing," it was the traditionalist Science that published the most dubious recent academic
paper of all.
This was a 2010 paper by then-NASA biochemist Felisa Wolfe-Simon
and colleagues claiming that they had found bacteria growing in Mono Lake that were uniquely able to subsist on arsenic and even
used arsenic to build the backbone of their DNA.
The publication in Science was accompanied by a breathless press release and press conference sponsored by NASA, which had an
institutional interest in promoting the idea of alternative life forms. But almost immediately it was debunked by other scientists
for spectacularly poor methodology and an invalid conclusion. Wolfe-Simon, who didn't respond to a request for comment last week,
has defended her interpretation
of her results as "viable." She hasn't withdrawn the paper, nor has Science, which has published numerous
critiques of the work . Wolfe-Simon is now
associated with the prestigious Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
To Eisen, the Wolfe-Simon affair represents the "perfect storm of scientists obsessed with making a big splash and issuing press
releases" -- the natural outcome of a system in which there's no career gain in trying to replicate and validate previous work,
as important as that process is for the advancement of science.
"A paper that actually shows a previous paper is true would never get published in an important journal," he says, "and it would
be almost impossible to get that work funded."
However, the real threat to research and development doesn't come from one-time events like the arsenic study, but from the dissemination
of findings that look plausible on the surface but don't stand up to scrutiny, as Begley and his Amgen colleagues found.
The demand for sexy results, combined with indifferent follow-up, means that billions of dollars in worldwide resources
devoted to finding and developing remedies for the diseases that afflict us all is being thrown down a rathole. NIH and the rest
of the scientific community are just now waking up to the realization that science has lost its way, and it may take years to
get back on the right path.
Have to have a surgery, met with surgeon today. Second question after how are you was have you had your covid shot? I said
no. He said why not? I said I was waiting until it was approved by FDA. He said that would be 5 years and Covid would be over
by then. I said OK. He said he refused to do surgery on anyone not vaxed for Covid. I said Ok, and left. So....now looking for
another surgeon. So there is that. Pretty dismayed, actually.
RedSeaPedestrian 4 hours ago
He violated your HIPAA protections. If you want a bit of revenge, turn him in.
The fines can be quite hefty.
HIPAA violations are taken very seriously. Anyone other than a licensed health care professional asking a private person about
their health conditions, including vaccinations, is against HIPAA regulations. NONE OF THE HIPAA LAWS WERE REPEALED OR RESCINDED
DUE TO COVID.
The minimum penalty for a criminal HIPAA violation is $50,000 per instance and can rise to $250k.
A private individual breaking HIPAA regulations can be fined $100, the company they work for if broken within a work environment
will be fined $50k.
So if I am not wearing a mask, and you ask for proof of vaccination, you just got your business a $50k fine.
Red Sea- He is a Surgeon that specializes in the surgery I need, no HIPAA violation. But thank you.
RedSeaPedestrian 4 hours ago
Did the surgeon tell you that? Read the link.
Quia Possum 4 hours ago (Edited)
Anyone other than a licensed health care professional asking a private person about their health conditions, including vaccinations,
is against HIPAA regulations.
BS. HIPAA only applies to medical record holders, not random people, and violations are by the record holder divulging information
that they should not. Asking prying questions is rude but not a HIPAA violation.
The USA vaccination efforts were badly thought out and badly implemented, resulting in dramatic economic losses for non-existent
public health gains. Looks like governments suspected that "the genie is out of the bottle" -- pathogen escaped from biolab in
the USA or China and badly overreacted, creating unnecessary economic losses and mass unemployment comparable with the Great
Depression.
There is no need to vaccinate people who already have had COVID-19. Natural immunity is much better than a vaccine that was rushed through the FDA.
Also many people are naturally immune to COVID-19 due tot he fact that they have previous coronavirus infection. This issue is
completely ignored in neoliberal MSM/
Notable quotes:
"... Obviously, you not only got immune to the Wuhan virus, but also to the globalist/collectivist and state propaganda. Those of us who lived in Soviet socialist "paradise" get it back in the USSR while protecting our mind and soul from state propaganda and government statistics. ..."
"... So more of the lies are being exposed, the lies that some who want to be in control have told are so bad, and yet some believe them. Why was SARS not a continuing pandemic, if it is the same base virus ..."
"... This is too funny. So at some point is anyone going to ask why this report is being featured on yahoo FINANCE? The answer is in the reference to the publicly-traded, pharmaceutical companies named in the Dr.'s interview. ..."
Dr. Adrian Burrowes, Family Medicine Physician &CFP Physicians Group CEO, joined Yahoo Finance to discuss the latest on covid-19.
Thomas 2 hours ago
I had Covid twice. Once in 2020 and once this year. The first time I had it I coughed for two whole months. I had a fever off
and on and I had to sleep with an extra pillow. I was miserable but I thought it was the flu because we didn't know the virus
was here yet. It was only after I was tested for antibodies several months later did I learn that I had it.
This past January, I got it again after some co-workers came down with it and we all were tested. I was quarantined for 10
days. During this 10 day period, I was only sick for 1 day with a slight stomach ache and diarrhea.
The rest of the time I was out doing yard work and cutting dead limbs out of my trees.
I told my wife that if my T-Cells had that good of memory to protect me that well, I probably won't get the shot. After all,
what can the shot do for me that the virus hasn't already.
Mike -> Thomas 38 minutes ago
Obviously, you not only got immune to the Wuhan virus, but also to the globalist/collectivist and state propaganda. Those of
us who lived in Soviet socialist "paradise" get it back in the USSR while protecting our mind and soul from state propaganda and
government statistics.
With the time, I hope enough Americans will develop the same herd immunity to propaganda masquerading as news, unhealthy "guidance"
from government health agencies and corrupt intelligent agencies' deceptions that serve self-centered bureaucrats and political
operatives, not the country. G-d Bless!
Ed 3 hours ago
So more of the lies are being exposed, the lies that some who want to be in control have told are so bad, and yet some believe
them. Why was SARS not a continuing pandemic, if it is the same base virus, and did not have a vaccine. and yet you hear nothing
about it, could it be that people gained immunity and so it is not a horrible thing as this engineered virus. and remember that
SARS started in the same area of the world as this covid 19.
AB 3 hours ago
This is too funny. So at some point is anyone going to ask why this report is being featured on yahoo FINANCE? The answer
is in the reference to the publicly-traded, pharmaceutical companies named in the Dr.'s interview.
The USA vaccination efforts were badly thought out and badly implemented, resulting in dramatic economic losses for non-existent
public health gains. Looks like governments suspected that "the genie is out of the bottle" -- pathogen escaped from biolab in
the USA or China and badly overreacted, creating unnecessary economic losses and mass unemployment comparable with the Great
Depression.
There is no need to vaccinate people who already have had COVID-19. Natural immunity is much better than a vaccine that was rushed through the FDA.
Also many people are naturally immune to COVID-19 due tot he fact that they have previous coronavirus infection. This issue is
completely ignored in neoliberal MSM/
Notable quotes:
"... Obviously, you not only got immune to the Wuhan virus, but also to the globalist/collectivist and state propaganda. Those of us who lived in Soviet socialist "paradise" get it back in the USSR while protecting our mind and soul from state propaganda and government statistics. ..."
"... So more of the lies are being exposed, the lies that some who want to be in control have told are so bad, and yet some believe them. Why was SARS not a continuing pandemic, if it is the same base virus ..."
"... This is too funny. So at some point is anyone going to ask why this report is being featured on yahoo FINANCE? The answer is in the reference to the publicly-traded, pharmaceutical companies named in the Dr.'s interview. ..."
Dr. Adrian Burrowes, Family Medicine Physician &CFP Physicians Group CEO, joined Yahoo Finance to discuss the latest on covid-19.
Thomas 2 hours ago
I had Covid twice. Once in 2020 and once this year. The first time I had it I coughed for two whole months. I had a fever off
and on and I had to sleep with an extra pillow. I was miserable but I thought it was the flu because we didn't know the virus
was here yet. It was only after I was tested for antibodies several months later did I learn that I had it.
This past January, I got it again after some co-workers came down with it and we all were tested. I was quarantined for 10
days. During this 10 day period, I was only sick for 1 day with a slight stomach ache and diarrhea.
The rest of the time I was out doing yard work and cutting dead limbs out of my trees.
I told my wife that if my T-Cells had that good of memory to protect me that well, I probably won't get the shot. After all,
what can the shot do for me that the virus hasn't already.
Mike -> Thomas 38 minutes ago
Obviously, you not only got immune to the Wuhan virus, but also to the globalist/collectivist and state propaganda. Those of
us who lived in Soviet socialist "paradise" get it back in the USSR while protecting our mind and soul from state propaganda and
government statistics.
With the time, I hope enough Americans will develop the same herd immunity to propaganda masquerading as news, unhealthy "guidance"
from government health agencies and corrupt intelligent agencies' deceptions that serve self-centered bureaucrats and political
operatives, not the country. G-d Bless!
Ed 3 hours ago
So more of the lies are being exposed, the lies that some who want to be in control have told are so bad, and yet some believe
them. Why was SARS not a continuing pandemic, if it is the same base virus, and did not have a vaccine. and yet you hear nothing
about it, could it be that people gained immunity and so it is not a horrible thing as this engineered virus. and remember that
SARS started in the same area of the world as this covid 19.
AB 3 hours ago
This is too funny. So at some point is anyone going to ask why this report is being featured on yahoo FINANCE? The answer
is in the reference to the publicly-traded, pharmaceutical companies named in the Dr.'s interview.
Well, it's official. One of my friends in the USSA who was fully vaccinated (Phizer I
think) within the past 3 months just got a positive COVID test. Teenage son brought it back
home and they all have it now.
uncle tungsten @40 - It looks like that bogus quote is used often, including by academics
and the paper I found was basically hidden, so it's an easy mistake to make by Strategic
Culture (whoever wrote that article). I had never seen/heard of that one so I looked it up
due to the non-contemporaneous looking language. Surprised to learn that "under-cover" is
actually a more recent term than "un-American" which I would have thought originated in the
1920s or 30s - or even 40s (WWII). According to that paper I found, it was first coined/used
just two years after Rush's passing. Go figure. Seems that several more of Rush's quotes as
told in the present day seem to be bogus as well.
"... may have contained downstream effects of some endothelial changes that would give rise to the hypercoagulable state that is characteristic of the disease ..."
"... We suggest that, in part, the presence of spike protein in circulation may contribute to the hypercoagulation in COVID-19 positive patients and may cause severe impairment of fibrinolysis. Such lytic impairment may be the direct cause of the large microclots we have noted here ..."
The researchers examined the fluorescent amyloid signals in abnormal clots and in healthy
platelet-poor plasma (PPP) with or without spike protein.
This showed a marked increase in dense abnormal amyloid clots, called amyloid deposits, in
PPP to which spike was added, with or without thrombin. Thrombin alone also created an
extensive fibrin clot. However, there was a significant increase in the percentage area of
amyloid deposits.
The greatest change followed the addition of both spike and thrombin.
Platelet
activation
When whole blood was exposed to spike protein even at low concentrations, the erythrocytes
showed agglutination, hyperactivated platelets were seen, with membrane spreading and the
formation of platelet-derived microparticles.
In all samples, spontaneous amyloid deposits formed after exposure to the spike protein
without the need for thrombin exposure.
Clotting in microfluidics channels
Microfluidics systems were set up to simulate extensive endothelial damage, with resulting
hypercoagulability. This showed that COVID-19 produced changes in the clotting profile of the
PPP.
Clot formation in healthy PPP occurred slowly and gradually, to a moderate size, and with
orderly clot layers that allowed blood flow to occur through the channel's center. These clots
were easily removed by flushing the channel at 1 mL/min.
The PPP from COVID-19 patients showed large disorderly clots that often projected into the
channel's center and obstructed the flow. These clots were impossible to dislodge at the
earlier flow rate or even at a higher flow.
Again, large clots formed in PPP from COVID-19 patients when it was exposed to thrombin in
about 90 seconds. However, most of the clotting happened in one burst, with not much
propagation of the clot thereafter, indicating rapid consumption of the thrombin.
This was not the case with PPP exposed to spike protein, where a fibrous laminar clot was
combined with a chaotic clot. Moderate flow disruption was also observed. These clots could
also be removed with similar ease. This intermediate state could be due to the absence of
multiple other biological factors that may have hindered the formation of the characteristic
clots seen in COVID-19 patients.
Mass spectrometry
The results of mass spectrometry of the healthy PPP with spike protein showed changes in the
structure of the beta and gamma fibrin(ogen) proteins, together with complement 3 and
prothrombin. These proteins showed resistance to degradation by trypsin, a powerful proteolytic
enzyme, in the presence of spike protein.
What are the implications?
The researchers show that the spike S1 not only interacts directly with both platelets and
with the key clotting protein fibrinogen and its activated form, fibrin, causing changes in the
protein that, in turn, alter the way blood clots.
In PPP, the addition of thrombin was found to induce fibrinogen's polymerization into a
fibrin mesh. Exposure to spike protein was shown to precipitate dense clots.
When spikes and thrombin were added to healthy PPP, the formation of abnormal amyloid
deposits was increased. These also showed significant changes in the blood cells'
ultrastructure, including the red cells and platelets.
The presence of extensive spontaneous fibrin networks following the addition of the spike
protein to whole blood matches the ultrastructural appearance seen on COVID-19-positive blood
smears. Here again, the primary features were anomalous clotting, amyloid in the clots, and
spontaneous fibrin network formation.
The study also shows that it may alter blood flow in COVID-19. The microfluidics simulation
showed that the PPP from COVID-19 patients, which is almost pure fibrinogen, formed large
obstructing clots. The PPP " may have contained downstream effects of some endothelial
changes that would give rise to the hypercoagulable state that is characteristic of the
disease ."
" We suggest that, in part, the presence of spike protein in circulation may
contribute to the hypercoagulation in COVID-19 positive patients and may cause severe
impairment of fibrinolysis. Such lytic impairment may be the direct cause of the large
microclots we have noted here ."
Thus, the free S1 subunit has harmful effects on the host even without direct infection of
the cells themselves. This strengthens the case for targeting the spike protein via antibodies
and vaccines.
*Important Notice
medRxiv publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and,
therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related
behavior, or treated as established information.
"... Neutralization of B.1.617 and B.1.618 spike protein variants by REGN10933 and REGN10987. Image Credit: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.14.444076v1.full.pdf ..."
India's surge in SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) infections are
linked to the new variants B.1.617 and B.1.618, with mutated spike proteins . In
recent months, it has caused a devastating second wave of the coronavirus disease 2019
(COVID-19) pandemic. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), it is reported that from
3 January 2020 to 17 May 2021, there have been over 25 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 with
over 274 thousand deaths.
The mutations in these variants may contribute to the increased transmissibility of the
virus, and could potentially result in re-infection or resistance to the vaccine-elicited
antibodies. The mutations are driven by selective pressure for increased affinity for its
receptor, ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme), and escape from neutralizing
antibodies . This raises concern over the fitness of the Indian SARS-CoV-2 variants and
their ability to escape the vaccine-elicited immune response.
In this context, researchers from the NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, USA, tested
the neutralization of B.1.617 and B.1.618 SARS-CoV-2 variant spike proteins and determined
their resistance to neutralization by convalescent sera, vaccine-elicited antibodies, and
therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.
To achieve this they generated lentiviruses pseudotyped by the variant proteins. They found
that these viruses with B.1.617 and B.1.618 spike proteins were neutralized with a 2-5-fold
decrease in titer by convalescent
sera and vaccine-elicited antibodies.
They observed a modest neutralization resistance to the vaccine-elicited antibodies. This is
good news as it suggests that the current vaccines will protect against the B.1.617 and B.1.618
42 variants. This study, led by Professor Nathaniel R. Landau, is recently posted on the
bioRxiv * server.
Our results lend confidence that current vaccines will provide protection against variants
identified to date."
The researchers also found that the resistance was caused by the L452R, E484Q, and E484K
mutations. Further, they reported that the variants were partially resistant to REGN10933,
which is one of the two mAbs constituting the Regeneron COV2 therapy (casirivimab (REGN10933)
with imdevimab (REGN10987), for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19).
The B.1.617 encodes a spike protein with the mutations L452R, E484Q, D614G, and P681R while
the B.1.618 spike has mutations Î"145-146, E484K, and D614G. The B.1.617 variant spike
protein contains L452R and E484Q mutations in the RBD in addition to D614G and the P681R
mutation near the proteolytic processing site and the B.1.618 spike has E484K in the RBD in
addition to D614G and the N-terminal deletion Î"145-146.
The researchers generated the lentiviral virions, expressing the spike proteins at a level
similar to that of wild-type D614G. They also tested the infectivity of the virus, reporting
that the B.1.617 spike protein (L452R/E484Q/P681R) was >2-fold increase in infectivity while
B.1.618 was similar to wild-type D614G.
Significantly, they found that the increased infectivity of the B.1.617 spike was attributed
to L452R mutation, which caused a 3.5-fold increase in infectivity and, in combination with
E484Q caused a 3-fold increase. Other point mutations had an insignificant effect on the
infectivity.
Both variants B.1.617 and B.1.618 have increased affinity for ACE2 and the researchers found
that both are partially resistant to the monoclonal antibodies. They discussed the mutations,
the expressed proteins, and the subsequent effect on binding and infection.
In this study, the researchers reported that the virus variants B.1.617 and B.1.618 spike
were partially resistant to neutralization, with an average 3.9-fold and 2.7-fold decrease in
IC50 for convalescent sera and antibodies elicited by Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines,
respectively. The neutralization resistance was mediated by the L452R, E484Q, and E484K
mutations. The resistance of these variants is similar to the previous variants.
Even with the 3-4-fold decrease in neutralization titer of vaccine-elicited antibodies,
average titers were around 1:500, a titer well above that found in the sera of individuals
who have recovered from infection with earlier unmutated viruses."
Significantly, this study reassures that the vaccinated individuals will remain protected
against the B.1.617 and B.1.618 variants.
Commenting on the other vaccines, the researchers said, "The analyses in this study were
restricted to the mRNA-based vaccines but there is no reason to believe that vector-based
vaccines such as that of Johnson and Johnson that express a stabilized, native, full-length
spike protein would be different with regarding antibody neutralization of virus
variants."
*Important Notice
bioRxiv publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and,
therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related
behavior, or treated as established information.
Dr. Marty Makary made the comments during a recent interview, noting that "natural immunity works" and it is wrong to vilify those
who don't want the vaccine because they have already recovered from the virus.
Makary criticised "the most slow, reactionary, political CDC in American history" for not clearly communicating the scientific
facts about natural immunity compared to the kind of immunity developed through vaccines.
" There is more data on natural immunity than there is on vaccinated immunity, because natural immunity has been around longer,"
Makary emphasised.
"We are not seeing reinfections, and when they do happen, they're rare. Their symptoms are mild or are asymptomatic," the professor
added.
"Please, ignore the CDC guidance," he urged, adding "Live a normal life, unless you are unvaccinated and did not have the infection,
in which case you need to be careful."
"We've got to start respecting people who choose not to get the vaccine instead of demonizing them," Makary further asserted.
The professor's comments come amid a plethora of
media generated propaganda suggesting that natural immunity isn't enough, and that those who do not choose to take the vaccine
should be socially ostracisedJustus D. Barnes 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link
I would not call it a hoax as some people do get sick and die.
However. Some people are allergic to peanuts. So lets force everyone to get vaccinated against peanuts?
I think of this whole thing as $#IT politicians shoving their $#IT policies down stupid peoples throats. In a free America
any thoughtful person would asses the danger that corona or a peanut would present to them personally and then take the action
they thought best. IMHO If your state does not let you make the choice for yourself then you join a class action lawsuit against
your state or move.
FurnitureFireSale 4 hours ago remove link
And that's the problem in that what America has become: a bunch of thoughtless sheep that do what their idols tell them to
do; what the commercials tell them to do; what the brainwashing convinces them to do. There are many, many of them and a good
amount of thoughtful ones (us)too. It is the latter having these discussions about these therapies, no matter how much the MSM
and FAANG's try to supress it. Many highly intelligent people I know have gone ahead and gotten their shots. Several in my circle
have not- never will. The have nots understand just what is going on. The liberal states that are pushing this agenda need to
be reeled in via a class action. One should not be forced to move based upon their vaccination status. It's as arbitrary as saying
"move to a state where they don't serve peanuts". You're exactly right.
sun tzu 3 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Deaths from purely from covid was probably in the 25,000 range in the past 14 months, which is less than half of 5 months of
flu deaths each year. Some died due to pneumonia or cytokine storm. Others died when the spike proteins got into their blood and
caused clots. The vast majority died with covid, either real or thru a false positives. Probably 25-50K were murdered on ventilators.
philipat 1 hour ago remove link
As I have written about previously, the CDC/WHO are playing (political) games with science and their actions only discredit
themselves and raise other obvious questions which challenge the official explanation(s) of events, in summary as follows:
The definition of Herd Immunity has been changed (including in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary) to EXCLUDE natural immunity
as a contributing factor. This is scientifically false because naturally acquired immunity is the best type of immunity because
it is a complete immune response which conveys long-lasting immunity and prevents transmission of any virus. This is NOT true
for the "vaccines" whose manufacturers only claim a reduction in the severity of any symptoms. The obvious conclusion based
on the science is that naturally immune people have a stronger claim on "Vaccine Passports" than the vaccinated.
Not only is it unnecessary for naturally immune people to be vaccinated, there are potential dangers in doing so. Based
again on scientific knowledge from earlier attempts to develop vaccines for CoVs, there is a very real risk of ADE (Antibody
Dependent Enhancement), also described as Pathogenic Priming from occurring when people with non-neutralizing antibodies are
exposed to further challenge from either a live virus or high concentrations of viral antigen. This can potentially occur in
both vaccinated people (we will know during the next "Flu" season) and in naturally immune people exposed to high concentrations
of viral antigen which triggers non-neutralizing antibodies. The subsequent autoimmune reaction can result from a triggered
"cytokine storm" which can result in the shutdown of vital organs and death,
Ironically, this MIGHT explain some of the many AEs being seen with the "vaccines" where an autoimmune effect is seen.
The only possible reason for the above denials 1-2) of the science is so as to comply with the official narrative that everyone
needs vaccination "" presumably for reasons other than science and public health.
The CDC still recommends the RT-qPCR test to diagnose "new cases" at a cycle threshold (Ct) of >35 cycles, typically run
at 35-45 or even 50 cycles. This despite the fact they fully understand that at these high cycle counts, the numbers of "false
positives" are high (up to 95% in some labs). However, in coming to terms with "a few breakthrough cases" of disease in vaccinated
people, CDC has been running trials to sequence the virus (in the hope of blaming new variants) obtained from such people.
However, to be included, only samples from patients confirmed positive with a PCR test run at a Ct of <28 cycles are allowed.
Why the difference?
The dilemma for CDC here is obvious. If they recommend that for reasons of accuracy, ALL PCR tests are run at a Ct of <28,
they will not be able to find many "new cases" (a/k/a false positives) to inflate the case numbers and have ample material
to blame "Covid deaths" on. If they run the trials on "breakthrough infections" at a Ct of >35 (as recommended for general
use) they will "confirm" (by their own definition) thousands of such " extremely rare breakthrough cases". This clearly demonstrates
duplicity on the part of CDC and destroys their credibility, which has been built on science not politics.
The Virus origin dilemma. The Overton window has allowed two, and only two, "explanations" for the origin of the virus.
Setting aside the fact that whenever the Establishment presents a limited number of explanations for anything, they are always
all wrong (and in this case there are other explanations surrounding the Military Games, held in Wuhan at around the time the
first patients were recorded) it is now obvious that the desired conclusion is a "leak" at the Wuhan Institute of Virology
(WIV). That means we must also set aside the fact that Bio Safety Level 4 labs don't just "leak" "" I can attest to this from
personal experience of BSL training.
The dilemma for the Authorities with this explanation, not yet widely recognised, is that if indeed this is the explanation,
it means that wild SARS-CoV-2 virus (and other man made variants in the "gain of function" research, was being experimented
with in WIV so as to infect the respiratory system of those "infected". Other bodily contamination transported out of the lab
is entirely impossible due to the security features built-in at BSL-4 facilities (Pressure gradients, UV exit lighting, 3 changes
of clothing involving showers with various chemical components etc. "" these are SERIOUS safety precautions)
That being the case, why then has it not been possible to isolate and purify said virus (and its variants) for the purposes
of confirming its existence and for use in more accurate tests and diagnostics plus for use in making natural (real) vaccines?
konputa 4 hours ago
The CDC are vaccine pushers and owners of numerous vaccine patents. It seems to me they are doing their job as intended, it's
just that the public misunderstands their purpose. Their mission isn't public health.
CheapBastard 5 hours ago (Edited)
That's exactly what my doc told me. Stay healthy and take the relevant supplements like Vitamin D. Most likely have immunity
from previous Flu infections with cross-over protection.
Problem is for the CDC and Big Pharma is their Fear **** can't be promoted and they can't make mind-numbing profits from natural
immunity.
What a mess_man 4 hours ago
We knew this last spring with the Diamond Princess.
Kentucky Republican discusses why he questioned the top health official over funding of the controversial Wuhan Institute of Virology
on 'Fox News Primetime.' #FoxNews #FoxNewsPrimetime
"Based on the lack of a rational explanation for the actions of the WHO, Merck, FDA and Unitaid, we conclude that they result
from an active disinformation campaign ... "
Thank you for the latest release from FLCCC. When you find the time to comment, you always supply powerful material - I am
extraordinarily grateful for this.
I just spent the time to read the release, and I was absorbed from beginning to end. Of course, there's some unavoidable scientific
terminology, but very little, and most of the document stands as a revolutionary manifesto, a call to action, a call to resist
the misinformation and the disinformation permeating the COVID-19 pandemic.
The document illustrates in a verifiable and succinct charge how the WHO has loaded the dice against the use of ivermectin
as both a prophylactic and a treatment for COVID-19, in order to argue against its adoption - and this, in a world that is increasingly
adopting its use because it quite simply works.
It works, and the results from all over the world are recorded by doctors, showing that it works up to a 90% effectiveness
in the main and close to 100% in some cases, and it does this with negligible collateral harm demonstrated across billions of
doses and many decades - and the WHO, despite that in 2018 it formally lauded its safety, now says that it doesn't work and that
it may be dangerous.
~~
So what is the Why of the WHO?
This release from FLCCC explains why and describes the underlying, systemic rottenness in the western medical system, how it
has been tainted for decades by corporations and large funding sources - and how the common doctors, fighting to do no harm and
to save lives, are up against a wall of opposition during this pandemic that is breathtakingly huge.
The FLCCC press release goes beyond the medical science and explains also the corporate tactics that have demolished scientific
method. It presents a call to action, and sketches the only tools we have to resist. It says much that we already know - but these
are doctors and awarded researchers telling us all the things that are so obviously fishy in the institutional responses
to the pandemic.
Big Pharma, Big Science, Big Media, Big Tech, Big Government, Big Foundations - all in collusion, all following the trail originally
blazed by Big Tobacco.
See, we know how it works because we've watched it for decades. The FLCCC release does us the service of reminding us and enumerating
the instances when corporate venality (my word, not theirs) has destroyed the truth simply to make money.
Looks like the chance to win a million bucks can give vaccination rates a real shot in the
arm.
Ohio saw its COVID-19 vaccination rate jump 45% between May 14-19 as compared to the
previous week, thanks in part to the state's Vax-A-Million lottery,
Gov. Mike DeWine told reporters on Wednesday . Last week, the state said it recorded a 28%
spike in vaccinations in the days following the lottery announcement.
Each week, adult Ohioans who have received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose will enter a
random drawing to win a million dollars. And younger vaccinated Ohio residents between the ages
of 12 and 17 will be part of a weekly random drawing to get a four-year scholarship to an Ohio
public university, which will include tuition, room, board and books. There will be five
winners for each prize selected over the next five weeks.Wednesday night, the Ohio lottery
announced the first two winners: Abbigail Bugenske of Silverton, near Cincinnati, won $1
million, while Joseph Costello of Englewood, near Dayton, won the college scholarship. Each
Wednesday moving forward, another adult and another teen winner will be revealed at 7:29 p.m.
through June 23.
More than 2.7 million adults registered for the cash prizes, and more than 100,000 teens are
vying for the scholarships.
I continue to be troubled by the Western Covid response of new vaccines.
Unless you haven't read Big Pharma bragging, they are projecting revenues of $100 billion
this year with $20+ projected by Pfizer alone. Given my jaded economics view of the industry
and Western governments owned by the financial elite, it is not beyond my belief that this
controlled taking advantage of a health care crisis is conscious war criminal behavior just
like the ongoing (since at least 2008) loading of the US Treasury with debt while the profits
go to private finance elite.
Back to further financialization of the Health Care world. I never saw the 1973 movie
Soylent Green but below is the last Wiki line about the movie that resonates with my
perspective of the Western brainwashed becoming a new income stream for Big Health just like
wars are income streams for the MIC
"
While being taken away, Thorn shouts out to the surrounding crowd, "Soylent Green is
people!"
"
When you go to a poker game, look around and can't see who the sucker of the evening is,
take a hint, its you
Its time to shoot the TV folks and end other brainwashing inputs that make it so you can't
see how the world really works.....private finance barbarism which is currently in a
civilization war with China's not barbarism/public finance approach.
With Grieved's friendly update.....
The shit show Narrative will continue until it doesn't..
Five people between D.C., Maryland and Virginia have been tested for the
new strain of coronavirus. There are no confirmed cases in the DMV. Something went wrong.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.460.0_en.html#goog_322948139 Author: Nick
Boykin (WUSA9), Jordan Fischer Published: 10:47 PM EST January 27, 2020 Updated: 3:33 PM EST
January 28, 2020
WASHINGTON -- With worries about the coronavirus spreading nationally, the National
Institute of Health's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) is working
on a vaccine to help combat the virus.
At its Bethesda headquarters, NIAID will be working with a company called Moderna, who
received a grant from the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations. Their mission is to
accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases during an outbreak,
according to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) . CEPI is helping
fund the grant money being used.
Two other organizations, Inovia Pharmaceuticals and The University of Queensland, also
received grants, according to CEPI.
"NIAID has mobilized a research response to 2019-nCoV that builds on experience with
SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and other emerging pathogens," NIAID said in a statement about the grant.
"NIAID has begun early stage development of an mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccine for 2019-nCoV. mRNA
vaccines direct the body's cells to express a protein to elicit a broad immune response
including high levels of neutralizing antibodies. The expressed protein is designed based on
knowledge of the virus structure, but the platform does not contain live or inactivated virus.
The mRNA platform can be quickly adapted and manufactured efficiently."
a very small number of teenagers and young adults vaccinated against the coronavirus may
have experienced heart problems, according to the
agency's vaccine safety group .
... The condition, called myocarditis, is an inflammation of the heart muscle, and can occur
following certain infections.
... The cases seem to have occurred predominantly in adolescents and young adults about four
days after their second dose of one of the mRNA vaccines, made by Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech.
And the cases were more common in males than in females.
... In the general population, about 10 to 20 of every 100,000 people each year develop myocarditis ,
experiencing symptoms from fatigue and chest pain to arrhythmias and cardiac arrest. Many
others likely have mild symptoms and are never diagnosed, according to researchers.
.. The agency did not specify the ages of the patients involved. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine
has been authorized for ages 16 and above since December.
... On May 14, the C.D.C. alerted clinicians to the possible link between myocarditis and
vaccines. And on May 17, the working group reviewed data on myocarditis from the Department of
Defense, reports filed with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and others.
"... was vaccinated before it was available to any of us peasants. About 3 weeks ago she was home sick with Covid. He husband got it too, and he was also vaccinated as well. ..."
My 29 year old niece that is as skinny as a broom stick is an RN in a pedes unit, and was vaccinated before it was available to
any of us peasants. About 3 weeks ago she was home sick with Covid. He husband got it too, and he was also vaccinated as well.
PHE figures show Covid outbreak is STILL flat despite rapid spread of Indian variant as
expert says it won't stop lockdown easing plans but SAGE adviser warns third wave has begun and
all 10 areas with biggest outbreaks are mutant strain hotspots
Some 95 out of 149 local authorities in England saw Covid cases dip last week. Dr Yvonne
Doyle said the latest data was 'hugely encouraging' but that there was still concern over the
Indian variant.
Last December, Yeadon, a British national,
filed
a petition
with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to immediately suspend testing on these experimental vaccines due to many
safety concerns, including pathogenic priming, which involves "
an exaggerated immune reaction,
especially when the test person is confronted with the real, 'wild' virus after vaccination
."
In their
white
paper
on the topic, AFLDS warned that such reactions, which can be fatal, "
are difficult to
prove
," as they are often interpreted as infection with "
a worse virus
," or, perhaps, a
more dangerous variant.
Having maintained that there is "
no
need of vaccines
" for COVID-19, Yeadon emphasizes below, "
PLEASE warn every person not to go
near top up vaccines. There is absolutely no need to them
."
At the outset, Dr. Yeadon said:
"
I'm well
aware of the global crimes against humanity being perpetrated against a large proportion of the world's population. I feel great
fear, but I'm not deterred from giving expert testimony to multiple groups of able lawyers like Rocco Galati in Canada and
Reiner
Fuellmich
in Germany. I have absolutely no doubt that we are in the presence of evil (not a determination I've ever
made before in a 40-year research career) and dangerous products."
"
In the U.K., it's abundantly clear that the authorities are bent
on a course which will result in administering 'vaccines' to as many of the population as they can. This is madness, because even
if these agents were legitimate, protection is needed only by those at notably elevated risk of death from the virus. In those
people, there might even be an argument that the risks are worth bearing. And there definitely are risks which are what I call
'mechanistic': inbuilt in the way they work.
"
"
But all the other people, those in good health and younger than
60 years, perhaps a little older, they don't perish from the virus. In this large group, it's wholly unethical to administer
something novel and for which the potential for unwanted effects after a few months is completely uncharacterized. In no other
era would it be wise to do what is stated as the intention. Since I know this with certainty, and I know those driving it know
this too, we have to enquire: What is their motive?
"
"
While I don't know, I have strong theoretical answers, only one
of which relates to money and that motive doesn't work, because the same quantum can be arrived at by doubling the unit cost and
giving the agent to half as many people. Dilemma solved. So it's something else. Appreciating that, by entire population, it is
also intended that minor children and eventually babies are to be included in the net, and that's what I interpret to be an evil
act."
"There is no medical rationale for it. Knowing as I do that the
design of these 'vaccines' results, in the expression in the bodies of recipients, expression of the spike protein, which has
adverse biological effects of its own which, in some people, are harmful (initiating blood coagulation and activating the immune
'complement system'), I'm determined to point out that those not at risk from this virus should not be exposed to the risk of
unwanted effects from these agents.
"
INTERVIEWER: In a
talk
you
gave four months ago, you said:
The most
likely duration of immunity to a respiratory virus like SARS CoV-2 is multiple years. Why do I say that? We actually have the
data for a virus that swept through parts of the world seventeen years ago called SARS, and remember SARS CoV-2 is 80 percent
similar to SARS, so I think that's the best comparison that anyone can provide.
The evidence is clear: These very clever cellular immunologists
studied all the people they could get hold of who had survived SARS 17 years ago. They took a blood sample, and they tested
whether they responded or not to the original SARS and they all did; they all had perfectly normal, robust T cell memory. They
were actually also protected against SARS CoV-2, because they're so similar; it's cross immunity.
So, I would say the best data that exists is that immunity should
be robust for at least 17 years. I think it's entirely possible that it is lifelong. The style of the responses of these people's
T cells were the same as if you've been vaccinated and then you come back years later to see if that immunity has been retained.
So I think the evidence is really strong that the duration of immunity will be multiple years, and possibly lifelong.
In other words, previous exposure to SARS – that is, a variant similar to SARS CoV-2 – bestowed SARS CoV-2 immunity.
The Israel government cites new variants to justify lockdowns, flight closures, restrictions, and Green Passport issuance. Given the
Supreme Court verdict, do you think it may be possible to preempt future government measures with accurate information about
variants, immunity, herd immunity, etc. that could be provided to the
lawyers
who
will be challenging those future measures?
DR. YEADON:
"What I
outlined in relation to immunity to SARS is precisely what we're seeing with SARS-CoV-2. The study is from one of the best labs
in their field.
"So, theoretically, people could test their T-cell
immunity
by
measuring the responses of cells in a small sample of their blood. There are such tests, they are not 'high throughout' and they
are likely to cost a few hundred USD each on scale. But not thousands. The test I'm aware of is not yet commercially available,
but research only in U.K.
"However, I expect the company could be induced to provide
test
kits
"for research" on scale, subject to an agreement. If you were to arrange to test a few thousand non-vaccinated Israelis,
it may be a double edged sword. Based on other countries experiences, 30-50percent of people had prior immunity & additionally
around 25percent have been infected & are now immune.
"Personally, I wouldn't want to deal with the authorities on their
own terms: that you're suspected as a source of infection until proven otherwise. You shouldn't need to be proving you're not a
health risk to others. Those without symptoms are never a health threat to others. And in any case, once those who are concerned
about the virus are vaccinated, there is just no argument for anyone else needing to be vaccinated."
INTERVIEWER: My understanding of a "
leaky
vaccine
" is that it only lessens symptoms in the vaccinated, but does not stop
transmission; it therefore allows the spread of what then becomes a more deadly virus.
For example, in China they deliberately use leaky Avian Flu vaccines to quickly cull flocks of
chicken, because the unvaccinated die within three days. In Marek's Disease, from which they needed to save all the chickens, the
only solution was to vaccinate 100% of the flock, because all unvaccinated were at high risk of death. So how a leaky vax is
utilized is intention-driven, that is, it is possible that the intent can be to cause great harm to the unvaccinated.
Stronger strains usually would not propagate through a population because they kill the host too
rapidly, but if the vaccinated experience only less-serious disease, then they spread these strains to the unvaccinated who contract
serious disease and die.
Do you agree with this assessment? Furthermore, do you agree that if the unvaccinated become the
susceptible ones, the only way forward is HCQ prophylaxis for those who haven't already had COVID-19?
Would the Zelenko Protocol work against these stronger strains if this is the case?
And if many already have the aforementioned previous "17-year SARS immunity", would that then
not protect from any super-variant?
DR. YEADON: "I think the Gerrt Vanden Bossche story is highly suspect. There is no evidence at all that vaccination is leading or
will lead to 'dangerous variants'. I am worried that it's some kind of trick.
"As a general rule, variants form very often, routinely, and tend to become less dangerous & more infectious over time, as it comes
into equilibrium with its human host. Variants generally don't become more dangerous.
"No variant differs from the original sequence by more than 0.3%. In other words, all variants are at least 99.7% identical to the
Wuhan sequence.
"It's a fiction, and an evil one at that, that variants are likely to "escape immunity".
"Not only is it intrinsically unlikely – because this degree of similarity of variants means zero chance that an immune person
(whether from natural infection or from vaccination) will be made ill by a variant – but it's empirically supported by high-quality
research.
"The
research
I
refer to shows that people recovering from infection or who have been vaccinated ALL have a wide range of immune cells which
recognize ALL the variants.
"
This
paper
shows WHY the extensive molecular recognition by the immune system makes the tiny changes in variants irrelevant.
"I cannot say strongly enough: The stories around variants and need for top up vaccines are FALSE. I am concerned there is a very
malign reason behind all this. It is certainly not backed by the best ways to look at immunity. The claims always lack substance
when examined, and utilize various tricks, like manipulating conditions for testing the effectiveness of antibodies. Antibodies are
probably rather unimportant in host protection against this virus. There have been a few 'natural experiments', people who
unfortunately cannot make antibodies, yet are able quite successfully to repel this virus. They definitely are better off with
antibodies than without. I mention these rare patients because they show that antibodies are not essential to host immunity, so some
contrived test in a lab of antibodies and engineered variant viruses do NOT justify need for top up vaccines.
"The only people who might remain vulnerable and need prophylaxis or treatment are those who are elderly and/or ill and do not wish
to receive a vaccine (as is their right).
"The good news is that there are multiple choices available: hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, budesonide (inhaled steroid used in
asthmatics), and of course oral Vitamin D, zinc, azithromycin etc. These reduce the severity to such an extent that this virus did
not need to become a public health crisis."
INTERVIEWER: Do you feel the FDA does a good job regulating big pharma? In what ways does big
pharma get around the regulator? Do you feel they did so for the mRNA injection?
DR. YEADON: "Until recently, I had high regard for global medicines regulators. When I was in Pfizer, and later CEO of a biotech I
founded (Ziarco, later acquired by Novartis), we interacted respectfully with FDA, EMA, and the U.K. MHRA. Always good quality
interactions.
"Recently, I noticed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) had made a grant to the Medicines and Healthcare products
Regulatory Agency (MHRA)! Can that ever be appropriate? They're funded by public money. They should never accept money from a
private body.
"So here is an example where the U.K. regulator has a conflict of interest.
"The European Medicines Agency failed to require certain things as disclosed in the 'hack' of their files while reviewing the Pfizer
vaccine.
"You can find examples on
Reiner
Fuellmich
's 'Corona Committee' online.
"Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and I petitioned the EMA Dec 1, 2020 on the genetic vaccines. They ignored us.
"Recently, we wrote privately to them, warning of blood clots, they ignored us. When we
went
public
with our letter, we were completely censored. Days later, more than ten countries paused use of a vaccine citing blood
clots.
"I think the big money of pharma plus cash from BMGF creates the environment where saying no just isn't an option for the regulator.
"I must return to the issue of 'top up vaccines' (booster shots) and it is this whole narrative which I fear will he exploited and
used to gain unparalleled power over us.
"PLEASE warn every person not to go near top up vaccines. There is absolutely no need to them.
"As there's no need for them, yet they're being made in pharma, and regulators have stood aside (no safety testing), I can only
deduce they will be used for nefarious purposes.
"For example, if someone wished to harm or kill a significant proportion of the world's population over the next few years, the
systems being put in place right now will enable it.
"It's my considered view that it is entirely possible that this will be used for massive-scale depopulation."
Not sure of Yeadon's claim disputing Bossche's suggestion of new strains arising from vaccination. We are
early on with the program but also seeing need to check that problem in Israel:
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/south-african-covid-19-variant-break-through-pfizer-vaccine-14598714
And Bossche's idea of vaccination, is not "more," of the same. But different. Can't use that argument of Yeadon's to override all
that Bossche happens to be saying.
Michael Yeadon, wasn't just any scientist. The 60-year-old is a former vice president of Pfizer, where he spent 16 years as an
allergy and respiratory researcher. He later co-founded a biotech firm that the Swiss drugmaker Novartis purchased for at least $325
million.
In recent months, Yeadon (pronounced Yee-don) has emerged as an unlikely hero of the so-called anti-vaxxers, whose adherents
question the safety of many vaccines, including for the coronavirus. The anti-vaxxer movement has amplified Yeadon's skeptical views
about COVID-19 vaccines and tests, government-mandated lockdowns and the arc of the pandemic. Yeadon has said he personally doesn't
oppose the use of all vaccines. But many health experts and government officials worry that opinions like his fuel vaccine hesitancy
– a reluctance or refusal to be vaccinated – that could prolong the pandemic. COVID-19 has already killed more than 2.6 million
people worldwide.
"These claims are false, dangerous and deeply irresponsible," said a spokesman for Britain's Department of Health & Social Care,
when asked about Yeadon's views. "COVID-19 vaccines are the best way to protect people from coronavirus and will save thousands of
lives."
Recent reports of blood clots and abnormal bleeding in a small number of recipients of AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine have cast
doubt on that shot's safety, leading several European countries to suspend its use.
The developments are likely to fuel vaccine
hesitancy further, although there is no evidence of a causative link between the AstraZeneca product and the affected patients'
conditions.
... ... ...
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., pictured in 2016, was recently banned on Instagram because of his COVID-19 vaccine posts. REUTERS/Stephanie
Keith
The visage and views of Yeadon, widely identified as an "Ex-VP of Pfizer,'' can be seen on social media in languages including
German, Portuguese, Danish and Czech. A Facebook post carries a video from November in which Yeadon claimed that the pandemic
"fundamentally is over." The post has been viewed more than a million times.
In October, Yeadon wrote a column for the United Kingdom's Daily Mail newspaper that also appeared on MailOnline, one of the world's
most-visited news websites. It declared that deaths caused by COVID-19, which then totaled about 45,000 in Britain, will soon
"fizzle out" and Britons "should immediately be allowed to resume normal life." Since then, the disease has killed about another
80,000 people in the UK.
Yeadon isn't the only respected scientist to have challenged the scientific consensus on COVID-19 and expressed controversial views.
Michael Levitt, a winner of the Nobel Prize for chemistry, told the Stanford Daily last summer that he expected the pandemic
would end in the United States in 2020 and kill no more than 175,000 Americans – a third of the [overinflated, so probably right
estimate --NNB] current total
– and "when we come to look back, we're going to say that wasn't such a terrible disease."
And
Luc Montagnier, another Nobel Prize winner, said last year that he believed the coronavirus was created in a Chinese lab
.
Many experts doubt that, but so far there is no way to prove or disprove it.
Levitt told Reuters that his projections about the pandemic in the United States were wrong, but he still believes COVID-19
eventually won't be seen as "a terrible disease" and that lockdowns "caused a great deal of collateral damage and may not have been
needed." Montagnier didn't respond to a request for comment.
...
... ...
Clare Craig, a British pathologist, compared Yeadon's treatment on Twitter – where some users derided his views as nonsense and
dangerous – to medieval societies burning heretics at the stake.
"There is no other way to see it than the burning of the witches," said Craig, who has criticized lockdowns and COVID-19 tests.
"Science is always a series of questions and the testing of those questions and when we are not allowed to ask those questions, then
science is lost."
JERUSALEM: The coronavirus variant discovered in South Africa can "break through"
Pfizer-BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine to some extent, a real-world data study in Israel found,
though its prevalence in the country is low and the research has not been peer reviewed.
The study, released on Saturday (Apr 10), compared almost 400 people who had tested positive
for COVID-19, 14 days or more after they received one or two doses of the vaccine, against the
same number of unvaccinated patients with the disease. It matched age and gender, among other
characteristics.
The South African variant, B1351, was found to make up about 1 per cent of all the COVID-19
cases across all the people studied, according to the study by Tel Aviv University and Israel's
largest healthcare provider, Clalit.
But among patients who had received two doses of the vaccine, the variant's prevalence rate
was eight times higher than those unvaccinated - 5.4 per cent versus 0.7 per
cent.
This suggests the vaccine is less effective against the South African variant, compared with
the original coronavirus and a variant first identified in Britain that has come to comprise
nearly all COVID-19 cases in Israel, the researchers said.
"We found a disproportionately higher rate of the South African variant among people
vaccinated with a second dose, compared to the unvaccinated group. This means that the South
African variant is able, to some extent, to break through the vaccine's protection," said Tel
Aviv University's Adi Stern.
The researchers cautioned, though, that the study only had a small sample size of people
infected with the South African variant because of its rarity in Israel.
They also said the research was not intended to deduce overall vaccine effectiveness against
any variant, since it only looked at people who had already tested positive for COVID-19, not
at overall infection rates.
Pfizer and BioNTech could not be immediately reached for comment outside business hours.
The companies said on Apr 1 that their vaccine was around 91 per cent effective at
preventing COVID-19, citing updated trial data that included participants inoculated for up to
six months.
In respect to the South African variant, they said that among a group of 800 study
volunteers in South Africa, where B1351 is widespread, there were nine cases of COVID-19, all
of which occurred among participants who got the placebo. Of those nine cases, six were among
individuals infected with the South African variant.
READ: COVID-19 lockdowns around the
world as vaccine efforts stumble
Some previous studies have indicated that the Pfizer-BioNTech shot was less potent against
the B1351 variant than against other variants of the coronavirus, but still offered a robust
defence.
While the results of the study may cause concern, the low prevalence of the South African
strain was encouraging, according to Stern.
"Even if the South African variant does break through the vaccine's protection, it has not
spread widely through the population," said Stern, adding that the British variant may be
"blocking" the spread of the South African strain.
Almost 53 per cent of Israel's 9.3 million population has received both Pfizer doses. Israel
has largely reopened its economy in recent weeks while the pandemic appears to be receding,
with infection rates, severe illness and hospitalisations dropping sharply. About a third of
Israelis are below the age of 16, which means they are still not eligible for the shot.
Money quote: "I think the PCR test at present is throwing up so many false positives that in
fact we're misdiagnosing the cause of the deaths that are being reported. The number of deaths at
the moment is normal for the time of year. So if I'm right and the pandemic is fundamentally
over, what's going on? And I think quite simply it's not over because SAGE says it's not!"
Notable quotes:
"... You also don't set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn't been extensively tested on human subjects." ..."
Michael Yeadon has voiced [his concerns about government policies regarding COVID-19] and it
has left everyone shocked. As Pfizer pharmaceuticals breaks news for
bringing corona virus vaccine , a former vice president and chief scientists of the company
Michael Yeadon said that there is no need for any vaccine to end the ongoing pandemic.
According to a report published in the Lockdown Sceptics, Yeadon wrote: "There is absolutely
no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic. You do not vaccinate people who aren't at risk
from the disease. You also don't set about
planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn't been
extensively tested on human subjects." Yeadon made the comment on the vaccine development
while criticizing the role played by the Scientific Advisory
Group for Emergencies (SAGE), a government agency of the UK.
SAGE is tasked with a role to determine public lockdown policies; in the UK, as a response
to the COVID-19 virus. He added, "SAGE says everyone was susceptible and only 7 per cent have
been infected. They have ignored all precedent in the field of immunology memory against
respiratory viruses. They have either not seen or disregarded excellent quality work from
numerous world-leading clinical immunologists; which show that around 30 per cent of the
population had prior immunity."
Michael Yeadon wrote "They should also have excluded from 'susceptible' a large subset; of
the youngest children, who appear not to become infected biology; means their cells express
less of the spike protein receptor, called ACE2. I have not assumed all young children don't
participate in transmission, but believe a two-thirds value is very conservative. It's not
material anyway. So SAGE is demonstrably wrong in one really crucial variable, they assumed no
prior immunity, whereas the evidence clearly points; to a value of around 30 per cent (and
nearly 40 per cent if you include some young children, who technically are 'resistant' rather
than 'immune')."
He concluded that the pandemic is effectively over and; can easily be handled by a properly
functioning NHS (National Health Service).
America's Frontline Doctors ( AFLDS ) today filed a motion in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Alabama requesting a temporary restraining
order against the emergency use authorization (EUA) permitting using the COVID-19 vaccines
in children under the age of 16, and that no further expansion of the EUAs to children under
the age of 16 be granted prior to the resolution of these issues at trial.
The case will challenge the EUAs for the injections on several counts, based on the law and
scientific evidence that the EUAs should never have been granted, the EUAs should be revoked
immediately, the injections are dangerous biological agents that have the potential to cause
substantially greater harm than the COVID-19 disease itself, and that numerous laws have been
broken in the process of granting these EUAs and foisting these injections on the American
people.
AFLDS Founder Dr. Simone Gold spoke about the
reasons for filing the motion: "We doctors are pro-vaccine, but this is not a vaccine," she
said. "This is an experimental biological agent whose harms are well-documented (although
suppressed and censored) and growing rapidly, and we will not support using America's children
as guinea pigs."
She continued: "We insist that the EUA not be relinquished prematurely; certainly not before
trials are complete - October 31, 2022 for Moderna and April 27, 2023 for Pfizer. We are
shocked at the mere discussion of this, and will not be silent while Americans are used as
guinea pigs for a virus with survivability of 99.8% globally and 99.97% under age 70.
"Under age 20 it is 99.997% - 'statistical zero'.
"There are 104 children age 0-17 who died from COVID-19 and 287 from COVID + Influenza - out
of ~72 million. This equals zero risk. And we doctors won't stand for children being offered
something they do not need and of whom some unknown percentage will suffer."
AFLDS Pediatric Director Dr. Angie
Farella explained: "My greatest concerns with the vaccination of children under the age of
18 is the fact that there is no prior study of these individuals before December of 2020."
She went on to say: "Children were not included in the trials, and the adult trials do not
have any long-term safety data currently available."
AFLDS Legal Director Ali Shultz commented on AFLDS' filing:
"Not many people could have taken this on. Dr. Simone Gold is a doctor, and a lawyer, and a
fierce warrior who will stop at nothing to protect humanity.
"She has a certain finesse in developing the right team to see this medical/legal mission
through."
To read the motion and all supporting documents, click here .
New notion: criminal pharma... The big pharma companies know that the chances of you dying of
COVID if you are NOT obese, aged or have 3-4 co-morbidites are close to ZERO. Heads they win,
tails you lose.
It's a policy designed to reinforce the CDC "get vaccinated" propaganda machine.
I stopped listening to these bozos a long time ago. When the commercials come on the radio
I turn it off, I'm tired of being nagged about something as ridiculous as this.
CDC wants medicine as the savior when in fact the human body is the best source of remedy
for anything like this.
Sick of this BS
paranoid.dragon 7 hours ago (Edited) remove link
if Covid-19 is actually so deadly to be classified as a "pandemic", what happened to a
patients' "right to try" medicines that are not "approved" by the CDC and FDA?
Why cannot a Primary Care Physician call in a prescription to a local pharmacy for a
patient with covid-like symptoms, like Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, blood
thinners, etc.
And a covid test not even needed.
Who has given the health agencies at the state and federal level the god-like powers to
threaten family doctors with jail, loss of license to practice medicine, and lawsuits for
prescribing a medicine that should be a decision between doctor and patient????
That should be the biggest red flag, at least in America...
Especially against the covid vaccine...
Doctors are not allowed to prescribe medications to treat covid. And the government
agencies and officials have essentially become big pharma reps peddling an experimental
genetic covid vaccine.
the US military has been turned into package boys for big pharma. Your family doctor's
research on covid goes no further than reading emails sent by the government and their big
pharma reps.
... ... ...
PharmaCoin.
Pfizer is already demanding military bases as collateral for their covid
vaccines...
lay_arrow
crazzziecanuck 11 hours ago (Edited)
They answer to a bunch of clueless elected officials, who respond to the fearmongering and
shrill hysterics created by the MSM. All of which starts with Pfizer.
Pfizer doesn't just bribe elected officials and, functionally making the "regulated"
Pfizer able to regulate it's regulators. Pfizer also bribes the MSM with advertising
dollars.
Michael Yeadon, wasn't just any scientist. The 60-year-old is a former vice president of Pfizer, where he spent 16 years as an
allergy and respiratory researcher. He later co-founded a biotech firm that the Swiss drugmaker Novartis purchased for at least $325
million.
This is amazing interview for a scientist who really knows his staff... His warning is
essentially a very powerful warning against Lysenkoism in science.
I disagree with him on some minor points like wearing masks in closed spaces as well as the spectrum of applicability of
vaccines (I think that healthcare workers, teachers and other people who systematically interact with a lot of (possibly infected)
people might benefit from vaccination, which should in any case be strocly voluntary. But I agree that vaccinating people who
already have had COVID-19 and children s very questionable and probably indefensible practice -- flavor of Lysenkoism which is
called Fauchism. Also stress of vaccines and downgrading therapy is also Faucism, or worse.
I also disagree with his statement that vaccine should be effective against all strains. Now we know that htis not the case. For
exampe South afrecan mutation successfully infects people vaccinated wit the the first generation vaccines.
He is against medicines which are used with violation of safety protocols. He is anti unsafe
medicines, no matter what they are.
We never have such an absurd attribution of death to COVID, when that fact the diseased is
false positive serve as the key reason of death
Lockdowns were political hysteria. Witch hunt against witches which never arrived. They were
unscientific and fradulent. Lockdown were never used before because they are ineffective. Instead
in the past guaranteed the sick. Mass testing of people without symptoms is Lysenkoism and defies
common sense.
Non-symptomatic people will not infect you. That's faucism and new flavor of Lysenkoism.
Asymptomatic transmission is bunk. It can happen but this never exceed fraction of one
percent.
It is all about increasing of the level of fear and increasing political control as in famous
quote. The only open question to what end this control will used for.
PCR technology is similar to technology used in forensic investigation using genetic
material. They just ignore false positives. Nobody in the world releases the percentage of false
positive of PcR test and dependence of the number of false positive on the number of
amplification.
I never expected to be writing something like this. I am an ordinary person, recently semi-retired from a career in the
pharmaceutical industry and biotech, where I spent over 30 years trying to solve problems of disease understanding and seek new
treatments for allergic and inflammatory disorders of lung and skin. I've always been interested in problem solving, so when
anything biological comes along, my attention is drawn to it. Come 2020, came SARS-CoV-2. I've written
about the pandemic as objectively as I could. The scientific method never leaves a person who trained and worked as a
professional scientist. Please do read that piece. My co-authors & I will submit it to the normal rigours of peer review, but that
process is slow and many pieces of new science this year have come to attention through pre-print servers and other less
conventional outlets.
While paying close attention to data, we all initially focused on the sad matter of deaths. I found it remarkable that, in
discussing the COVID-19 related deaths, most people I spoke to had no idea of large numbers. Asked approximately how many people a
year die in the UK in the ordinary course of events, each a personal tragedy, They usually didn't know. I had to inform them it is
around 620,000, sometimes less if we had a mild winter, sometimes quite a bit higher if we had a severe 'flu season. I mention this
number because we know that around 42,000 people have died with or of COVID-19. While it's a huge number of people, its 'only' 0.06%
of the UK population. Its not a coincidence that this is almost the same proportion who have died with or of COVID-19 in each of the
heavily infected European countries – for example, Sweden. The annual all-causes mortality of 620,000 amounts to 1,700 per day,
lower in summer and higher in winter. That has always been the lot of humans in the temperate zones. So for context, 42,000 is about
~24 days worth of normal mortality. Please know I am not minimising it, just trying to get some perspective on it. Deaths of this
magnitude are not uncommon, and can occur in the more severe flu seasons. Flu vaccines help a little, but on only three occasions in
the last decade did vaccination reach 50% effectiveness. They're good, but they've never been magic bullets for respiratory viruses.
Instead, we have learned to live with such viruses, ranging from numerous common colds all the way to pneumonias which can kill.
Medicines and human caring do their best.
So, to this article. Its about the testing we do with something called PCR, an amplification technique, better known to biologists
as a research tool used in our labs, when trying to unpick mechanisms of disease. I was frankly astonished to realise they're
sometimes used in population screening for diseases – astonished because it is a very exacting technique, prone to invisible errors
and it's quite a tall order to get reliable information out of it, especially because of the prodigious amounts of amplification
involved in attempting to pick up a strand of viral genetic code. The test cannot distinguish between a living virus and a short
strand of RNA from a virus which broke into pieces weeks or months ago.
I believe I have identified a serious, really a fatal flaw in the PCR test used in what is called by the UK Government the Pillar 2
screening – that is, testing many people out in their communities. I'm going to go through this with care and in detail because I'm
a scientist and dislike where this investigation takes me. I'm not particularly political and my preference is for competent, honest
administration over the actual policies chosen. We're a reasonable lot in UK and not much given to extremes. What I'm particularly
reluctant about is that, by following the evidence, I have no choice but to show that the Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, misled the
House of Commons and also made misleading statements in a radio interview. Those are serious accusations. I know that. I'm not a
ruthless person. But I'm writing this anyway, because what I have uncovered is of monumental importance to the health and wellbeing
of all the people living in the nation I have always called home.
Back to the story, and then to the evidence. When the first (and I think, only) wave of COVID-19 hit the UK, I was with almost
everyone else in being very afraid. I'm 60 and in reasonable health, but on learning that I had about a 1% additional risk of
perishing if I caught the virus, I discovered I was far from ready to go. So, I wasn't surprised or angry when the first lockdown
arrived. It must have been a very difficult thing to decide. However, before the first three-week period was over, I'd begun to
develop an understanding of what was happening. The rate of infection, which has been calculated to have infected well over 100,000
new people every day around the peak, began to fall, and was declining before lockdown. Infection continued to spread out, at an
ever-reducing rate and we saw this in the turning point of daily deaths, at a grim press conference each afternoon. We now know that
lockdown made no difference at all to the spread of the virus. We can tell this because the interval between catching the virus and,
in those who don't make it, their death is longer than the interval between lockdown and peak daily deaths. There isn't any
controversy about this fact, easily demonstrated, but I'm aware some people like to pretend it was lockdown that turned the
pandemic, perhaps to justify the extraordinary price we have all paid to do it. That price wasn't just economic. It involved
avoidable deaths from diseases other than COVID-19, as medical services were restricted, in order to focus on the virus. Some say
that lockdown, directly and indirectly, killed as many as the virus. I don't know. Its not something I've sought to learn. But I
mention because interventions in all our lives should not be made lightly. Its not only inconvenience, but real suffering, loss of
livelihoods, friendships, anchors of huge importance to us all, that are severed by such acts. We need to be certain that the prize
is worth the price. While it is uncertain it was, even for the first lockdown, I too supported it, because we did not know what we
faced, and frankly, almost everyone else did it, except Sweden. I am now resolutely against further interventions in what I have
become convinced is a fruitless attempt to 'control the virus'. We are, in my opinion – shared by others, some of whom are well
placed to assess the situation – closer to the end of the pandemic in terms of deaths, than we are to its middle. I believe we
should provide the best protection we can for any vulnerable people, and otherwise cautiously get on with our lives. I think we are
all going to get a little more Swedish over time.
In recent weeks, though, it cannot have escaped anyone's attention that there has been a drum beat which feels for all the world
like a prelude to yet more fruitless and damaging restrictions. Think back to mid-summer. We were newly out of lockdown and despite
concerns for crowded beaches, large demonstrations, opening of shops and pubs, the main item on the news in relation to COVID-19 was
the reassuring and relentless fall in daily deaths. I noticed that, as compared to the slopes of the declining death tolls in many
nearby countries, that our slope was too flat. I even mentioned to scientist friends that inferred the presence of some fixed signal
that was being mixed up with genuine COVID-19 deaths. Imagine how gratifying it was when the definition of a COVID-19 death was
changed to line up with that in other countries and in a heartbeat our declining death toll line became matched with that elsewhere.
I was sure it would: what we have experienced and witnessed is a terrible kind of equilibrium. A virus that kills few, then leaves
survivors who are almost certainly immune – a virus to which perhaps 30-50% were already immune because it has relatives and some of
us have already encountered them – accounts for the whole terrible but also fascinating biological process. There was a very interesting
piece in the BMJ in
recent days that offers potential support for this contention.
Now we have learned some of the unusual characteristics of the new virus, better treatments (anti-inflammatory steroids,
anti-coagulants and in particular, oxygen masks and not ventilators in the main) the 'case fatality rate' even for the most hard-hit
individuals is far lower now than it was six months ago.
As there is no foundational, medical or scientific literature which tells us to expect a 'second wave', I began to pay more
attention to the phrase as it appeared on TV, radio and print media – all on the same day – and has been relentlessly repeated ever
since. I was interviewed
recently by Julia Hartley-Brewer on her talkRADIO show and on that occasion I called on the Government to disclose to us the
evidence upon which they were relying to predict this second wave. Surely they have some evidence? I don't think they do. I searched
and am very qualified to do so, drawing on academic friends, and we were all surprised to find that there is nothing at all. The
last two novel coronaviruses, Sar (2003) and MERS (2012), were of one wave each. Even the WW1 flu 'waves' were almost certainly a
series of single waves involving more than one virus. I believe any second wave talk is pure speculation. Or perhaps it is in a
model somewhere, disconnected from the world of evidence to me? It would be reasonable to expect some limited 'resurgence' of a
virus given we don't mix like cordial in a glass of water, but in a more lumpy, human fashion. You're most in contact with family,
friends and workmates and they are the people with whom you generally exchange colds.
A long period of imposed restrictions, in addition to those of our ordinary lives did prevent the final few percent of virus mixing
with the population. With the movements of holidays, new jobs, visiting distant relatives, starting new terms at universities and
schools, that final mixing is under way. It should not be a terrifying process. It happens with every new virus, flu included. It's
just that we've never before in our history chased it around the countryside with a technique more suited to the biology lab than to
a supermarket car park.
A very long prelude, but necessary. Part of the 'project fear' that is rather too obvious, involving second waves, has been the
daily count of 'cases'. Its important to understand that, according to the infectious disease specialists I've spoken to, the word
'case' has to mean more than merely the presence of some foreign organism. It must present signs (things medics notice) and symptoms
(things you notice). And in most so-called cases, those testing positive had no signs or symptoms of illness at all. There was much
talk of asymptomatic spreading, and as a biologist this surprised me. In almost every case, a person is symptomatic because they
have a high viral load and either it is attacking their body or their immune system is fighting it, generally a mix. I don't doubt
there have been some cases of asymptomatic transmission, but I'm confident it is not important.
That all said, Government decided to call a person a 'case' if their swab sample was positive for viral RNA, which is what is
measured in PCR. A person's sample can be positive if they have the virus, and so it should. They can also be positive if they've
had the virus some weeks or months ago and recovered. It's faintly possible that high loads of related, but different coronaviruses,
which can cause some of the common colds we get, might also react in the PCR test, though it's unclear to me if it does.
But there's a final setting in which a person can be positive and that's a random process. This may have multiple causes, such as
the amplification technique not being perfect and so amplifying the 'bait' sequences placed in with the sample, with the aim of
marrying up with related SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA. There will be many other contributions to such positives. These are what are called
false positives.
Think of any diagnostic test a doctor might use on you. The ideal diagnostic test correctly confirms all who have the disease and
never wrongly indicates that healthy people have the disease. There is no such test. All tests have some degree of weakness in
generating false positives. The important thing is to know how often this happens, and this is called the false positive rate. If 1
in 100 disease-free samples are wrongly coming up positive, the disease is not present, we call that a 1% false positive rate. The
actual or operational false positive rate differs, sometimes substantially, under different settings, technical operators, detection
methods and equipment. I'm focusing solely on the false positive rate in Pillar 2, because most people do not have the virus
(recently around 1 in 1000 people and earlier in summer it was around 1 in 2000 people). It is when the amount of disease, its
so-called prevalence, is low that any amount of a false positive rate can be a major problem. This problem can be so severe that
unless changes are made, the test is hopelessly unsuitable to the job asked of it. In this case, the test in Pillar 2 was and
remains charged with the job of identifying people with the virus, yet as I will show, it is unable to do so.
Because of the high false positive rate and the low prevalence, almost every positive test, a so-called case, identified by Pillar 2
since May of this year has been a FALSE POSITIVE. Not just a few percent. Not a quarter or even a half of the positives are FALSE,
but around 90% of them. Put simply, the number of people Mr Hancock sombrely tells us about is an overestimate by a factor of about
ten-fold. Earlier in the summer, it was an overestimate by about 20-fold.
Let me take you through this, though if you're able to read Prof Carl Heneghan's clearly
written piece first, I'm more confident that I'll be successful in explaining this dramatic conclusion to you. (Here is a link to
the record of numbers of tests, combining Pillar 1 (hospital) and Pillar 2 (community).)
Imagine 10,000 people getting tested using those swabs you see on TV. We have a good estimate of the general prevalence of the virus
from the ONS, who are wholly independent (from Pillar 2 testing) and are testing only a few people a day, around one per cent of the
numbers recently tested in Pillar 2. It is reasonable to assume that most of the time, those being tested do not have symptoms.
People were asked to only seek a test if they have symptoms. However, we know from TV news and stories on social media from sampling
staff, from stern guidance from the Health Minister and the surprising fact that in numerous locations around the country, the local
council is leafleting people's houses, street by street to come and get tested.
The bottom line is that it is reasonable to expect the prevalence of the virus to be close to the number found by ONS, because they
sample randomly, and would pick up symptomatic and asymptomatic people in proportion to their presence in the community. As of the
most recent ONS survey, to a first approximation, the virus was found in 1 in every 1000 people. This can also be written as 0.1%.
So when all these 10,000 people are tested in Pillar 2, you'd expect 10 true positives to be found (false negatives can be an issue
when the virus is very common, but in this community setting, it is statistically unimportant and so I have chosen to ignore it,
better to focus only on false positives).
So, what is the false positive rate of testing in Pillar 2? For months, this has been a concern. It appears that it isn't known,
even though as I've mentioned, you absolutely need to know it in order to work out whether the diagnostic test has any value! What
do we know about the false positive rate? Well, we do know that the Government's own scientists were very concerned about it, and a report on
this problem was sent to SAGE dated June 3rd 2020. I quote: "Unless we understand the operational false positive rate of the UK's
RT-PCR testing system, we risk over-estimating the COVID-19 incidence, the demand on track and trace and the extent of asymptomatic
infection". In that same report, the authors helpfully listed the lowest to highest false positive rate of dozens of tests using the
same technology. The lowest value for false positive rate was 0.8%.
Allow me to explain the impact of a false positive rate of 0.8% on Pillar 2. We return to our 10,000 people who've volunteered to
get tested, and the expected ten with virus (0.1% prevalence or 1:1000) have been identified by the PCR test. But now we've to
calculate how many false positives are to accompanying them. The shocking answer is 80. 80 is 0.8% of 10,000. That's how many false
positives you'd get every time you were to use a Pillar 2 test on a group of that size.
The effect of this is, in this example, where 10,000 people have been tested in Pillar 2, could be summarised in a headline like
this: "90 new cases were identified today" (10 real positive cases and 80 false positives). But we know this is wildly incorrect.
Unknown to the poor technician, there were in this example, only 10 real cases. 80 did not even have a piece of viral RNA in their
sample. They are really false positives.
I'm going to explain how bad this is another way, back to diagnostics. If you'd submitted to a test and it was positive, you'd
expect the doctor to tell you that you had a disease, whatever it was testing for. Usually, though, they'll answer a slightly
different question: "If the patient is positive in this test, what is the probability they have the disease?" Typically, for a good
diagnostic test, the doctor will be able to say something like 95% and you and they can live with that. You might take a different,
confirmatory test, if the result was very serious, like cancer. But in our Pillar 2 example, what is the probability a person
testing positive in Pillar 2 actually has COVID-19? The awful answer is 11% (10 divided by 80 + 10). The test exaggerates the number
of covid-19 cases by almost ten-fold (90 divided by 10). Scared yet? That daily picture they show you, with the 'cases' climbing up
on the right-hand side? Its horribly exaggerated. Its not a mistake, as I shall show.
Earlier in the summer, the ONS showed the virus prevalence was a little lower, 1 in 2000 or 0.05%. That doesn't sound much of a
difference, but it is. Now the Pillar 2 test will find half as many real cases from our notional 10,000 volunteers, so 5 real cases.
But the flaw in the test means it will still find 80 false positives (0.8% of 10,000). So its even worse. The headline would be "85
new cases identified today". But now the probability a person testing positive has the virus is an absurdly low 6% (5 divided by 80
+ 5). Earlier in the summer, this same test exaggerated the number of COVID-19 cases by 17-fold (85 divided by 5). Its so easy to
generate an apparently large epidemic this way. Just ignore the problem of false positives. Pretend its zero. But it is never zero.
This test is fatally flawed and MUST immediately be withdrawn and never used again in this setting unless shown to be fixed. The
examples I gave are very close to what is actually happening every day as you read this.
I'm bound to ask, did Mr Hancock know of this fatal flaw? Did he know of the effect it would inevitably have, and is still having,
not only on the reported case load, but the nation's state of anxiety. I'd love to believe it is all an innocent mistake. If it was,
though, he'd have to resign over sheer incompetence. But is it? We know that internal scientists wrote to SAGE, in terms, and,
surely, this short but shocking warning document would have been drawn to the Health Secretary's attention? If that was the only bit
of evidence, you might be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. But the evidence grows more damning.
Recently, I published with my co-authors a short Position Paper. I don't think by then, a month ago or so, the penny had quite
dropped with me. And I'm an experienced biomedical research scientist, used to dealing with complex datasets and probabilities.
On September 11th 2020, I was a guest on Julia Hartley-Brewer's talkRADIO
show. Among other things, I called upon Mr Hancock to release the evidence underscoring his confidence in and planning for 'the
second wave'. This evidence has not yet been shown to the public by anyone. I also demanded he disclose the operational false
positive rate in Pillar 2 testing.
On September 16th, I was back on Julia's show and this time focused on the false positive rate issue (1m 45s – 2min 30s). I had read
Carl Heneghan's analysis showing that even if the false positive rate was as low as 0.1%, 8 times lower than any similar test, it
still yields a majority of false positives. So, my critique doesn't fall if the actual false positive rate is lower than my assumed
0.8%.
On September 18th, Mr Hancock again appeared, as often he does, on Julia Hartley-Brewer's show. Julia asked
him directly (1min 50s – on) what the false positive rate in Pillar 2 is. Mr Hancock said "It's under 1%". Julia again asked him
exactly what it was, and did he even know it? He didn't answer that, but then said "it means that, for all the positive cases, the
likelihood of one being a false positive is very small".
That is a seriously misleading statement as it is incorrect. The likelihood of an apparently positive case being a false positive is
between 89-94%, or near-certainty. Of note, even when ONS was recording its lowest-ever prevalence, the positive rate in Pillar 2
testing never fell below 0.8%.
It gets worse for the Health Secretary. On September the 17th, I believe, Mr Hancock took a question from
Sir Desmond Swayne about false positives. It is clear that Sir Desmond is asking about Pillar 2.
Mr Hancock replied: "I like my right honourable friend very much and I wish it were true. The reason we have surveillance testing,
done by ONS, is to ensure that we're constantly looking at a nationally representative sample at what the case rate is. The latest
ONS survey, published on Friday, does show a rise consummate (sic) with the increased number of tests that have come back positive."
He did not answer Sir Desmond's question, but instead answered a question of his choosing. Did the Health Secretary knowingly
mislead the House? By referring only to ONS and not even mentioning the false positive rate of the test in Pillar 2 he was, as it
were, stealing the garb of ONS's more careful work which has a lower false positive rate, in order to smuggle through the hidden and
very much higher, false positive rate in Pillar 2. The reader will have to decide for themselves.
Pillar 2 testing has been ongoing since May but it's only in recent weeks that it has reached several hundreds of thousands of tests
per day. The effect of the day by day climb in the number of people that are being described as 'cases' cannot be overstated. I know
it is inducing fear, anxiety and concern for the possibility of new and unjustified restrictions, including lockdowns. I have no
idea what Mr Hancock's motivations are. But he has and continues to use the hugely inflated output from a fatally flawed Pillar 2
test and appears often on media, gravely intoning the need for additional interventions (none of which, I repeat, are proven to be
effective).
You will be very familiar with the cases plot which is shown on most TV broadcasts at the moment. It purports to show the numbers of
cases which rose then fell in the spring, and the recent rise in cases. This graph is always accompanied by the headline that "so
many thousands of new cases were detected in the last 24 hours".
You should know that there are two major deceptions, in that picture, which combined are very likely both to mislead and to induce
anxiety. Its ubiquity indicates that it is a deliberate choice.
Firstly, it is very misleading in relation to the spring peak of cases. This is because we had no community screening capacity at
that time. A colleague has adjusted the plot to show the number of cases we would have detected, had there been a well-behaved
community test capability available. The effect is to greatly increase the size of the spring cases peak, because there are very
many cases for each hospitalisation and many hospitalisations for every death.
Secondly, as I hope I have shown and persuaded you, the cases in summer and at present, generated by seriously flawed Pillar 2
tests, should be corrected downwards by around ten-fold.
I do believe genuine cases are rising somewhat. This is, however, also true for flu, which we neither measure daily nor report on
every news bulletin. If we did, you would appreciate that, going forward, it is quite likely that flu is a greater risk to public
health than COVID-19. The corrected cases plot (above) does, I believe, put the recent rises in incidence of COVID-19 in a much more
reasonable context. I thought you should see that difference before arriving at your own verdict on this sorry tale.
There are very serious consequences arising from grotesque over-estimation of so-called cases in Pillar 2 community testing, which I
believe was put in place knowingly. Perhaps Mr Hancock believes his own copy about the level of risk now faced by the general
public? Its not for me to deduce. What this huge over-estimation has done is to have slowed the normalisation of the NHS. We are all
aware that access to medical services is, to varying degrees, restricted. Many specialities were greatly curtailed in spring and
after some recovery, some are still between a third and a half below their normal capacities. This has led both to continuing delays
and growth of waiting lists for numerous operations and treatments. I am not qualified to assess the damage to the nation's and
individuals' health as a direct consequence of this extended wait for a second wave. Going into winter with this configuration will,
on top of the already restricted access for six months, lead inevitably to a large number of avoidable, non-Covid deaths. That is
already a serious enough charge. Less obvious but, in aggregate, additional impacts arise from fear of the virus, inappropriately
heightened in my view, which include: damage to or even destruction of large numbers of businesses, especially small businesses,
with attendant loss of livelihoods, loss of educational opportunities, strains on family relationships, eating disorders, increasing
alcoholism and domestic abuse and even suicides, to name but a few.
In closing, I wish to note that in the last 40 years alone the UK has had seven official epidemics/pandemics; AIDS, Swine flu, CJD,
SARS, MERS, Bird flu as well as annual, seasonal flu. All were very worrying but schools remained open and the NHS treated everybody
and most of the population were unaffected. The country would rarely have been open if it had been shut down every time.
I have explained how a hopelessly-performing diagnostic test has been, and continues to be used, not for diagnosis of disease but,
it seems, solely to create fear.
This misuse of power must cease. All the above costs are on the ledger, too, when weighing up the residual risks to society from
COVID-19 and the appropriate actions to take, if any. Whatever else happens, the test used in Pillar 2 must be immediately withdrawn
as it provides no useful information. In the absence of vastly inflated case numbers arising from this test, the pandemic would be
seen and felt to be almost over.
Dr Mike Yeadon is the former CSO and VP, Allergy and Respiratory Research Head with Pfizer Global R&D and co-Founder of Ziarco
Pharma Ltd.
Its both...its fear porn and also shedding...according to researchers.
The National Vaccine Information Center published an important document relevant to this
topic titled "The Emerging Risks of Live Virus & Virus Vectored Vaccines: Vaccine Strain
Virus Infection, Shedding & Transmission." Pages 34-36 in the section on "Measles, Mumps,
Rubella Viruses and Live Attenuated Measles, Mumps, Rubella Viruses" discuss evidence that
the MMR vaccine can lead to measles infection and transmission.
New policies will artificially deflate "breakthrough infections" in the vaccinated, while
the old rules continue to inflate case numbers in the unvaccinated.
The US Center for Disease Control (CDC) is altering its practices of data logging and
testing for "Covid19" in order to make it seem the experimental gene-therapy "vaccines" are
effective at preventing the alleged disease.
They made no secret of this, announcing the policy changes on their website in late
April/early May, (though naturally without admitting the fairly obvious motivation behind the
change).
The trick is in their reporting of what they call "breakthrough infections" – that is
people who are fully "vaccinated" against Sars-Cov-2 infection, but get infected anyway.
Essentially, Covid19 has long been shown – to those willing to pay attention –
to be an entirely created pandemic narrative built on two key factors:
Inflated Case-count. The incredibly broad definition
of "Covid case", used all over the world, lists anyone who receives a positive test as a
"Covid19 case", even if they never experienced any symptoms .
Without these two policies, there would never have been an appreciable pandemic at all , and
now the CDC has enacted two policy changes which means they no longer apply to vaccinated
people.
Firstly, they are lowering their CT value when testing samples from suspected "breakthrough
infections".
From the CDC's instructions for state health authorities on handling "possible breakthrough
infections" (uploaded to their website in late April):
For cases with a known RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) value, submit only specimens with Ct
value ≤28 to CDC for sequencing. (Sequencing is not feasible with higher Ct values.)
Throughout the pandemic, CT values in excess of 35 have been the norm, with labs around the
world going into the 40s.
18 play_arrow
Just a Little Froth in the Market 15 hours ago
They are manipulating the numbers to make it look like only the unvaxxed get infected.
That is fraud, and this rogue agency needs to be stopped.
Enraged 1 hour ago remove link
The CDC is not an independent government agency, but is actually a subsidiary of Big
Pharma.
The CDC owns patents on at least 57 different vaccines, and profits $4.1 billion per year
in vaccination sales.
There are CDC patents applicable to vaccines for Flu, Rotavirus, Hepatitis A, HIV,
Anthrax, Rabies, Dengue fever, West Nile virus, Group A Strep, Pneumococcal disease,
Meningococcal disease, RSV, Gastroenteritis, Japanese encephalitis, SARS, Rift Valley Fever,
and chlamydophila pneumoniae.
People might be starting to get the impression that the federal regime, which owns the
media, judiciary, academia, bureaucracy, and big tech, are attempting to manipulate
information to increase their power and wealth. The elites have confiscated almost ALL the
commoners wealth and now they want the rest of the money and complete and total control. Mao
or Stalin would be proud of these fascists.
LetThemEatRand 17 hours ago
Imagine living under the rule of a globalist oligarchy that controls the Press. That.
JakeIsNotFake 14 hours ago remove link
What is that if not an obvious and deliberate act of deception?
Well, before 3/20, this would have been a FELONY. Each time a lab provided a patient with
KNOWINGLY FALSE test results, the lab and the doctor would have been subject to a 16 month
term in the state penitentiary. For each instance.
Can you imagine getting a positive, terminal prognosis, committing a well deserved murder,
and then not dying?
Oopsie! My bad.
gregga777 14 hours ago
Government, and that especially includes the so-called "Scientists" in government service,
are Corrupt, Incompetent, Unaccountable and Untrustworthy. The Government's so-called
"Scientists," including those funded by Government contracts, are no more trustworthy than
politicians.
PeterLong 14 hours ago
Sometimes you have no choice. We had to undergo surgical procedures in a hospital and had
to get tested a few days before. Whether they use the same parameters for these type cases as
for others I don't know. Perhaps they are reluctant to turn away or delay surgical cases for
BS reasons and therefore possibly use more realistic standards , but my opinion of the entire
medical industry has become so low that I could believe anything. I still wonder about
hospital and other medical practices finances concenring this scam. Have they continued to
profit somehow despite being shut down in some ways?
Beebee 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link
Same here, Peter. Hubby's mother broke her elbow last year. And we had to bring her to
tests to do surgery. She was negative. But, afterwards, suddenly, developed lymphoma. Now, I
wonder about these tests! The cancer chemo was delayed due to all this stuff. She had so many
Covid tests, all negative, and just now completed the chemo rounds. It's not necessary and
they do make a profit. She is the only reason we stay here, otherwise we would moved from NY.
She's a mess, and I resent the fact the hold-ups are due to testing.
fewer 36 minutes ago
Hospitals made tons of money on this. Uncle Sugar pays so much, and the administrators
always slice & dice the budget/reports so they seem on the edge of bankruptcy no matter
what. Naturally all of this is "debunked" by (((the usual sources))).
Here's one fact that the "debunkers" deliberately ignore: the feds pay for all the
treatment of uninsured C19 patients... including illegals . Normally if an illegal comes to
the ED and needs to be admitted, the hospital can't refuse to do that and instead has to eat
the cost (well, they pass the cost on to hardworking, insurance having people like you and
me, but bear with me).
If they admit the person for a reason *other* than C19, then the hospital still eats the
cost. Now, tell me, what's the incentive here if an illegal comes in with a bunch of
comorbidities and needs admission to manage those? What should be recorded as the admitting
diagnosis/problem if they can get swabbed for a high Ct PCR test (a meaningless positive
result)?
lasvegaspersona 7 hours ago
After more than 50 years in medicine, I tell friends and family, 'stay away from us if you
can'. Modern medicine is a rats nest of false positive testing and chasing trivial
abnormalities on imaging studies.
The sad part is patients feel relieved when they are told 'nothing was finally
found'....this after great expense of time and money.
spiff 54 minutes ago
Caught Red-Handed
Yes, define "Caught". I have a feeling life will continue without consequences for the
perpetrator of this fraud, or even your average person knowing about it.
_triplesix_ 14 hours ago
CDC, FBI, CIA, DHS, NIH, EPA, DOE...shall I go on?
Drater 6 hours ago
FAA, TSA, SEC, FCC, NHTSA, DOJ
JakeIsNotFake 13 hours ago
CDC is .gov. As an NGO, (funded by 99% .gov and 1% phony donations), the CDC can legally,
(not honestly), claim they are just an advisory body.
While noteing the distinction, please pay attention to the language: Mask mandate,
guidelines, advisories are NOT laws. Just like travel advisories, protocols, and best
practice. These are all weasel words. And totally unenforceable.
snatchpounder PREMIUM 9 hours ago
Everything is rigged, this plandemic, elections, markets you name it because when there's
currency to be made you'll always have someone more than willing to do it. Big pharma is
making a killing literally in this case and tax slaves paid for the gene therapy shots
creation. And all the rubes who took the shot will pay much more than just currency for their
naivety.
archipusz 11 hours ago
We can speculate all we want about what the agenda is of the CDC.
But what we know is that it has nothing to do with the truth or our health.
Enraged 1 hour ago remove link
The CDC is not an independent government agency, but is actually a subsidiary of Big
Pharma.
The CDC owns patents on at least 57 different vaccines, and profits $4.1 billion per year
in vaccination sales.
There are CDC patents applicable to vaccines for Flu, Rotavirus, Hepatitis A, HIV,
Anthrax, Rabies, Dengue fever, West Nile virus, Group A Strep, Pneumococcal disease,
Meningococcal disease, RSV, Gastroenteritis, Japanese encephalitis, SARS, Rift Valley Fever,
and chlamydophila pneumoniae.
amazing they do not even try to hide the deception.
but reporting on such deception will have one labeled a "conspiracy theorist", and the FBI
classifies "conspiracy theorists" as "domestic terrorists".
That's right, re-stating publicly available comments and policies of government agencies
and officials will have you branded as a domestic terrorist.
And the "intellectuals" in the media, academia, and "think-tanks" have abandoned all logic
and common sense to serve their masters in the government and big pharma.
history will not forget.
smacker 12 hours ago
Very good article which rightly exposes the CDC and all those around it for being utterly
corrupt and are perpetrating a fake pandemic with sinister objectives.
crazzziecanuck 11 hours ago
You realize, it's Putin's fault. Putin can rig a presidential election, it's child's play
for him to manipulate the CDC to do his evil bidding.
Everything is Putin's fault: Trump, COVID, 737 Max crashes, slavery, crucifixion of
Christ, the end of the dinosaurs, and so on.
archipusz 13 hours ago
Notice how Rand Paul will argue with Fauci about policy over when we should wear a mask,
BUT WILL NOT DARE ASK THEM WHY THEY HAVE, AND ARE, COMMITTING CRIMINAL FRAUD WITH THE PCR
TESTING?
Demystified 2 hours ago
It's a rigged game, a scam. These people are so dishonest, and intent on falsifying Covid
test results by applying different standards for vaccinated and unvaccinated people? They are
perpetuating a fraud on the people.
You have to be brain dead to not see what they are doing.
Robert De Zero 3 hours ago remove link
This is so evil. Medicalized dictatorship, supported by propaganda media, is here.
Alien 851 4 hours ago
This is NEWS??? Are you kidding?
It was March 2020 when they changed the rules on reporting of Covid deaths to run the
count as high as possible. It is still used in fear headlines today! How about wildly
fluctuation "new cases" that seem to totally respect state borders...?
For God's sake, wake the hell up!!!!
In March, the CDC redefined what is to be reported by Medical Examiners in the US. One
of them gave examples of Covid Death cases reporting criteria:
"The case definition is very simplistic," Dr. Ngozi Ezike, director of Illinois
Department of Public Health, explains. "It means, at the time of death, it was a COVID
positive diagnosis. That means, that if you were in hospice and had already been given a
few weeks to live, and then you also were found to have COVID, that would be counted as a
COVID death. It means, technically even if you died of clear alternative cause, but you had
COVID at the same time, it's still listed as a COVID death."
Sweden presently offers 3 different COVID-19 jabs: Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, with the
latter being the most widely available (while other European states like Germany have sought to
offer substitutes to younger patients, who are more vulnerable to dangerous cerebral blood
clots, which are a rare - but not unheard of - side effect).
The number of suspected adverse reactions from the two shots seems relatively small when
compared to the 19,961 reports linked to AstraZeneca's Vaxzevria, while the AstraZeneca shot
only accounts for about 26% of the roughly 2.7MM vaccines that have been administered so far in
Sweden, but makes up around 63% of the side effects reports.
Ebba Hallberg, an official with the Medical Products Agency, told Swedish media that it was
unusual to receive so many reports of side effects. She added that the tally was likely higher
because of public focus on the new vaccines.To head off complaints that many of the incidences
of side effects were minor, she said healthcare providers are likely only reporting the more
"serious" side effects.
One Swedish media outlet said the number of complaints filed in just a few months exceeded
the number typically filed over 4 years, which underscores the public anxieties about the COVID
vaccines.
In March, Sweden was one of several nations to temporarily suspend the use of the
AstraZeneca jab, following reports of abnormal blood clotting in recipients. AstraZeneca, as
well as the European Medicines Agency, have insisted that the vaccine is safe after it came
under scrutiny.
4 hours ago remove link
I honestly don't understand how anyone could inject this toxic shot into someone's arm, see
with their own eyes someone having a severe adverse reaction, and then continue to get back to
work injecting more people. What the hell is wrong with these people? play_arrow 51 play_arrow
2
Friedrich not Salma 4 hours ago
It's the teevee. I asked a 75 year old man today "Do you think the nightly news would ever
lie to you?" His answer: "No, I would certainly hope not, or at least not intentionally."
I walked him through how the news is full of Pharma ads and how there was no chance Pharma
would put up with a pharma investigative segment. He at least gave it some thought. His son
wouldn't budge on the idea that the teevee would ever lie.
Billy the Poet 4 hours ago
Ask them to show you the Weapons of Mass Destruction. Then point out that both the TV and
the government lie.
zvzzt 2 hours ago
Even worse (IMHO), if they make a mistake, they'll turn and twist in every way to avoid
any blame, making things worse along the way. Promote the 'fvcker-ups" so they don't rock any
boats.
Zero skin in the game, zero accountability ("you can always vote them away if you dont
like them", right.... ) and thus zero credibility.
And than the endless comment "It's all part of the political game/theatre"... Destroying
lives, destroying value, killing people accross the globe and depressing people for no other
reason than a "game"? Lowest form of life. MSM is just a willing toothless prostitute.
Pie rre 56 minutes ago (Edited)
I used to search the Web for anecdotal experiences with meds my doctor advises me to take.
I Used to be successful but not any longer so I imagine the pharm industry now has bots that
search for and bury them.
PrivetHedge 3 hours ago
Nuremberg Code: Informed Consent.
Deliberate misinformation and witholding of valid information = people doom
themselves.
There are laws, as you know. Many laws and safeguards.
But we are way beyond laws and democracy now, this is a sustained onslaught: a slaughter
of the naive and careless. Leaving a core population who know exactly what they did: and who
did it. This is probably the biggest flaw in their plan. Plenty of powerful people who don't
want this plan.
As more and more see it, we could see some pushback. Already Gates is becoming a liability
for Technocracy, some in the Trilateral Commision will want him gone. Same with Fauci, the
poison dwarf's credibility is shot and they need a new puppet.
theWHTMANN 4 hours ago
I heard today that the number of vax deaths in the US is 4,191 - more than the combined
vax deaths for all vaccinations in 20 years. In 1976, 25 people died of swine flu vax and
they stopped it in its tracks. Hmmm.
aspnaz again 4 hours ago
FDA worked for the people in the 70s, it now rubber stamps for corporations trying to rip
you off for evermore useless and more dangerous drugs.
Billy the Poet 3 hours ago
From the 5/7/2021 release of VAERS data:
Found 4,057 cases where Vaccine is COVID19 and Patient Died
Apparently side-effect reports make it to VAERS only if the adverse reaction or death
occurs within 1-2 days of the administration of the vaccine. So if someone's skin falls off
on day 3, too bad, not counted .
PrivetHedge 3 hours ago remove link
Yes, CDC is hiding the numbers, most deaths we see are from January.
Now they are coming for our CHILDREN .
(CNN) A Colorado mass vaccination site paused operations this week after 11
people experienced adverse reactions to the Covid-19 vaccine
. More than 1,700 people received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine on Wednesday at Dick's
Sporting Goods Park, a soccer stadium where the state of Colorado and health care provider
Centura Health operate a mass
vaccination site . The 11 people reported feeling nauseous and dizzy after they were
vaccinated, Colorado health officials said. Two of the patients were transported to a hospital
"out of an abundance of caution," while the other nine were given juice and water to recover,
according to a statement from the Colorado State Joint Information Center. Don't freak out
if you get these side effects from a Covid-19 vaccine. They can actually be a good sign
Officials didn't elaborate on the two hospital patients' conditions. "The state has no reason
to believe that people who were vaccinated today at Dick's Sporting Goods Park should be
concerned," state health officials said. The site closed early on Wednesday afternoon, before
another 640 people were scheduled to receive their vaccine. Their appointments have been
rescheduled to Sunday, Centura Health said. Enter your email to subscribe to the CNN Five
Things Newsletter. "close Email Capture Inline
Zone" Do you want the news summarized each morning? We've got you.
Sign Me Up
By subscribing you agree to our
privacy policy. Despite the hospital transport, the side effects the 11 patients reported
were "consistent with what can be expected" from the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, Covid-19
Incident Commander Scott Bookman said in a statement. "We know it can be alarming to hear about
people getting transported to the hospital, and we want to assure Coloradoans that the CDC and
public health are closely monitoring all the authorized vaccines continually," Bookman said.
"Based on everything we know, it remains true that the best vaccine to get is the one you can
get the soonest." Severe side effects from Covid-19 vaccines are rare It's relatively
common to experience side effects from any of the three vaccines available in the US -- about
10% to 15% of volunteers in vaccine trials developed "quite noticeable side effects," former
Operation Warp Speed Chief Scientific Adviser Moncef Slaoui said late last year. The most
common side effects are arm soreness, fatigue, body aches and, in some cases, a low-grade
fever. Nausea, like the 11 patients in Colorado experienced, headaches and swelling at the
injection site may occur, too, according to the US Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention. Severe side effects, like an allergic reaction, are far less
common, occurring around every two to five per million people, Baylor College of Medicine dean
Dr. Peter Hotez told CNN earlier
this month . Johnson & Johnson vaccine is effective Health officials continue to
combat the stigma that Johnson & Johnson is a lesser vaccine than the Moderna and Pfizer
two-shot offerings, which a
recent CDC study found are 90% effective at preventing Covid-19. Johnson & Johnson's
vaccine was
found to be 66% effective in preventing moderate to severe illness. It's difficult to draw
comparisons between Johnson & Johnson and the two-shot alternatives, though, because the
Johnson & Johnson vaccine was studied after highly contagious variants of coronavirus were
discovered, said
Dr. Leana Wen , a CNN medical analyst. The vaccine was found to be effective in preventing
severe disease in South Africa, where a contagious variant became dominant, and no patients who
received the vaccine were hospitalized or died. "Having a vaccine that is clearly effective
against this type of mutation is a distinct advantage," she told CNN in March.
CNN's Holly Yan and Katia Hetter contributed to this report.
In Germany, one researcher thinks he has found what is triggering the clots. Andreas Greinacher, a blood expert, and his team at the
University of Greifswald believe so-called viral vector vaccines -- which use modified harmless cold viruses, known as adenoviruses, to
convey genetic material into vaccine recipients to fight the coronavirus -- could cause an autoimmune response that leads to blood
clots. According to Prof. Greinacher, that reaction could be tied to stray proteins and a preservative he has found in the
AstraZeneca vaccine.
Prof. Greinacher and his team has just begun examining Johnson & Johnson's vaccine but has identified more than 1,000 proteins in
AstraZeneca's vaccine derived from human cells, as well as a preservative known as ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, or EDTA. Their
hypothesis is that EDTA, which is common to drugs and other products, helps those proteins stray into the bloodstream, where they
bind to a blood component called platelet factor 4, or PF4, forming complexes that activate the production of antibodies.
The inflammation caused by the vaccines, combined with the PF4 complexes, could trick the immune system into believing the body had
been infected by bacteria, triggering an archaic defense mechanism that then runs out of control and causes clotting and bleeding.
Prof. Andreas Greinacher is looking at the possible cause of an autoimmune response that leads to blood clots.
PHOTO:
MANUELA JANKE/UMG
Prof. Greinacher has compared the activation of the dormant response -- which has been supplanted in the evolution of the human immune
system, but still lurks in its foundations -- to "awakening a sleeping dragon."
Prof. John Kelton of McMaster University in Canada, whose outfit runs Canada's reference lab for testing patients with
blood-clotting symptoms after vaccination, said the lab replicated some of Prof. Greinacher's research and confirmed his findings.
... ... ...
One reason vaccine-induced clotting might not have been reported in the past is because shots using viral vector technology haven't
been administered at scale. The Russian vaccine Sputnik V and the shot by CanSino Biologics from China use the same technology as
AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson, but haven't been linked to the condition so far.
The only similar shot widely administered before the pandemic is one against Ebola by Johnson & Johnson, which was given to at least
60,000 people as of last July.
Clotting occurs between one in 28,000 and one in 100,000, according to European data -- extremely rare amid the hundreds of millions of
doses administered so far, yet higher than one in 150,000 previously assumed by some medical authorities, Prof. Greinacher said.
Most of the hundreds of people who have been diagnosed recover, but between a fifth and a third have died, and others could suffer
permanent consequences.
Data from U.S. and European regulators so far suggest young women are primarily affected by the condition. But several
scientists, including Sabine Eichinger, a senior Austrian hematologist who treated one of the first-known patients, have said the
correlation could reflect that medical workers and teachers were among the first to get the vaccines in Europe, and the majority of
them are younger women
.
Anton Pottegård, a professor of pharmacoepidemiology at the University of Southern Denmark, co-wrote a study of more than 280,000
people in Denmark and Norway who received the AstraZeneca vaccine. The study, which was published in the British Medical Journal on
May 5, found the incidence of rare but severe blood clots among vaccine recipients was 2.5 in 100,000.
One
recent study among healthcare workers in Israel estimated that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine
is 97% effective against symptomatic infection and 86% effective against asymptomatic
infection.
For such a large country it is reasonable to expect the new mutations will emerge or already
emerged: " India is sequencing far less than 1% of daily positive samples. An early goal was to
aim for 5% of cases, but that became unrealistic once cases ballooned. The world leader, the
U.K., has been
sequencing up to 10% of samples at points in the pandemic."
... the B.1.617 variant is outpacing other variants, including the variant first identified
in the U.K.
... B.1.617 is the fourth to be classified by the WHO as a variant of concern. The U.N.
agency has also given the same designation to the B.1.1.7 variant, the B.1.35 variant found in
South Africa and the P.1 variant discovered by researchers in Brazil.
Recent research on the B.1.617 variant -- not yet peer-reviewed and published -- has shown
that it broke through to infect fully vaccinated staff at a hospital in New Delhi, though none
of them got seriously ill. A separate paper, also available before publication, found that the
variant showed evasion against a drug cocktail often used on Covid-19 patients and that it had
better entry into some cell lines, mainly in the lungs and gut. The paper also found the
variant "evaded antibodies induced by infection or vaccination, although with moderate
efficiency."
"... Why is healthy 24-year-old Jennifer Gates jumping the line to get the vaccination when older at-risk Americans can't get an appointment? You may not have inherited your father's genius as you claim, but you certainly have his sense of entitlement. ..."
Why is healthy 24-year-old Jennifer Gates jumping the line to get the vaccination when older at-risk Americans can't
get an appointment? You may not have inherited your father's genius as you claim, but you certainly have his sense of
entitlement.
Why do so many people who are fully
vaccinated care whether I have been vaccinated or not? They seem to think that vaccines only "work" if everyone is vaccinated.
I am getting vax shamed by my family
for not getting the vaccine yet, especially from my brother who is a surgeon. What's wrong with waiting until there is more data
if you're young and healthy with no underlying conditions?
Pfizer Inc. and
BioNTech SE 's Covid-19
vaccine was cleared for use in children age 12 to 15 in the U.S., paving the way for the mass
vaccination of middle- and high-school students before the next school year.
The Food and Drug Administration said in a statement Monday that it had expanded the shot's
original emergency use authorization to include adolescents 12 through 15 years of age.
(cnbc.com) 408
booster dose of a Covid-19 vaccine within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated . His
comments were made public Thursday but were taped April 1. From a report: Bourla said it's
possible people will need to get vaccinated against the coronavirus annually. "A likely
scenario is that there will be likely a need for a third dose, somewhere between six and 12
months and then from there, there will be an annual revaccination, but all of that needs to be
confirmed. And again, the variants will play a key role," he told CNBC's Bertha Coombs during
an event with CVS Health. "It is extremely important to suppress the pool of people that can be
susceptible to the virus," Bourla said. The comment comes after Johnson & Johnson CEO Alex
Gorsky told CNBC in February that people may need to get vaccinated against Covid-19 annually,
just like seasonal flu shots. Researchers still don't know how long protection against the
virus lasts once someone has been fully vaccinated.
Death of fully vaccinated US expert in India sparks worry over Pfizer's efficacy against COVID-19 double mutant By Fan Anqi and
Lou Kang Published: May 05, 2021 08:48 PM
Medical workers prepare an oxygen parlor for COVID-19 patients in Kolkata, India, May 3, 2021. Photo: Xinhua
Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines have been dragged into the spotlight over efficacy concerns against the new double mutant variant first
found in India after an infectious disease specialist from the US, who had received two Pfizer shots prior to his arrival in India,
passed away after testing positive for coronavirus at the age of 81, local media reported on Wednesday.
Although there is no direct evidence showing reduced efficacy of Pfizer vaccines against the new mutated strain, previous studies
suggest a reduced protection rate against other variants, health experts reached by the Global Times said.
Dr Rajendra Kapila, a professor at Rutgers University in Newark, New Jersey specializing in infectious diseases, arrived in India
in late March and was scheduled to fly back to the US in mid-April, but he found he was infected with COVID-19 on April 8 and was
later admitted to Delhi's Shanti Mukund Hospital, local media the Hindustan Times reported on Wednesday.
He died at the hospital on April 28, the report said, but no details on the cause of his death have been disclosed, nor has it
been specified if Kapila was infected with the double mutated virus.
"For the last one year I have been working at a COVID-19 lab in New Jersey and had ensured a safe environment at home," said Dr
Deepti, Kapila's wife who traveled with him to India. "It is ironic that we came to India for two weeks and he contracted it here,"
she said, Hindustan Times reported.
Mainstream Western media have stayed silent on Kapila's death, and the Shanti Mukund Hospital did not reply to the Global Times'
inquiry as of press time.
However, reports have been circulating on social media such as Reddit since May, which said that Kapila had died from undisclosed
complications of COVID-19. A Facebook user named Neha Majmudar, who claimed he had been given consent from a family friend of Kapila,
replied under a post that "Kapila had history of diabetes and CAD S/P stents… and passed away following a massive heart attack
in the early morning hours." But this information cannot be verified so far.
People wait to receive COVID-19 vaccination at a government school in Delhi, India, on May 3, 2021. (Xinhua/Partha Sarkar)
India's National Institute of Virology shared limited data on the double mutant virus strain in April, which showed that of the
361 genome-sequenced samples collected between January and March this year, 220 of them - almost 61 percent - had carried the double
mutation, Indian Express reported.
In another article, the Indian Express said that the strain, also known as the B.1.617 variant, is fast replacing the previous
variant in south India and is becoming dominant, according to scientists at a local Indian research center on Tuesday.
Tao Lina, a Shanghai-based vaccine expert, told the Global Times on Wednesday there is no direct evidence showing whether the
Pfizer vaccine is effective on this variant or not, while noting that China-developed inactivated vaccines might be more effective
against the double mutant than mRNA ones.
"Technically, Pfizer vaccine uses human cells to synthesize S protein in the human body to produce antibodies, whereas China-developed
vaccines, including Sinovac and Sinopharm, use inactivated viruses as antibodies, which may cover more variants than Pfizer does,"
Tao said.
Tao added that while the efficacy of Pfizer against the new double mutant remains unknown, previous medical studies suggested
a reduced efficacy rate of Pfizer shots against other COVID-19 variants.
"The human body develops resistance to vaccines, and the variants may need even five or six doses of vaccine instead of merely
two to produce enough protection," he noted.
Chinese experts also warned that seniors, people who are obese and those with chronic diseases may have a reduced response to
vaccines, while urging India to conduct further research on Kapila's case.
According to the World Health Organization on Wednesday, over the past week India accounted for nearly half, or 46 percent, of
the world's total COVID-19 infections, and a quarter of global death toll.
According to a press release on its official website, Pfizer said its vaccines show a 95.3 percent efficacy rate against severe
COVID-19 cases, which has been defined by the US Food and Drug Administration.
(nytimes.com) 64
Posted by EditorDavid on Sunday April 11, 2021 @03:34PM from the big-thank-you dept. Long-time
Slashdot reader destinyland writes: The New York Times tells
the story of Hungarian-born Dr. Kariko, whose father was a butcher and who growing up had never
met a scientist â€" but knew they wanted to be
one . Despite earning a Ph.D. at Hungary's University of Szeged and working as a
postdoctoral fellow at its Biological Research Center, Kariko never found a permanent position
after moving to the U.S., "instead clinging to the fringes of academia."
Now 66 years old,
Dr. Kariko is suddenly being hailed as "one of the heroes of Covid-19 vaccine development,"
after spending an entire career focused on mRNA, "convinced mRNA could be used to instruct
cells to make their own medicines, including vaccines."
From the article: For many years her career at the University of Pennsylvania was fragile.
She migrated from lab to lab, relying on one senior scientist after another to take her in. She
never made more than $60,000 a year... She needed grants to pursue ideas that seemed wild and
fanciful. She did not get them, even as more mundane research was rewarded. "When your idea is
against the conventional wisdom that makes sense to the star chamber, it is very hard to break
out," said Dr. David Langer, a neurosurgeon who has worked with Dr. Kariko... Kariko's husband,
Bela Francia, manager of an apartment complex, once calculated that her endless workdays meant
she was earning about a dollar an hour.
The Times also describes a formative experience in 1989 with cardiologist Elliot Barnathan:
One fateful day, the two scientists hovered over a dot-matrix printer in a narrow room at
the end of a long hall. A gamma counter, needed to track the radioactive molecule, was attached
to a printer. It began to spew data.
Their detector had found new proteins produced by cells that were never supposed to make
them â€" suggesting that mRNA could be used to direct any cell to make any protein,
at will.
"I felt like a god," Dr. Kariko recalled.
Yet Kariko was eventually left without a lab or funds for research, until a chance meeting at a
photocopying machine led to a partnership with Dr. Drew Weissman of the University of
Pennsylvania: "We both started writing grants," Dr. Weissman said. "We didn't get most of
them. People were not interested in mRNA. The people who reviewed the grants said mRNA will not
be a good therapeutic, so don't bother.'" Leading scientific journals rejected their work. When
the research finally was published , in
Immunity , it got little attention... "We talked to pharmaceutical companies and venture
capitalists. No one cared," Dr. Weissman said. "We were screaming a lot, but no one would
listen."
Eventually, though, two biotech companies took notice of the work: Moderna, in the United
States, and BioNTech, in Germany. Pfizer partnered with BioNTech, and the two now help fund Dr.
Weissman's lab.
The question is why the vaccine needed for teen, not if they are protected or not. If not natural immunity better then
immunity from Pfizer vaccine and teenagers not in danger of getting virus pneumonia in any case -- the main rational for the
development of Pfizer vaccine.
(arstechnica.com) 91
Posted by BeauHD on Wednesday March
31, 2021 @06:40PM from the vaccinated-adolescents dept. An anonymous reader quotes a report
from Ars Technica:
The company also said that the vaccine was well-tolerated in the
age group, spurring only the standard side effects seen in people ages 16 to 25. The vaccine is
already authorized for use in people age 16 and over.
The vaccine appeared more effective at spurring defensive immune responses in adolescents
ages 12 to 15 than in the 16- to 25-year-old group, producing even higher levels of antibodies
that were able to neutralize SARS-CoV-2. In a measure of neutralizing antibodies, vaccinated
youths in the new trial had geometric mean titers (GMTs) of 1,239.5, compared with the GMTs of
705.1 previously seen in those ages 16 to 25, Pfizer noted.
The trial involved 2,260
adolescents ages 12 to 15, of which 1,131 were vaccinated and 1,129 received a placebo.
There
were 18 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 in the trial, all of which were in the placebo group.
In
today's press release, the company trumpeted that the vaccine demonstrated "100 percent
efficacy." The trial was not primarily designed to assess efficacy, however. It was primarily
assessing relative immune responses, so it will require more data to fully evaluate efficacy.
Additionally, Pfizer and BioNTech have only released top-line trial results, not the full data
from the trial, which has not been peer-reviewed.
(www.cbc.caThe scientist who won the race to deliver
the first widely used coronavirus vaccine says people can rest assured the shots are safe, and
that the technology behind it will soon be used to
fight another global scourge -- cancer . Ozlem Tureci, who founded the German company
BioNTech with her husband, Ugur Sahin, was working on a way to harness the body's immune system
to tackle tumors when they learned last year of an unknown virus infecting people in China.
Over breakfast, the couple decided to apply the technology they'd been researching for two
decades to the new threat.
Britain authorized BioNTech's mRNA vaccine for use in December, followed a week later by
Canada. Dozens of other countries, including the U.S., have followed suit and tens of millions
of people worldwide have since received the shot developed together with U.S. pharmaceutical
giant Pfizer. [...] As BioNTech's profile has grown during the pandemic, so has its value,
adding much-needed funds the company will be able to use to pursue its original goal of
developing a new tool against cancer. The vaccine made by BioNTech-Pfizer and U.S. rival
Moderna uses messenger RNA, or mRNA, to carry instructions into the human body for making
proteins that prime it to attack a specific virus. The same principle can be applied to get the
immune system to take on tumors.
"We have several different cancer vaccines based on mRNA," said Tureci. Asked when such a
therapy might be available, Tureci said "that's very difficult to predict in innovative
development. But we expect that within only a couple of years, we will also have our vaccines
[against] cancer at a place where we can offer them to people." For now, Tureci and Sahin are
trying to ensure the vaccines governments have ordered are delivered and that the shots respond
effectively to any new mutation in the virus.
(nytimes.com)
505
Posted by msmash on Monday May 03, 2021 @12:07PM from the closer-look dept. Widely circulating
coronavirus variants and persistent hesitancy about vaccines will keep the goal out of reach.
The virus is here to stay, but vaccinating the most vulnerable may be enough to restore
normalcy. From a report :
Early in the pandemic, when vaccines for the coronavirus were still just a glimmer on
the horizon, the term "herd immunity" came to signify the endgame: the point when enough
Americans would be protected from the virus so we could be rid of the pathogen and reclaim
our lives. Now, more than half of adults in the United States have been inoculated with at
least one dose of a vaccine. But daily vaccination rates are slipping, and there is
widespread consensus among scientists and public health experts that the herd immunity
threshold is not attainable -- at least not in the foreseeable future, and perhaps not ever.
Instead, they are coming to the conclusion that rather than making a long-promised exit, the
virus will most likely become a manageable threat that will continue to circulate in the
United States for years to come, still causing hospitalizations and deaths but in much
smaller numbers.
How much smaller is uncertain and depends in part on how much of the nation, and the
world, becomes vaccinated and how the coronavirus evolves. It is already clear, however, that
the virus is changing too quickly, new variants are spreading too easily and vaccination is
proceeding too slowly for herd immunity to be within reach anytime soon. Continued
immunizations, especially for people at highest risk because of age, exposure or health
status, will be crucial to limiting the severity of outbreaks, if not their frequency,
experts believe. "The virus is unlikely to go away," said Rustom Antia, an evolutionary
biologist at Emory University in Atlanta.
"But we want to do all we can to check that it's likely to become a mild infection."
The shift in outlook presents a new challenge for public health authorities. The drive for
herd immunity -- by the summer, some experts once thought possible -- captured the
imagination of large segments of the public. To say the goal will not be attained adds
another "why bother" to the list of reasons that vaccine skeptics use to avoid being
inoculated.
Yet vaccinations remain the key to transforming the virus into a controllable threat,
experts said. Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the Biden administration's top adviser on Covid-19,
acknowledged the shift in experts' thinking. "People were getting confused and thinking
you're never going to get the infections down until you reach this mystical level of herd
immunity, whatever that number is," he said.
There is no or very little (depending of type of vaccine) immunity from South African mutation in the USA for people who
already were vaccinated.
From comments: "Herd Immunity or Heard on the Street immunity? COVID was way over-played in order to get Biden in the WH. Now
the shoes on the other foot and the Herd Concept is eroding pretty darn fast"... "Here in the US, it's undeniable that the quantity
of covid cases were intentionally over counted -- likely for political reasons."
"If the re-infection rate is near zero and those who are the most vulnerable are 95% inoculated why should the remaining
unvaccinated (mostly youth) be needed to reach herd immunity? Their reaction to COVID-19 is either undetectable or no worse than a
mild cold. Some people, journalists, just do not want to think and/or act logically."
Notable quotes:
"... For example, there is no herd immunity from South African mutation in the USA for those who were immunized with the Moderna vaccine and Johnson and Johnson vaccine ..."
"... And more mutations will follow this and the next year. So the concept of "herd immunity" when applied to coronaviruses looks to me fuzzy; in this sense this is the goal that the nation probably can't achieve. Remember the "flattering of the curve" fiasco in NYC. Quarantine measures were completely decimated by Floyd-gate riots and authorities were forced to swallow the bitter pill. Measures they advocated proved to be useless and economically damaging. ..."
"... Coronaviruses like C19 are a moving target. Moreover, there are large swats of the US population that have weakened immune system (including some seniors) who that does not respond to vaccination, creating no protection. In large cities like NYC they will serve as the reservoir of virus mutations vaccination, or no vaccination. ..."
"... We have Fauci making unfounded statements that confuse everyone and now economists are going to tell us when herd immunity will become operative. Can't do any worse than the 'media docs'. ..."
Some view herd immunity -- the point at which a critical mass of a population become immune to a disease-causing virus or bacteria -- as a
key factor in determining when Covid-19 will be conquered and economies will return to normal. Until herd immunity is reached, some
say, governments will restrict activities to prevent the disease's spread, resulting in fewer goods and services being produced and
consumed.
Other economists say businesses can reopen and economic activity can rebound without full herd immunity, and likely will.
Part of the challenge for economists is that it is hard to know exactly when a given place will achieve herd immunity, if ever.
For
Covid-19
, epidemiologists generally believe it will require having at least 60% to 80% of a population develop antibodies,
curbing the virus's ability to spread.
... ... ...
Economists at
Goldman
Sachs Group
Inc.
have
tried to incorporate immunity estimates into their forecasts by looking at daily vaccination progress around the world and take
account of estimates of how many people have already been infected.
According to their calculations, 60% of the population in the U.S. and U.K. are already immune to Covid-19; the biggest economies
of Europe will get there by August.
Serg Bezrukov
I agree with Umesh Patil.
For example, there is no herd immunity from South African mutation in the USA for those who were immunized with the Moderna
vaccine and Johnson and Johnson vaccine
.
And more mutations will follow this and the next year. So the concept of "herd immunity" when applied to coronaviruses looks
to me fuzzy; in this sense this is the goal that the nation probably can't achieve. Remember the "flattering of the curve"
fiasco in NYC. Quarantine measures were completely decimated by Floyd-gate riots and authorities were forced to swallow the
bitter pill. Measures they advocated proved to be useless and economically damaging.
Coronaviruses like C19 are a moving target. Moreover, there are large swats of the US population that have
weakened
immune system
(including
some seniors) who that does not respond to vaccination, creating no protection. In large cities like NYC they will serve as the
reservoir of virus mutations vaccination, or no vaccination.
Rick Schaler
SUBSCRIBER
3 hours ago
We have Fauci making unfounded statements that confuse everyone and now economists are going to tell us when herd
immunity will become operative. Can't do any worse than the 'media docs'.
I think that we are collectively failing to understand what can we expect from a campaign
of massive vaccination against a respiratory virus and more particularly against a
respiratory virus that is transmitted with relative ease amongst humans.
I think I have written about this here more than once, twice, etc. Talking about
'immunity' doesn't make much sense in a case like this. There is not a barrier (except some
difficulties the mucosae impose) to virus entry into the upper respiratory tract and as long
as viable particles enter in numbers high enough we will be infected even if we have a
humoral response (antibodies). It is only that the load will have to be increased if you have
some antibodies spread into the URT mucosae. Instead of taking about 'immunity' or a barrier
we should think about vaccination as inducing quantitative protection. The level of
protection will very much depend on the levels of neutralizing antibodies on the
nasopharyngeal mucosae compared with the entry load. So, if you have high enough levels of
antibodies you can be deemed as 'fairly immune'. The levels of antibodies in the mucosae
depend very much on the levels in blood since these cross the circulatory system to spread
around the epithelial tissues of the mucosae.
Unfortunately, to maintain high levels there, where it matters, would require high level
antibody production and sustained in time, something our body cannot afford (particularly
keeping in mind the many virus serotypes that can enter through our respiratory system). In
the best cases you will be fairly immune for some time after the second shot. Sinovac does
not distinguish herself by inducing particularly high levels of neutralizing antibodies
compared with other vaccines so it may well be the case that one is 'fairly immune' just for
a short time, let's say for instance, a few weeks.
But this not the whole story, fortunately. Whether you are fairly, moderately or barely
immune to virus entry in the URT when you have been infected or vaccinated before, not
totally naive to the Coronavirus, for instance with the Sinovac vaccine your chances to fight
the new infection are much better now and there is a range of immune tools that might prevent
further progression of the disease into the worst outcomes: you have memory cells that will
wake up fast, and with the chance of producing new antibodies against new variants that are
somehow different, and you indeed will have a faster cellular response that will help against
progression.
I think it would be very important to have a follow up of these new infections in
Seychelles and compare the development of severe respiratory syndrome between those
vaccinated and infected with those that weren't vaccinated. IMO, there will lie the real
efficiency of the Sinovac vaccine and my guess is that the incidence of severe or fatal
outcomes will be very much reduced within those vaccinated.
First, most, if not all commercial passenger carrying airliners have fully enclosed cabins
with heavily recycled air. I'd imagine that airliners would have efficient air filtration
systems, considering the exudations and miasmas Terran humans emit. On extended flights, the
degree of inter-personal air mixing probably approaches 100%. There have been several
graphical presentations of the transmission paths for viruses in enclosed spaces here over
the past year. So, the airliner itself, perhaps not so much a factor in virus
transmission.
The airports are where the major viral mixing would happen. International airports are
huge places, usually enclosed with 'tempered' air. The theme of the insufficiencies of the
air filtration systems in public spaces has come up here before.
I would compare giant enclosed public spaces to petri dishes. Mix your 'ingredients' and
see what grows.
Of interest to the 'curious' personality type, a long PDF from NASA outlining the computed
requirements and ancillary items for a space station. From 1982. Atmospheric considerations
are part of section 10.0.
What the NASA document shows me is that we can do the "right thing," when motivated and
funded. At least, we could do so forty years ago.
I am reminded forcefully of the follies of the PMC/Meritocrat politico class when I
consider that both the Space Shuttle Challenger and Space Shuttle Colombia disasters could
have been avoided if the relevant 'expert's' warnings had been heeded. Both disasters were
the result of politically motivated decisions by NASA middle managers, aided and abetted by
NASA upper management's craven careerism.
The 'national' response to the Pandemic is of a piece with the Space Shuttle disasters.
The Laws of Institutions 'select' for cowards and conformists.
As a microbiologist, humans may be facing a reality that is inescapable. For eons, humans
had no defense against infectious diseases except what evolution provided. Pasteur published
his germ theory around 1860. Success in developing effective vaccines against scourges to
humanity followed and was truly amazing. And as is wont with humans, taken for granted. Look
at mortality tables of the 19th century and it is startling to modern sensibilities.
I think we have reached the point that the truth of the matter is that microbes ability to
evolve will exceed our ability to mount defenses. The fact that measures against microbial
pathogens succeeded so well for so long does not mean that they will continue to succeed.
I am vaccinated, and I have a long list of co-morbidities that put me at great peril. I
hope measures can be implemented that will be effective – I like living. But I think
the truth of the matter is that humans ability to control the environment is much less than
humans suppose. And that is if a significant majority of humans do the rational thing –
which considering that the proposition that a significant majority of humans are rational, is
a dubious proposition.
Also, let's not forget the mining of US and global health by the 'food' scientists who
design unnutritious food that tastes good. And the behavioural scientists who are more than
willing for a $ to research and design methods to sell that "food". Human health is under
attack by science.
All this while the esteemed Epidemiologists, Virologists, etc. stand obliviously and
silently by.
There is no herd immunity for COVID19. Period. As there never was herd immunity to the
cold or to the flu.
Even if you were able to vaccinate 100% of the population all in the same day there still
would not be herd immunity. I wish people understood this once and for all.
I would quibble: There is currently no prospect of lasting herd immunity of the sort that
could prevent further epidemics absent competent public health measures to monitor for and
suppress the outbreaks that will inevitably occur.
Monitoring and suppressing future outbreaks isn't "herd immunity." Not even close.
Instead, it's using the tried and true methods of disease control that Vietnam, New
Zealand and other countries that placed saving lives over economic activity used.
https://www.amazon.com/Body-Hero-MD-Ronald-Glasser/dp/0394400135
I happened to read the above book prior to starting to major in microbiology. Just to further
my first post, we believe medicine cures disease. The truth of the matter is, if your
own body's restorative functions are impaired, you will not get better. If your immune system
is impaired or diminished due to age or health condition, the vaccine is going to be
significantly less effective than when provided to a younger person in good health. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/flu/in-depth/flu-shots/art-20048000
The people most endangered by Covid are the least protected by vaccines. That is just the
nature of the beast. It is better to have the vaccine than not have it, but for a lot of
people, the vaccine alone is not enough
We live with this reality as relates to influenza. Now we have another respiratory disease,
that appears to be significantly more serious. This upcoming winter is going to put some
stark choices on the table
Governments and companies may find that soft bribery is the best way to get the no-vaxxers
to the clinics. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, for example,
has linked her state reopening policies to progress in shots, letting restaurants and bars
increase their occupancy once 60 percent of the state has been vaccinated, and promising to
lift mask orders when 70 percent of Michiganders have received both doses.
... the cultural backlash against domestic restrictions could be prodigious. If blue-state
governors and sports stadiums deny economic activities to the unvaccinated while red-state
stadiums allow anybody to sit at a bar or in the bleachers, it will deepen the culture-war
tensions between scolding liberals and accommodating conservatives in a way that might not be
good for Democrats politically, even if they have the upper hand in the public-health
argument.
Recognizing the broad potential of mRNA science, we set out to create an mRNA technology
platform that functions very much like an operating system on a computer. It is designed so
that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the "program"
or "app" is our mRNA drug - the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein."
Not really. The author of this piece makes some mistakes and, I'd say, take things a touch
far but in the bigger scheme of things the author isn't very far off base.
I do wish that people would stop making technical errors in the way they talk about this
but that's probably not possible since this is so far over most people's heads that literally
98% of people can't understand it without a genetics course along with a couple (at least)
modern cellular biology courses to boot.
The thing about all of this, IMHO, is that what you're seeing is a massive CYA operation
here. I've covered that here before. You combine that with an ignorant media out to make
money, the general ignorance of the public, the ignorance of some well-meaning but
misinformed pundits and you're going to get a ****show.
For example "gene therapy" (I'm picking on this term and Moderna because I'm not typing
out 30+ pages here).
Yeah, Moderna played a bit loose with how they talked about their mRNA-1273 therapy. The
company referred to it as a "gene-based delivery" at least twice in the last paper that I
read from them. Now, that might be technically true in some regards depending on how they
made mRNA-1273 in terms of a template. In that case the "basis" would be the DNA they used as
either the template or the coding strand to create mRNA-1273. But that's kind of a stretch,
like saying that the basis of good batting in baseball is a solid foundation in forestry.
For all practical purposes what they're saying is not true and Moderna is adding to the
confusion by using this term. It could technically be true that they derived mRNA-1273 from a
template (or coding) strand of DNA that they created to store that information. That would,
technically, make mRNA-1273 a "gene product" (product of a gene) and you could then say that
the ultimate root basis for the Moderna jab is the template (or coding) DNA sequence that can
be transcribed into mRNA-1273. I would however point out to say that mRNA-1273 is a
"gene-based delivery" is a stretch in technical terminology and not likely to be understood
by anyone outside the biology world.
A "gene" is defined as "The fundamental physical unit of heredity, whose existence can be
confirmed by allelic variants and which occupies a specific chromosomal locus. A DNA sequence
coding for a single polypeptide or an RNA molecule" . (Essentials of Genetics, 11th ed. Klug
et al essentially the go-to text on undergraduate genetics at this point in time) Genes are
DNA and are heritable . That definition has nothing to do with mRNA-1273. mRNA is not
heritable. It's a intracellular messaging system that instructs cellular machinery to do or
produce something. It will then be degraded by proteases once its function has been
served.
Now, could this be a gene therapy? Erm, "no" but define your terms, please. The same book
defines "gene therapy" as "A therapeutic approach for providing a normal copy of a gene,
replaces a defective gene or supplementing a gene for treating or curing a genetic disorder"
. Now, with regards to any of these jabs, by design they do none of that. In fact, it would
be quite hard (though admittedly not entirely impossible) for it to happen by accident. Ergo,
this is not a gene therapy (At least not one that's intentional. Or shall we call smoking a
gene therapy?).
Now, here's the point. What I've said here are not really very reasonable objections to
these "jabs" (or whatever you'd prefer to call them) in terms of actual science. However,
they're not unexpected given the nature of what's going on, particularly if one considers the
FDA's stance on this right up until about nine months ago.
That said, rational objections to what's going on do, in fact, exist and are actually not
all that uncommon within the biological sciences community. They're simply things that most
people couldn't understand and which the media doesn't want to cover for various reasons.
The exact objection will depend on who you may talk to and what their specialty is. But
concerns about how the immune system might interpret this kind of mRNA modification over the
longer term are rational. This could produce autoimmune disorders of a huge variety of types.
It could also produce blood, specifically serum, problems that might not be survivable. Some
of the people initially reported as having had "allergic reactions" were NOT treated for
allergic reactions. They were, in essence, treated for serum sickness.
That's somewhat disturbing because no one on the planet really understands blood serum.
Modern methods for treating severe cases are going to be a combination of dialysis and
transfusion over time to remove and replace the problematic serum. And just looking at the
physical nature of the protein produced by mRNA-1273 raises some significant questions as to
if this might be a problem following apoptosis or an unexpected lysing of the cells that
express the new spike glycoprotein.
ShutUpSlave 9 hours ago remove link
I prefer to call it Gene Hacking
Maghreb2 16 hours ago
Those interested should read what Strategic Culture and
Mathew Ehret were talking about when they did their globalists in literature series a few
months back on Zero Hedge. The Huxley article was incredibly informative and deserves to be
disseminated online regardless of how you feel about Strategic Culture.
In my opinion Aldous was giving a warning but was aware of the blue print and mechanisms
due to being from a family who were twisiting science into an ideological tool of the British
establishment. His borther Julian Huxley was profoundly influential at the U.N and UNESCO.
All this was 19th century and early 20th century eugenics at play. Now the danger has been
magnified ten fold by the scientific advances that in some ways make parts of the human
condition obsolete.
In their defense the current generation are more against the conservatives than they are
the general population but its considered by some simply a strategy in the same game.
Good comment. Yep, so much of this stuff was initiated many moons ago and by people who
are long dead. I'm sort-of pissed I'm still alive to have to face this crap.
Many of us loved that song when it came out, it was fascinating to ponder the message back
then.
Now, I could only hear less than a minute and started to feel sick.
paranoid.dragon 5 hours ago
Brilliant Article!!
i think the New World Order has now firmly been in place for 50 years.
The Western Liberal Elites(which includes both Democrats and Republicans) have been living
lives of luxury at the expense of everyone else, including their own fellow citizens.
They especially hate those citizens who are true Patriots, Christians, Nationalist who
want a self-reliant country, which decides its own destiny and is not at the mercy of
foreigners, those against foreign interventionism by way of military force and economic
sanctions, those against endless money printing by the FED that is given to the seriously
corrupted wall street, those against the globalism defined by the multinational corporations
of sharehoder capitalism that suck nations dry of resources like parasites.
The Empire built by the Liberal Elites is in serious danger, not by physical force, but by
ideas.
The ideas of conspiracy theorists based on the questioning of the Liberal Elites' true
intentions that challenges their moral authority.
Conspiracy theories that map out the possible next moves of the Liberal Elites. The more
theories the better, as it closes the avenues of possible secret plots of the Liberal
Elites.
Conspiracy theories based on what-if scenarios, referencing history, challenging the
validity of history written by the "victors".
Conspiracy theories that acknowledge Marxist playbooks written in the past, but also the
constant never ending planning and plotting of new schemes.
Conspiracy theories that connect the dots between current events, true science and
mathematics, and try to fill in the blanks of obvious voids of the hidden secret knowledge
deficits the Liberal Elites are hoarding for themselves.
Conspiracy theories that are posited as questions, never accusatorial, pointing out
obvious peculiarities, so they may never be proven as false, because they were claimed to be
true in the first place.
Conspiracy theories that frustrate the Liberal Elites', obvious as they must constantly
demonize Conspiracy Theorists and refute their ideas.
Perhaps this is why the deep state FBI classified conspiracy theorists as potential
"domestic terrorists" back in 2018. Possibility a classic case of projection. As there are
far too many apparent false flag events the FBI has been allegedly been all too eager to go
along with and whitewash and sweep under the rug.
Never stop forming theories of the possible conspiracies these demonic maniacal Liberal
Elites have been scheming
This is starting to look really like staging of "Brave new world..." Today's society is
closer to Huxley's "Brave New World" than to Orwell's "1984". But there are clear elements of
both. If you will, the worst of both worlds has come true today.
In 1949, sometime after the publication of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four , Aldous
Huxley, the author of Brave New World (1931), who was then living in California, wrote to
Orwell. Huxley had briefly taught French to Orwell as a student in high school at Eton.
Huxley generally praises Orwell's novel, which to many seemed very similar to Brave New
World in its dystopian view of a possible future. Huxley politely voices his opinion that his
own version of what might come to pass would be truer than Orwell's. Huxley observed that the
philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is sadism, whereas his own version is
more likely, that controlling an ignorant and unsuspecting public would be less arduous, less
wasteful by other means. Huxley's masses are seduced by a mind-numbing drug, Orwell's with
sadism and fear.
The most powerful quote In Huxley's letter to Orwell is this:
Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant
conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs
and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting
people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
Aldous Huxley.
Could Huxley have more prescient? What do we see around us?
Masses of people dependent upon drugs, legal and illegal. The majority of advertisements
that air on television seem to be for prescription drugs, some of them miraculous but most of
them unnecessary. Then comes COVID, a quite possibly weaponized virus from the
Fauci-funded-with-taxpayer-dollars lab in Wuhan, China. The powers that be tragically deferred
to the malevolent Fauci who had long been hoping for just such an opportunity. Suddenly, there
was an opportunity to test the mRNA vaccines that had been in the works for nearly twenty
years. They could be authorized as an emergency measure but were still highly experimental.
These jabs are not really vaccines at all, but a form of gene therapy . There
are potential
disastrous consequences down the road. Government experiments on the public are
nothing new .
Since there have been no actual, long-term trials, no one who contributed to this massive
drug experiment knows what the long-term consequences might be. There have been countless
adverse injuries and deaths already for which the government-funded vaccine producers will
suffer no liability. With each passing day, new side-effects have begun to appear: blood clots,
seizures, heart failure.
As new adverse reactions become known despite the censorship employed by most media outlets,
the more the Biden administration is pushing the vaccine, urging private corporations to make
it mandatory for all employees. Colleges are making them mandatory for all students returning
to campus.
The leftmedia are advocating the "shunning" of the unvaccinated. The self-appointed
virtue-signaling Democrats are furious at anyone and everyone who declines the jab. Why? If
they are protected, why do they care? That is the question. Same goes for the ridiculous mask
requirements . They protect no one but for those in operating rooms with their insides
exposed, yet even the vaccinated are supposed to wear them!
Months ago, herd immunity was near. Now Fauci and the CDC say it will never be achieved? Now
the Pfizer shot will necessitate yearly booster shots. Pfizer
expects to make $21B this year from its COVID vaccine! Anyone who thinks this isn't about
money is a fool. It is all about money, which is why Fauci, Gates, et al. were so determined to
convince the public that HCQ and ivermectin, both of which are effective, prophylactically and
as treatment, were not only useless, but dangerous. Both of those drugs are tried, true, and
inexpensive. Many of those thousands of N.Y. nursing home fatalities might have been prevented
with the use of one or both of those drugs. Those deaths are on the hands of Cuomo and his
like-minded tyrants drunk on power.
Months ago, Fauci, et al. agreed that children were at little or no risk of getting COVID,
of transmitting it, least of all dying from it. Now Fauci is demanding that all teens be
vaccinated by the end of the year! Why? They are no more in danger of contracting it now than
they were a year ago. Why are parents around this country not standing up to prevent their kids
from being guinea pigs in this monstrous medical experiment? And now they are " experimenting
" on infants. Needless to say, some have died. There is no reason on Earth for teens, children,
and infants to be vaccinated. Not one.
Huxley also wrote this:
"The surest way to work up a crusade in favor of some good cause is to promise people they
will have a chance of maltreating someone. To be able to destroy with good conscience, to be
able to behave badly and call your bad behavior 'righteous indignation' -- this is the height
of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats ."
Perhaps this explains the left's hysterical impulse to force these untested shots on those
of us who have made the decision to go without it. If they've decided that it is the thing to
do, then all of us must submit to their whims. If we decide otherwise, it gives them the
righteous right to smear all of us whom they already deplore.
As C.J. Hopkins has
written , the left means to criminalize dissent. Those of us who are vaccine-resistant are
soon to be outcasts, deprived of jobs and entry into everyday businesses. This kind of
discrimination should remind everyone of ...oh, Germany three quarters of a century ago. Huxley
also wrote, "The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other
sets of people are human." That is precisely what the left is up to, what BLM is planning, what
Critical Race Theory is all about.
Tal Zaks, Moderna's chief medical officer, said these new vaccines are "hacking the
software of life." Vaccine-promoters claim he never said this, but he did. Bill Gates called
the vaccines " an operating
system " to the horror of those promoting it, a Kinsley gaffe. Whether it is or isn't
hardly matters at this point, but these statements by those behind the vaccines are a clue to
what they have in mind.
There will be in the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love
their servitude and producing dictatorship without tears , so to speak, producing a kind of
painless concentration camp for entire societies so that people will in fact have their
liberties taken away from them but will rather enjoy it.
This is exactly what the left is working so hard to effect: a pharmacologically compromised
population happy to be taken care of by a massive state machine. And while millions of people
around the world have surrendered to the vaccine and mask hysteria, millions more, about 1.3
billion, want no part of this government vaccine mania.
In his letter to Orwell, Huxley ended with the quote cited above and again here because it
is so profound:
Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant
conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs
and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting
people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
Huxley nailed the left more than seventy years ago, perhaps because leftists have never
changed throughout the ages. 61,497 173
Fat Beaver 14 hours ago (Edited)
If i am to be treated as an outcast or an undesirable because i refuse the vax, i will
immediately become someone that has zero reverence for the law, and i can only imagine 10's
of millions will be right there with me.
strych10 14 hours ago
Welcome to the club.
We have coffee in the corner and occasional meetings at various bars.
Dr. Chihuahua-González 13 hours ago
I'm a doctor, you could contact me anytime and receive your injection.
Fat Beaver 13 hours ago (Edited)
I've gotta feeling the normie world you think you live in is about to change drastically
for the worse...
sparky139 PREMIUM 10 hours ago
You mean you'll sign papers that you injected us *wink *wink? And toss it away?
bothneither 2 hours ago
Oh geez how uncommon, another useless doctor with no Scruples who sold out to big Pharma.
Please have my Gates sponsored secret sauce.
Unknown 6 hours ago (Edited)
Both Huxley and Orwell are wrong. Neoliberalism (the use of once office for personal
gains) is by far the most powerful force that subjugates the inept population. Neoliberalism
demolished the mighty USSR, now destroying the USA, and will do the same to China. And this
poison dribbles from the top to bottom creating self-centered population that is unable to
unite, much less resist.
Deathrips 15 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Tylers.
You gonna cover Tucker Carlsons show earlier today on FOX news about vaxxx deaths? almost 4k
reported so far this year.
Is the population of india up in arms or is the MSM?
Nelbev 10 hours ago
Facebook just flagged/censored it, must sign into see vid, Tuck also failed to mention
mRNA and adenovirus vaxes were experimental and not FDA approved nor gone through stage III
trials. Beside deaths, have blood clot issues. Good he mentioned how naturally immune if get
covid and recovered, better than vaccine, but not covered for bogus passports. Me personally,
I would rather catch covid and get natural immunity than be vaccinated with an untested
experimental vaccine.
Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya; Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche; Dr. Ron Brown; Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr.
Richard Fleming; Dr. Simone Gold; Dr. Sunetra Gupta; Dr. Carl Heneghan; Dr. Martin Kulldorff;
Dr. Paul Marik; Dr. Peter McCullough; Dr. Joseph Mercola; Dr. Lee Merritt; Dr. Judy Mikovits;
Dr. Dennis Modry; Dr. Hooman Noorchashm; Dr. Harvey Risch; Dr. Sherri Tenpenny; Dr. Richard
Urso; Dr. Michael Yeadon;
Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya; Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche; Dr. Ron Brown; Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr.
Richard Fleming; Dr. Simone Gold; Dr. Sunetra Gupta; Dr. Carl Heneghan; Dr. Martin Kulldorff;
Dr. Paul Marik; Dr. Peter McCullough; Dr. Joseph Mercola; Dr. Lee Merritt; Dr. Judy Mikovits;
Dr. Dennis Modry; Dr. Hooman Noorchashm; Dr. Harvey Risch; Dr. Sherri Tenpenny; Dr. Richard
Urso; Dr. Michael Yeadon;
His making of the gamma and delta workforce was quite prescient. We are seeing it play out
now, we all know gammas and delta. There was a really good ABC tv movie made in 1980 Brave
New World. Excellent show, it shows the Alphas and names them Rothchild and so on. Shows what
these people specifically want to do to the world. I wonder if the ruling psychopaths
actually wait for science fiction authors to plan the future and then follow their
script.
Mineshaft Gap 10 hours ago
If Huxley were starting out today no major publisher would touch him.
They'd tell him Brave New World doesn't have a diverse enough of cast. Even the mostly
likable totalitarian guy named Mustapha turns out to be white! A white Mustapha. It's soooo
triggering. Also, what's wrong with a little electronic fun and drug taking, anyway? Lighten
up , Aldous.
Meanwhile his portrait of shrieking medieval Catholic nuns who think they're possessed in
The Devils of Loudun might remind the leftist editors too uncomfortably of their own recent
bleating performances at "White Fragility" struggle sessions.
single dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine protects against two of the most concerning
coronavirus variants, but perhaps only in people who have
overcome the infection naturally, research suggests.
An effective immunisation programme has long been hailed as a route out of the pandemic, however, the emergence of new variants
in Kent, South Africa and India has left many concerned the virus may no longer respond to the UK's three approved jabs.
Results suggest the workers who had overcome a mild or asymptomatic infection with the original coronavirus variant experienced
"significantly enhanced protection" against the so-called Kent and South Africa variants post-jab.
The workers who had not fought off the coronavirus had a weaker immune response after the vaccine, potentially leaving them at
risk of the variants.
A person's immune system may be "primed" after overcoming the coronavirus naturally, raising the potency of its response following
the first vaccine dose.
The results may highlight the importance of getting the second jab when called up, with the first dose similarly priming the immune
system.
The coronavirus can acquire new mutations as it replicates, some of which may enable variants to spread more easily, evade vaccines
or cause more severe disease. (Stock, Getty Images)
"Our findings show people who have had their first dose of vaccine, and who have not previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2
[the coronavirus], are not fully protected against the circulating variants of concern," said lead author Professor Rosemary Boyton.
TEL AVIV: The Pfizer vaccine is effective against the Indian variant of Covid-19, albeit at
a reduced efficacy level, Israeli authorities have said, say reports.
Israel, which has been touted as one of the world’s vaccination success
stories due to its sweeping inoculation campaign against Covid-19, has identified eight cases
of the so-called “Indian†variant of the novel coronavirus, just
days after the country ended its outdoors mask mandate
... ... ...
The Indian variant has been identified in both the UK and in Ireland.
“The impression is that the Pfizer vaccine has efficacy against it,
albeit a reduced efficacy,†the Israel’s health ministry
director-general, Hezi Levy, told Kan public radio, saying the number of cases of the variant
in Israel now stood at eight.
Israel has already vaccinated 81 per cent of its 9.3 million population, all residents above
the age of 16.
Double mutant variant
Indian authorities had in January detected a “double mutantâ€
variant of the virus, with changes to the SARS-nCov-2 virus spike protein similar to those in
both UK and South Africa at once.
While the UK variant was known to be more infectious, the South African variant was believed
to be deadlier â€" and triggered reduced efficacy rates in existing vaccines.
AstraZeneca had announced plans to develop a modification to its vaccine to better tackle
the threat of new variants, aiming to prepare this by the end of the year.
Pfizer, meanwhile, has said those who had already taken its vaccine may require a third dose
within 6-12 months, as their immunity to the virus starts to wane.
(Reuters) - A laboratory study suggests that the South African variant of the coronavirus
may reduce protective antibodies elicited by the Pfizer Inc/BioNTech SE vaccine by two-thirds,
and it is not clear if the shot will be effective against the mutation, the companies said on
Wednesday.
The study found the vaccine was still able to neutralize the virus and there is not yet
evidence from trials in people that the variant reduces vaccine protection, the companies
said.
Still, they are making investments and talking to regulators about developing an updated
version of their mRNA vaccine or a booster shot, if needed.
For the study, scientists from the companies and the University of Texas Medical Branch
(UTMB) developed an engineered virus that contained the same mutations carried on the spike
portion of the highly contagious coronavirus variant first discovered in South Africa, known as
B.1.351. The spike, used by the virus to enter human cells, is the primary target of many
COVID-19 vaccines.
Researchers tested the engineered virus against blood taken from people who had been given
the vaccine, and found a two- thirds reduction in the level of neutralizing antibodies compared
with its effect on the most common version of the virus prevalent in U.S. trials.
Their findings were published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).
Because there is no established benchmark yet to determine what level of antibodies are
needed to protect against the virus, it is unclear whether that two-thirds reduction will
render the vaccine ineffective against the variant spreading around the world.
However, UTMB professor and study co-author Pei-Yong Shi said he believes the Pfizer vaccine
will likely be protective against the variant.
“We don’t know what the minimum neutralizing number
is. We don’t have that cutoff line,†he said, adding that he
suspects the immune response observed is likely to be significantly above where it needs to be
to provide protection.
That is because in clinical trials, both the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and a similar shot from
Moderna Inc conferred some protection after a single dose with an antibody response lower than
the reduced levels caused by the South African variant in the laboratory study.
Even if the concerning variant significantly reduces effectiveness, the vaccine should still
help protect against severe disease and death, he noted. Health experts have said that is the
most important factor in keeping stretched healthcare systems from becoming overwhelmed.
More work is needed to understand whether the vaccine works against the South African
variant, Shi said, including clinical trials and the development of correlates of protection -
the benchmarks to determine what antibody levels are protective.
Pfizer and BioNTech said they were doing similar lab work to understand whether their
vaccine is effective against another variant first found in Brazil.
Moderna published a correspondence in NEJM on Wednesday with similar data previously
disclosed elsewhere that showed a sixfold drop antibody levels versus the South African
variant.
Moderna also said the actual efficacy of its vaccine against the South African variant is
yet to be determined. The company has previously said it believes the vaccine will work against
the variant.
The Pfizer vaccine was able to neutralize a coronavirus variant first identified in Brazil
in a new lab study, a positive sign for the vaccine's effectiveness.
...
The study also found strong neutralization of the B.1.1.7 variant, first identified in the
U.K., though that was already expected.
... The study authors cautioned that their results are based on a study in a lab and must
ultimately be validated by real-world evidence.
The coronavirus variant discovered in South Africa can “break
through†Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine to some extent, a
study in Israel found.
The South African coronavirus variant managed to penetrate the protection offered by two
doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine to some degree, though it remains unclear just how much
efficacy is lost, it said.
... ... ...
The research, released on Saturday, compared nearly 400 people who tested positive for
COVID-19 two weeks or more after they received one or two doses of the vaccine, against the
same number of unvaccinated patients with the disease.
It matched age and gender, among other characteristics.
The South African variant, B.1.351, was found to make up about 1 percent of all the
COVID-19 cases across all the people studied, according to the study by Tel Aviv University and
Israel’s largest healthcare provider, Clalit. But among patients who had
received two doses of the vaccine, the variant’s prevalence rate was eight
times higher than those unvaccinated â€" 5.4 percent versus 0.7 percent.
This suggests the vaccine is less effective against the South African variant, compared with
the original coronavirus and a variant first identified in Britain that has come to comprise
nearly all COVID-19 cases in Israel, the researchers said.
“ We found a disproportionately higher rate of the South African
variant among people vaccinated with a second dose, compared with the unvaccinated group. This
means that the South African variant is able, to some extent, to break through the
vaccine’s protection,†said Tel Aviv
University’s Adi Stern who led the study.
However, the researchers cautioned that the study only had a small sample size of people
infected with the South African variant because of its rarity in Israel.
They also said the research was not intended to deduce overall vaccine effectiveness against
any variant, since it only looked at people who had already tested positive for COVID-19, not
at overall infection rates.
Pfizer and BioNTech could not be immediately reached for comment outside business hours.
... ... ...
Almost 53 percent of Israel’s 9.3 million population has received both
doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
Israel has largely reopened its economy in recent weeks as the pandemic appeared to recede,
with infection rates, severe illness and hospitalisations dropping sharply.
About one-third of Israelis are below the age of 16, which means they are still not eligible
for the shot.
March 9, 2021 -- The Pfizer/ and Moderna vaccines
don’t work as well against the coronavirus variant first discovered in South
Africa as they do against the dominant virus strain first seen in United Kingdom, a new study
says.
In the study, 10 blood samples were taken from people who received the Pfizer vaccine, 28
days after the second dose, and 12 samples from those who received the Moderna vaccine , 43 days after the
second dose, Business Insider reported, citing a study published in Nature .
The goal was to find out how well the blood sample antibodies
“neutralized†the original coronavirus, the variant from South
Africa (called B.1.351), and the variant found in the U.K. (B.1.1.7).
The key finding: The percentage of positive antibodies that neutralized the South African
variant was 12.4 fold lower for the Moderna vaccine than against the original coronavirus and
10.3 fold lower for the Pfizer vaccine
, the study says.
The researchers found that the two vaccines still appear to work well against the variant
first found in the U.K.
“Overall, the neutralizing activity against B.1.1.7 was essentially
unchanged, but significantly lower against B.1.351,†the study said.
Both Pfizer and Moderna have previously said their vaccines work better against the U.K.
variant than the South African variant.
The new lab study differed from previous studies because it used real forms of the variant
taken from people who’d been infected with the virus. Earlier studies used
manufactured forms of the South African variant and showed a higher level of effectiveness for
the vaccines.
The variant first detected last fall in South Africa has now been reported in several
countries. The CDC says that in the United States, 81 cases have been found in 20 states.
More than 3,000 cases of the UK variant have been found in the U.S., with every state except
Vermont, South Dakota, and Oklahoma reporting cases as of March 8, the CDC says. Health experts
say it may soon become the dominant coronavirus strain in the country.
Researchers acknowledged the sample size was small and it’s not fully
known how the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines will work in real life against the South African
variant. Both companies have said they’re developing booster shots targeted
for the South African variant.
"I Just Wanted A Little More Time" - Texas Nurse Was Fired For Refusing COVID Vaccine
BY TYLER DURDEN SUNDAY, MAY 02, 2021 - 02:55 PM
Many hospital systems around the country have
been surprised by the number of nurses who have passed on being vaccinated (either because
they had already been infected, or simply because they didn't want the vaccine). But as federal
public health officials crank up the pressure on Americans to submit to the vaccine as unused
jabs pile up, one nurse in Texas complained to local journalists that she was fired simply
because she refused the jab.
Nurse Michelle Fuentes told Dallas-Fort
Worth CBS affiliate KRIV-TV that she had been terminated after working for 10 years at
Houston Methodist Hospital, allegedly because she refused to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.
"I knew that the date was looming over my head of me to get the vaccine and we were
constantly being pressured and pressured," Michelle Fuentes said.
According to their report, at the start of April, Houston Methodist announced it would
require all employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine by June 7. However, the hospital system asked
employees who refused to get the vaccine to submit documentation for consideration for a
medical or religious exemption. The paperwork was reportedly due by May 3.
Michelle Fuentes
Fuentes said she told her employer that she needed more time to make a decision to do more
"research" on her own, but instead wound up turning in her two weeks notice.
"I just needed a little bit more time and little bit more research to be
done,†Fuentes said.
A spokesperson for the hospital system said 90% of its employees are vaccinated, and that
only two have resigned so far. Fuentes said when she didn't agree to stay quiet about the
reason for her departure, she was not allowed to complete her final two weeks and was
immediately escorted out of the hospital by security.
Finally, Fuentes told the press that she wants to wait until all clinical trials are
completed before she decides to get the vaccine or not. She stressed she is not against
vaccines and gets the flu vaccine every year. Fuentes even volunteered to work in the COVID
unit. Despite reassurances that vaccines are safe, and that their vast public benefit outweighs
any risks, recent concerns about vaccine side effects have included
incidents of rare but deadly cerebral blood clots , and also an impact on the menstrual
cycle.
Trials of the
Novavax , Janssen/Johnson & Johnson , and AstraZeneca
vaccines in South Africa, where the B.1.351 variant of concern represents virtually all of the
circulating SARS-CoV-2, seemed to justify those concerns. The South Africa trials found lower
vaccine efficacy compared with trials in other countries where B.1.351
wasn’t dominant.
The pivotal trials of the
Pfizer-BioNTech and
Moderna vaccines, the first 2 authorized by the FDA, were conducted mainly in the US before
any cases of infection by B.1.351 or other variants of concern had been detected in the
country.
Much of the current data on the messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines’ efficacy
against SARS-CoV-2 variants has come from laboratory studies in which researchers exposed serum
samples from immunized individuals to genetically engineered versions of concerning variants
and then measured neutralizing antibody titers. Such studies repeatedly have shown the vaccines
elicit lower levels of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variants than against older,
more common isolates.
For example, in a February 17 letter to the editor in The New England Journal
of Medicine , scientists described testing serum samples from individuals immunized with 2
doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine against recombinant viruses containing some or all of the
spike protein mutations found in the B.1.351 variant. Neutralization of B.1.351 was
approximately two-thirds lower than that of USA-WA1/2020, an early SARS-CoV-2 isolate.
In another letter
published the same day, researchers reported measuring neutralizing antibody activity in serum
samples from participants in the phase 1 trial of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. One week after
the participants received the second dose, neutralizing antibody titers induced by a
recombinant virus bearing the B.1.351 spike protein were 6-fold lower than those induced by a
recombinant virus bearing the original Wuhan-Hu-1 spike protein.
However, that still might be sufficient to protect against COVID-19, or at least severe
COVID-19.
“Fortunately, neutralization titers induced by vaccination are high, and
even with a 6-fold decrease, serum can still effectively neutralize the virus,â€
Fauci and 2 NIAID colleagues wrote in a JAMA ï"¿ editorial posted February 11. And, they noted,
lower vaccine efficacy in the South African clinical trials could be related to geographic or
population differences.
... ... ...
Without immune correlates of protection, only real-world experience can provide answers
about COVID-19 vaccines’ efficacy against illness and death from SARS-CoV-2
variants.
“For right now, you know that a line is crossed if you see people fully
immunized with the vaccines [who], nonetheless, when infected with the variants, are being
hospitalized,†Offit said at a February 4 COVID-19 Vaccine Analysis Team press briefing.
At first glance, findings from a phase 2 trial of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine in South
Africa seemed quite discouraging, spurring that country to
suspend its planned rollout of the vaccine. The trial found that the vaccine did not
protect against mild to moderate COVID-19 caused by the B.1.351 variant. The findings , posted February 12, had not
been peer reviewed.
However, “the study was not really designed to determine whether the
vaccine could protect against severe COVID or not,†principal investigator Shabir
Madhi, MBBCH, PhD, a vaccinologist at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, and
cofounder and codirector of the African Leadership Initiative for Vaccinology Expertise, said
in a February 7 briefing about the results. Participants, who
numbered only about 2000, were youngâ€"average age 31 yearsâ€"and
healthy, so their risk of severe disease was low, vaccinated or not, explained Madhi, who also
led Novavax’s vaccine trial in South Africa.
Novavax
and
Janssen conducted larger trials in South Africa than Oxford and AstraZeneca. Although both
of their vaccines had lower efficacy rates in South Africa than in trials in other countries,
vaccinated participants who received the Janssen vaccine were still less likely to require
hospitalization for COVID-19 than those who received placebo shots, and Madhi recently
told Nature he
expected that to be the case with the Novavax vaccine as well.
.. ... ...
Pfizer and BioNTech
announced February 25 that they had begun evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of a
third dose of their vaccine to see whether it would boost immunity to SARS-CoV-2 variants. In
addition, the companies said they are discussing with regulatory agencies, including the FDA, a
clinical study to evaluate a modified vaccine based on the B.1.351 variant.
“The companies are hoping to pursue the validation of future modified mRNA
vaccines with a regulatory pathway similar to what is currently in place for flu
vaccines,†according to a press release.
Moderna
announced February 24 that it had shipped a booster vaccine candidate based on B.1.351 to
the NIAID for a phase 1 trial. And Novavax, whose first-generation vaccine
hasn’t been authorized yet in the US, announced January 28 it was working on
developing a booster, a combination bivalent vaccine, or both to protect against variants. The
company said it expected to begin clinical trials in the second quarter of 2021.
Modifying vaccines to target variants isn’t difficult. For example, with
Pfizer-BioNTech’s and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines,
“it’s very convenient, because, basically, all you do is
change a computer program and the synthetic for the synthesizing portion of this and you can
change the vaccine,†Peter Marks, MD, PhD, director of the FDA’s
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which regulates vaccines, said during a January
29 American Medical Association (AMA)
webinar . “But the question is, what do we need from the FDA perspective
to feel comfortable having that deployed.â€
On February 22, the FDA updated its nonbinding
guidance for vaccine manufacturers to include information about what the agency would like
to see when evaluating vaccines that have been modified to address emerging SARS-CoV-2
variants.
The updated guidance advises manufacturers to conduct studies comparing neutralizing
antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 induced by the modified vaccine with those induced by the
prototype vaccine. One such study should use serum samples from people who
hadn’t been previously vaccinated or infected with SARS-CoV-2, while another
study would use serum samples from people previously vaccinated with a prototype vaccine who
then received an experimental booster against variants of concern.
The Hard Part
Modifying COVID-19 vaccines would probably be the most straightforward step in dealing with
SARS-CoV-2 variants. “For vaccines and biologics, it’s
the manufacturing process that defines the product, and the manufacturing process
isn’t changing,†Baylor explained.
More challenging will be deciding when and how to deploy COVID-19 vaccines 2.0. The
influenza model, in which surveillance during the Southern Hemisphere’s flu
season identifies the circulating strains to target with vaccines in the Northern
Hemisphere’s coming flu season, doesn’t work for
SARS-CoV-2, Baylor noted.
“The challenge for COVID is what variant do you pick†when
modifying a vaccine, he said. “How often does it change?â€
Once that’s decided, would people who’ve already
received the original COVID-19 vaccine get a booster shot to protect against variants of
concern while vaccine-naive individuals receive the original vaccine and the booster rolled
into one? “Do we have the capacity to make both?†Baylor
asked.
Plus, the need to deploy vaccines or boosters targeting new variants would complicate the
already rocky rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, in part due to inexperience in vaccinating US
adults en masse.
“How do we deploy this?†Baylor said of next-generation
COVID-19 vaccines. “When do we pull the trigger to actually do
this?â€
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been raging for over a year, creating global detrimental impact. The BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine has demonstrated
high protection levels, yet apprehension exists that several variants of concerns (VOCs) can surmount the immune defenses generated
by the vaccines. Neutralization assays have revealed some reduction in neutralization of VOCs B.1.1.7 and B.1.351, but the relevance
of these assays in real life remains unclear. We performed a case-control study that examined the distribution of SARS-CoV-2 variants
observed in infections of vaccinated individuals (“breakthrough casesâ€) and matched infections of unvaccinated individuals. We
hypothesized that if there is lower vaccine effectiveness against one of the VOCs, its proportion among the breakthrough cases should
be higher than among unvaccinated cases. Our results show that vaccinees that tested positive at least a week after the second dose
were indeed disproportionally infected with B.1.351, as compared with unvaccinated individuals (odds ratio of 8:1). Those who tested
positive between two weeks after the first dose and one week after the second dose, were disproportionally infected by B.1.1.7 (odds
ratio of 26:10), suggesting reduced vaccine effectiveness against both VOCs at particular time windows following vaccination. Nevertheless,
the B.1.351 incidence in Israel to-date remains low and vaccine effectiveness remains high among those fully vaccinated. These results
overall suggest that vaccine breakthrough infection may be more frequent with both VOCs, yet a combination of mass-vaccination with
two doses coupled with non-pharmaceutical interventions control and contain their spread. Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by an ERC starting grant 852223 (RNAVirFitness), by an Israeli Science Foundation grant 3963/19, and
by kind donations from the Millner and AppFlyer foundations. This study was supported in part by fellowships to TK, NH, and SH from
the Edmond J. Safra Center for Bioinformatics at Tel-Aviv University.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been
obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the CHS institutional review board (IRB #0016-21-COM2) and was exempt from the requirement for informed
consent. The study was further approved by the Tel-Aviv University ethics committee (0002706-1).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved
registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial
registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial
ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s)
and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
"... What remains to be seen is how long the mRNA stays viable, how it is down regulated and let us hope it is stable and not prone to telling the cell about something else to build. ..."
45North1 6 hours ago (Edited) 45North1 6 hours ago (Edited)
mRNA based vaccines are mis-named, they are a gene therapy, triggering the manufacture of
antigens to work on virus.
What remains to be seen is how long the mRNA stays viable, how it is down regulated and let
us hope it is stable and not prone to telling the cell about something else to build.
They could push this as an annual thing.
I would prefer the Sputnik V which is made to make the immune system do the work, and maybe
retain that memory for years (?).
It's true that most common cold coronaviruses only provide immunity for a year or two.
HOWEVER, there is significant cross-immunity between coronaviruses.
Meaning that if we can just get the PTB to drop this ridiculous charade of mandated masks,
blanket testing and partial shutdowns of everything from restaurants to government offices to
baseball games, we can get back to a NORMAL situation in which everyone gets exposed to some
kind of coronavirus disease several times a year, expanding and extending the cross-immunities
that made eighty percent of the population IMMUNE to Covid-19 when it first arrived.
Before this hysteria hit, medical science had begun to take its first baby-steps towards
admitting that humans are biological creatures that exist in a biological environment, in which
our relationships with many microbes are not merely harmless, but essential . To cut ourselves
off from the living world is to die. Sterility kills. Isolating ourselves from all potential
sources of infection inevitably destroys our ability to resist infection when we are finally
exposed . The last thing we need is a world of germ-free "bubbles". If we are to lead healthy
and wholesome lives, we need to reject the fundamental principles on which the worldwide
covid-19 response has been based. Look at Africa. They did nothing. They are healthy and
happy.
Bay Area Guy 4 hours ago remove link
These things are described as vaccines, but they aren’t. The not so fine
print says that they supposedly prevent recipients from getting serious cases of CoVid. (Tell
that to the 74 who died.). That shots will be needed every year was a foregone conclusion.
Anyone who thought differently was naive. There are enormous dollars to be made with a virus
that’s endemic. And with countries jumping on the vaccine passport
bandwagon, not just for travel, but for doing everyday things, Big Pharma is going to rake in
trillions from this.
Some scientists have used the term vaccine resistance to describe the
reduced efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines against some variants. But that confuses matters by
suggesting vaccines are analogous to antibiotics, University of Washington biologist Carl
Bergstrom, PhD, who studies evolution and medicine, said in an interview. "The key point for me
is that in antibiotic resistance, the changes happen in people who are on antibiotics," he
said, while antigenic escape by SARS-CoV-2 occurs in people who haven't been
vaccinated.
When viruses replicate, Penn State biologist David Kennedy, PhD, explained in an interview,
the cycle is like a classic childhood game. "Viruses copying themselves, it's almost like a
game of telephone," said Kennedy, who studies pathogen evolution. "They repeat what they
thought they heard, so they make mistakes all the time."
Despite those many mistakes, Kennedy noted, he's unaware of any vaccines against viral
diseases other than seasonal flu that have had to be updated because of changes in the virus.
Hepatitis B virus developed " vaccine escape mutations ," but they posed
no health risks, he said.
It can only be a coincidence that Emer Cooke, who was appointed head of the EMA in November 2020, was head of the European Federation
of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), a European lobbying association for the pharmaceutical industry, in which
are among others AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer members. She worked there until 1998 and then switched directly to
the EU.
(I see hungarytoday.hu has already censored the government table out of the article.)
Immediately, a scandal ensued, with herds of righteous grant-eaters explaining why the government stats are not to be believed.
All in all, funny slapstick, I like it.
In a basic sense, there are two types of pressures that lead to mutations that allow the
virus to proliferate at a rate greater than its predecessor. Sometimes these advantages lead to
the emergence of a new dominant strain throughout a population.
The first one is the pressure to infect. A mutation occurs that allows the virus to more
reliably enter a host cell. In other words, the outer protein structure has changed to better
attach and go through a channel in the cell membrane. This type of mutation may be the
predominant mechanism that allows certain strains to spread more easily.
The second is the pressure to evade. A mutation occurs that allows the virus to dodge the
host immune system, a person’s own immune system fighting the virus. This
type of mutation gives rise to strains that can make the person more sick and a vaccine less
effective.
Mutations in the new coronavirus could reduce the effectiveness of vaccines against it. But
vaccines themselves can also drive viral mutations, depending on exactly how the shots are
deployed and how effective they are.
So far, vaccines still appear to work against the new strains â€" though
scientists are warily watching a variant that first appeared in South Africa since it seems to
reduce vaccine effectiveness. And evolution isn't standing still, so scientists realize they
may need to update vaccines to keep them working reliably.
What's going on here is somewhat similar to a larger, and more concerning problem in
medicine: Many bacteria have gradually evolved the ability to survive even when walloped by a
large dose of antibiotics. That problem has created new strains of deadly, drug-resistant
germs.
Viruses also evolve, but the process is different and the result is usually much less severe
when it comes to vaccines. When a virus such as the coronavirus infects someone, that
person's immune system mounts a response. Viruses produce slight variations when they multiply,
and if any of these variants can evade a person's immune response, those variants are more
likely to survive and possibly to spread to other people
Snyder is not even close to understanding what is going on, but I will give him credit for
at least noticing how insane the mRNA experiments are - and bringing up money and big
pharma.
Here is a well-documented dose of reality for anyone interested in the truth -
"... Remember how Oxford-AZ was going to offer the vaccine pro-bono and Billy Baphomet said they had to charge for it? Pfizer (with a big Black Rock stake) has tried repeatedly to take over AZ (similar BlackRock stake of around 8%) but has been rebuffed. I wouldn't be surprised if AZ is about to be humbled. ..."
"... Oligarchical collectivism is equally happy with fascism, communism or any other variety of state corporatism. Is this why the socialist/communist left has disappeared (it's redundant)? ..."
This is gearing up to a money circus indeed. From the Graud:
"EU starts legal action against AstraZeneca over vaccine shortfalls
Firm says it will 'strongly defend itself' against claim it breached agreement to supply Covid jab"
There will be the usual Left/ Right theatre with interminable wrangling over accusations of incompetence, corruption and a
more responsible system for allocating funds . all over a totally unnecessary and potentially lethal vax for a hyped up flu variant.
Moneycircus , Apr 27, 2021 2:44 PM Reply to
Corarden
Remember how Oxford-AZ was going to offer the vaccine pro-bono and Billy Baphomet said they had to charge for it? Pfizer
(with a big Black Rock stake) has tried repeatedly to take over AZ (similar BlackRock stake of around 8%) but has been
rebuffed. I wouldn't be surprised if AZ is about to be humbled.
There is no Department of Commerce, Securities and Exchange Commission, or Competition Commission -- effectively they've disappeared.
Monopoly is the order of the day.
Oligarchical collectivism is equally happy with fascism, communism or any other variety of state corporatism. Is this why
the socialist/communist left has disappeared (it's redundant)?
The recreation of IG Farben (including Bayer-Monsanto) which was a longstanding Rockefeller partner the green light to Amazon
dominance in retail the inevitably centralized nature of subsidized "Green" energy the social credit system implied by replacing
money with digital store credits the attempt to abolish individual self-determination in the interest of "keeping everybody safe"
the intention is clear as day.
TEL AVIV: The Pfizer vaccine is effective against the Indian variant of Covid-19, albeit at
a reduced efficacy level, Israeli authorities have said, say reports.
Israel, which has been touted as one of the world’s vaccination success
stories due to its sweeping inoculation campaign against Covid-19, has identified eight cases
of the so-called “Indian†variant of the novel coronavirus, just
days after the country ended its outdoors mask mandate
... ... ...
The Indian variant has been identified in both the UK and in Ireland.
“The impression is that the Pfizer vaccine has efficacy against it,
albeit a reduced efficacy,†the Israel’s health ministry
director-general, Hezi Levy, told Kan public radio, saying the number of cases of the variant
in Israel now stood at eight.
Israel has already vaccinated 81 per cent of its 9.3 million population, all residents above
the age of 16.
Double mutant variant
Indian authorities had in January detected a “double mutantâ€
variant of the virus, with changes to the SARS-nCov-2 virus spike protein similar to those in
both UK and South Africa at once.
While the UK variant was known to be more infectious, the South African variant was believed
to be deadlier â€" and triggered reduced efficacy rates in existing vaccines.
AstraZeneca had announced plans to develop a modification to its vaccine to better tackle
the threat of new variants, aiming to prepare this by the end of the year.
Pfizer, meanwhile, has said those who had already taken its vaccine may require a third dose
within 6-12 months, as their immunity to the virus starts to wane.
The coronavirus variant discovered in South Africa can “break
through†Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine to some extent, a
study in Israel found.
The South African coronavirus variant managed to penetrate the protection offered by two
doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine to some degree, though it remains unclear just how much
efficacy is lost, it said.
... ... ...
The research, released on Saturday, compared nearly 400 people who tested positive for
COVID-19 two weeks or more after they received one or two doses of the vaccine, against the
same number of unvaccinated patients with the disease.
It matched age and gender, among other characteristics.
The South African variant, B.1.351, was found to make up about 1 percent of all the
COVID-19 cases across all the people studied, according to the study by Tel Aviv University and
Israel’s largest healthcare provider, Clalit. But among patients who had
received two doses of the vaccine, the variant’s prevalence rate was eight
times higher than those unvaccinated â€" 5.4 percent versus 0.7 percent.
This suggests the vaccine is less effective against the South African variant, compared with
the original coronavirus and a variant first identified in Britain that has come to comprise
nearly all COVID-19 cases in Israel, the researchers said.
“ We found a disproportionately higher rate of the South African
variant among people vaccinated with a second dose, compared with the unvaccinated group. This
means that the South African variant is able, to some extent, to break through the
vaccine’s protection,†said Tel Aviv
University’s Adi Stern who led the study.
However, the researchers cautioned that the study only had a small sample size of people
infected with the South African variant because of its rarity in Israel.
They also said the research was not intended to deduce overall vaccine effectiveness against
any variant, since it only looked at people who had already tested positive for COVID-19, not
at overall infection rates.
Pfizer and BioNTech could not be immediately reached for comment outside business hours.
... ... ...
Almost 53 percent of Israel’s 9.3 million population has received both
doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
Israel has largely reopened its economy in recent weeks as the pandemic appeared to recede,
with infection rates, severe illness and hospitalisations dropping sharply.
About one-third of Israelis are below the age of 16, which means they are still not eligible
for the shot.
Trials of the
Novavax , Janssen/Johnson & Johnson , and AstraZeneca
vaccines in South Africa, where the B.1.351 variant of concern represents virtually all of the
circulating SARS-CoV-2, seemed to justify those concerns. The South Africa trials found lower
vaccine efficacy compared with trials in other countries where B.1.351
wasn’t dominant.
The pivotal trials of the
Pfizer-BioNTech and
Moderna vaccines, the first 2 authorized by the FDA, were conducted mainly in the US before
any cases of infection by B.1.351 or other variants of concern had been detected in the
country.
Much of the current data on the messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines’ efficacy
against SARS-CoV-2 variants has come from laboratory studies in which researchers exposed serum
samples from immunized individuals to genetically engineered versions of concerning variants
and then measured neutralizing antibody titers. Such studies repeatedly have shown the vaccines
elicit lower levels of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variants than against older,
more common isolates.
For example, in a February 17 letter to the editor in The New England Journal
of Medicine , scientists described testing serum samples from individuals immunized with 2
doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine against recombinant viruses containing some or all of the
spike protein mutations found in the B.1.351 variant. Neutralization of B.1.351 was
approximately two-thirds lower than that of USA-WA1/2020, an early SARS-CoV-2 isolate.
In another letter
published the same day, researchers reported measuring neutralizing antibody activity in serum
samples from participants in the phase 1 trial of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. One week after
the participants received the second dose, neutralizing antibody titers induced by a
recombinant virus bearing the B.1.351 spike protein were 6-fold lower than those induced by a
recombinant virus bearing the original Wuhan-Hu-1 spike protein.
However, that still might be sufficient to protect against COVID-19, or at least severe
COVID-19.
“Fortunately, neutralization titers induced by vaccination are high, and
even with a 6-fold decrease, serum can still effectively neutralize the virus,â€
Fauci and 2 NIAID colleagues wrote in a JAMA ï"¿ editorial posted February 11. And, they noted,
lower vaccine efficacy in the South African clinical trials could be related to geographic or
population differences.
... ... ...
Without immune correlates of protection, only real-world experience can provide answers
about COVID-19 vaccines’ efficacy against illness and death from SARS-CoV-2
variants.
“For right now, you know that a line is crossed if you see people fully
immunized with the vaccines [who], nonetheless, when infected with the variants, are being
hospitalized,†Offit said at a February 4 COVID-19 Vaccine Analysis Team press briefing.
At first glance, findings from a phase 2 trial of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine in South
Africa seemed quite discouraging, spurring that country to
suspend its planned rollout of the vaccine. The trial found that the vaccine did not
protect against mild to moderate COVID-19 caused by the B.1.351 variant. The findings , posted February 12, had not
been peer reviewed.
However, “the study was not really designed to determine whether the
vaccine could protect against severe COVID or not,†principal investigator Shabir
Madhi, MBBCH, PhD, a vaccinologist at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, and
cofounder and codirector of the African Leadership Initiative for Vaccinology Expertise, said
in a February 7 briefing about the results. Participants, who
numbered only about 2000, were youngâ€"average age 31 yearsâ€"and
healthy, so their risk of severe disease was low, vaccinated or not, explained Madhi, who also
led Novavax’s vaccine trial in South Africa.
Novavax
and
Janssen conducted larger trials in South Africa than Oxford and AstraZeneca. Although both
of their vaccines had lower efficacy rates in South Africa than in trials in other countries,
vaccinated participants who received the Janssen vaccine were still less likely to require
hospitalization for COVID-19 than those who received placebo shots, and Madhi recently
told Nature he
expected that to be the case with the Novavax vaccine as well.
.. ... ...
Pfizer and BioNTech
announced February 25 that they had begun evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of a
third dose of their vaccine to see whether it would boost immunity to SARS-CoV-2 variants. In
addition, the companies said they are discussing with regulatory agencies, including the FDA, a
clinical study to evaluate a modified vaccine based on the B.1.351 variant.
“The companies are hoping to pursue the validation of future modified mRNA
vaccines with a regulatory pathway similar to what is currently in place for flu
vaccines,†according to a press release.
Moderna
announced February 24 that it had shipped a booster vaccine candidate based on B.1.351 to
the NIAID for a phase 1 trial. And Novavax, whose first-generation vaccine
hasn’t been authorized yet in the US, announced January 28 it was working on
developing a booster, a combination bivalent vaccine, or both to protect against variants. The
company said it expected to begin clinical trials in the second quarter of 2021.
Modifying vaccines to target variants isn’t difficult. For example, with
Pfizer-BioNTech’s and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines,
“it’s very convenient, because, basically, all you do is
change a computer program and the synthetic for the synthesizing portion of this and you can
change the vaccine,†Peter Marks, MD, PhD, director of the FDA’s
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which regulates vaccines, said during a January
29 American Medical Association (AMA)
webinar . “But the question is, what do we need from the FDA perspective
to feel comfortable having that deployed.â€
On February 22, the FDA updated its nonbinding
guidance for vaccine manufacturers to include information about what the agency would like
to see when evaluating vaccines that have been modified to address emerging SARS-CoV-2
variants.
The updated guidance advises manufacturers to conduct studies comparing neutralizing
antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 induced by the modified vaccine with those induced by the
prototype vaccine. One such study should use serum samples from people who
hadn’t been previously vaccinated or infected with SARS-CoV-2, while another
study would use serum samples from people previously vaccinated with a prototype vaccine who
then received an experimental booster against variants of concern.
The Hard Part
Modifying COVID-19 vaccines would probably be the most straightforward step in dealing with
SARS-CoV-2 variants. “For vaccines and biologics, it’s
the manufacturing process that defines the product, and the manufacturing process
isn’t changing,†Baylor explained.
More challenging will be deciding when and how to deploy COVID-19 vaccines 2.0. The
influenza model, in which surveillance during the Southern Hemisphere’s flu
season identifies the circulating strains to target with vaccines in the Northern
Hemisphere’s coming flu season, doesn’t work for
SARS-CoV-2, Baylor noted.
“The challenge for COVID is what variant do you pick†when
modifying a vaccine, he said. “How often does it change?â€
Once that’s decided, would people who’ve already
received the original COVID-19 vaccine get a booster shot to protect against variants of
concern while vaccine-naive individuals receive the original vaccine and the booster rolled
into one? “Do we have the capacity to make both?†Baylor
asked.
Plus, the need to deploy vaccines or boosters targeting new variants would complicate the
already rocky rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, in part due to inexperience in vaccinating US
adults en masse.
“How do we deploy this?†Baylor said of next-generation
COVID-19 vaccines. “When do we pull the trigger to actually do
this?â€
IF vaccines worked it shouldn't matter to a vaccinated person whether you have a
vaccination or not.
The entire "what about the poor wretch that is so ill he cannot survive a vaccine" is just
virtue signaling tripe. FIRST no person has a claim on your life. Period, the only exception
being your own children. And even that has finite limits.
The more truthful complaint is "I KNOW it is a scientific fact that flu vaccines are at
BEST 70%, and often closer to 40% effective. So I am afraid of my own shadow." This exposes a
risk aversion that has long since crossed over into the mental illness of full on
uncontrollable paranoia.
Let the person that is so sick they cannot be around other people self isolate. Let the
person that is so terrified they cannot function in society self isolate too!
The fake outrage and virtue signaling sociopaths have well and truly outlived the patience
of everyone on the planet that doesn't require psychotropic drugs to make it through the
day.
"... " Pfizer and Moderna are both running clinical trials for their experimental mRNA shots on 11,000 children as young as six months old . Both trials began in mid-March. Moderna calls its study KidCOVE . Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca are also using children as guinea pigs . These companies have no moral fiber and are driven solely by profits. That is a given. But the parents are something beyond surreal." ..."
No shit. Yesterday, as I was driving from my hideaway up on the hill in the woods, I
caught a glimpse of a group of preschoolers coming out of the forest. I thought that they had
facemasks on, which I found preposterous, so I stopped, checked the rear-view mirror and
waited for them to come closer. Sure enough, they did have the fucking things on. Mind you,
it was a nice sunny day, the air fresh, the perfect April weather.
I went full postal and yelled at the teachers with just about all my might. They didn't
seem to give a shit. Maybe they're too afraid, like of "losing their job". Damn, in
retrospect, I should have addressed the kids and told them to tell the teachers to wipe their
ass with the stupid masks.
This is truly horrible, and I know what I'm talking about. I started school in 1970, a
short while after the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968. At a time when all hope was
crushed, when the purges started. When people were afraid of "losing their job", if not
worse. The teachers took out their fear, or perhaps anger, on us kids. Save for some, they
came hard on us children and passed on us the oppression inflicted on them by the regime. I,
as other kids, saw them as enemies and fought against them throughout my younger years. I was
only able to come out of that in university (on the other side of the world).
What the teachers are doing today is much worse. It's not just mindfuck, it physical
terror. They're taking party in asphyxiating the kids.
Very interesting observation born from real experience Jacques – that the oppressed
adults took it out on the children, focused it through their own lens onto their helpless
captives in a mirror image of the larger version of the cruelty and dehumanising process.
Horrible. Undeniable based on current events.
" Pfizer and Moderna are both running clinical trials for their experimental mRNA
shots
on 11,000 children as young as six months old . Both trials began in mid-March. Moderna
calls its study KidCOVE . Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca are also
using children as guinea pigs . These companies have no moral fiber and are driven solely
by profits. That is a given. But the parents are something beyond surreal."
" the children are not only endangered in their mental, physical and spiritual well-being
by the obligation to wear face masks during school hours and to keep their distance from each
other and from other persons, but, in addition, they are already being harmed. At the same
time, this violates numerous rights of the children and their parents under the law, the
constitution and international conventions. This applies in particular to the right to free
development of the personality and to physical integrity from Article 2 of the Basic Law as
well as to the right from Article 6 of the Basic Law to upbringing and care by the parents
(also with regard to measures for preventive health care and 'objects' to be carried by
children) "
As Reiner Fuellmich stated recently – 'They are coming after the children.'
"... If anyone had listened to Dr. Fauci or any of the mainstream press, they would think the vaccine is totally 100% safe. ..."
"... the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, VAERS, would disagree with Dr. Fauci and the mainstream media. ..."
"... According to the most recent data from VAERS found on the CDC website , 3.018 people have been reported died after taking the COVID-19 Vaccine. These deaths constitute 64.45% of all vaccine deaths. So, not only have the COVID vaccines killed 3,018 people, but 6 in 10 recorded deaths from vaccines were from a COVID vaccine alone ..."
"... ABC News reports that 189.4 million flu vaccines were distributed in the 2020-2021 season. Of that, VAERS reports a grand total of 598 people have died from the vaccines. ..."
If anyone had listened to Dr. Fauci or any of the mainstream press, they would think the vaccine is totally 100% safe. They
would think that anyone who says differently is a conspiracy theorist with enough tinfoil to build a radio antenna that would
reach the Andromeda Galaxy.
However, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, VAERS, would disagree with Dr. Fauci and the
mainstream media.
According to the most recent data from VAERS found on the CDC website
, 3.018 people have been reported died after taking the COVID-19 Vaccine. These deaths constitute 64.45% of all vaccine deaths.
So, not only have the COVID vaccines killed 3,018 people, but 6 in 10 recorded deaths from vaccines were from a COVID vaccine
alone:
Breaking this down by data, ABC News reports that
189.4
million flu vaccines were distributed in the 2020-2021 season. Of that, VAERS reports a grand total of 598 people have died
from the vaccines.
So, considering more people have taken the Flu vaccine than a COVID vaccine, and far fewer people have died with a flu vaccine
than a COVID vaccine, it is not at all accurate to suggest the Coronavirus vaccine is as safe as a flu vaccine. The VAERS reporting
system says completely differently.
Granted, just because a report goes into VAERS, it doesn't mean that it has been fully investigated and confirmed, but the
CDC's webpage for VAERS says that it is a useful tool to provide
an early warning of safety problems with vaccines:
The strengths of VAERS are that it is national in scope and can quickly provide an early warning of a safety problem with a
vaccine. As part of CDC and FDA's multi-system approach to post-licensure vaccine safety monitoring, VAERS is designed to rapidly
detect unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse events, also known as "safety signals."
If a safety signal is found in VAERS,
further studies can be done in safety systems such as the CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) or the Clinical Immunization
Safety Assessment (CISA) project.
These systems do not have the same limitations as VAERS, and can better assess health risks
and possible connections between adverse events and a vaccine.
This is particularly alarming to say the least, since the COVID vaccine alone has been responsible for
120,000 adverse reactions in general, it would be a good idea to discuss getting the vaccine with your doctor to see if it
is the right choice for you."
QuiteShocking 5 hours ago remove link
We've probably already have herd immunity in many places..
Pfizer and BioNTech said they have asked European regulators to authorise their Covid-19
vaccine for those aged 12-15, a move seen as a crucial step towards achieving herd
immunity.
The companies already filed a similar request with US authorities earlier this month. Their
vaccine is currently only approved for use in people aged 16 and over.
In a joint statement released yesterday, Pfizer and BioNTech said they had submitted a
request with the Amsterdam-based European Medicines Agency (EMA) to expand the use of their jab
to include "adolescents 12 to 15 years of age".
Mr Ugur Sahin, co-founder and CEO of Germany's BioNTech, on Thursday said the jab could be
available for those age groups from next month if EU approval is granted.
The move comes after Phase 3 trial data showed the vaccine provided "robust antibody
responses" and was 100 per cent effective in warding off the disease among those aged 12 to 15.
"The vaccine also was generally well tolerated," the statement added.
In an interview with Der Spiegel weekly, Mr Sahin said he expected regulators' evaluation of
the data to take four to six weeks.
If approved, the green light would apply to all 27 European Union member states.
Pfizer and BioNTech added that they also plan to seek authorisations "with other regulatory
authorities worldwide".
No coronavirus vaccines are currently authorised for use on children.
While children and teenagers are less likely to develop severe Covid-19 symptoms, they make
up a large part of the population and inoculating them is considered key to ending the
pandemic.
The prospect of getting older children jabbed before the next school year begins would also
ease the strain on parents who are juggling the demands of homeschooling while keeping up with
jobs.
"It's very important to enable children a return to their normal school lives and allow them
to meet with family and friends," Mr Sahin told Spiegel.
BioNTech and Pfizer are also racing to get their jab approved for younger kids, from six
months upwards.
"In July, the first results for five- to 12-year-olds could be available, and those for
younger children in September," Mr Sahin said.
Ongoing trials so far are "very encouraging", he added, suggesting that "children are very
well protected by the vaccine".
The BioNTech/Pfizer shot is based on mRNA technology and was the first Covid-19 jab to be
approved in the West late last year
The Pfizer
-BioNTech vaccine is currently authorized in the U.S. for people 16 years and older. The
companies have asked U.S. health regulators to authorize the vaccine for people 12 years and
older. Mr. Zients said if the FDA authorizes Pfizer's vaccine for adolescents, the
administration will have "both a robust plan and sufficient supply" to administer those
shots.
Shots from Moderna
Inc. and Johnson &
Johnson are authorized in the U.S. for people 18 years and older. Both companies are
testing their vaccines in adolescents.
Mr. Biden's senior Covid-19 advisers say they are reaching out to pediatricians, citing them
as "an important point of trust" who can help encourage parents to vaccinate their children
once shots are approved. The administration hopes children in high school will be vaccinated
going into the fall school year.
Many school districts are still providing hybrid in-person and remote learning, though some
of the largest districts across the country plan to fully reopen in the fall for in-person
instruction.
Estimates have differed on how much of the population would need to be vaccinated to stop
the virus from circulating, but many health experts are using
70% to 80% as a goal . As of Thursday, 52% of adults in the U.S. had gotten at least one
dose of a vaccine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That proportion
ranged from 72% in New Hampshire to 39% in Mississippi.
Podcaster Joe Rogan has become a target of critics on social media after saying he believes
young and healthy people likely don't need Covid-19 vaccines and even opined that inoculating
children is "crazy."
Rogan quickly began trending on social media on Tuesday after a recent clip from his
podcast, 'The Joe Rogan Experience,' prompted critics to accuse him of spreading Covid-19
disinformation and feeding into vaccine hesitancy.
In fact, Rogan said on his show that he believes getting vaccinated is "safe" for
most people – before he argued that not everyone has to get a jab.
"I think for the most part, it's safe to get vaccinated. I do. But if you're like
21-years-old and you say to me, 'should I get vaccinated?' I'll go no," Rogan said in the
clip, first posted by a journalist for the left-wing Media Matters.
The podcaster went on to argue that a healthy person who exercises regularly, eats well, and
has no health conditions that weaken their immune system likely "don't need to worry about
this."
The group Rogan believes should not be subjected to vaccines at all is children, revealing
his own two kids both got Covid-19 and claiming that in the end, "it was nothing."
Adding that he is not "diminishing" that children have died from the virus, Rogan
blasted people who are pushing for children to be vaccinated when most are far less vulnerable
to the virus than adults.
"You should be vaccinated if you're vulnerable," Rogan said.
Rogan's vaccine opinion has gotten him once again on the firing line against liberal
critics. The former 'Fear Factor' host has become a frequent target since his podcast
exclusively moved to Spotify and quickly became the network's most popular show. He's been
criticized for everything from his views on trans women in sports to his openness to interviews
with controversial figures such as Alex Jones.
Others also criticized Spotify, which has even seen employees protest the hiring of Rogan
since the platform went into business with him in what was reportedly a $100 million
contract.
While Rogan cited his own experience with his children when criticizing mass vaccinations,
kids and even younger adults are also statistically far less vulnerable to the virus than older
people. According to data from the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC), people under 45 account for less than 3% of the Covid-19 deaths
in the US. The highest is 65 and older, which covers over 80%.
Comorbidities – underlying conditions that weaken the immune system, such as diabetes
and hypertension – are also frequent among the hundreds of thousands of patients who have
died from the virus.
There are currently no vaccines on the market authorized for anyone under 16 to take.
Pfizer's vaccine is approved for patients 16 and older, while Moderna has been approved for
people 18 and over.
During another episode of his podcast this year, Rogan revealed he is not planning on
getting a vaccine himself. Asked whether he would get the vaccine when available, he replied,
"no. I mean I would if I felt like I needed it."
The Pfizer vaccine could cause
severe neurodegenerative
diseases caused by brain prions created by the mRNA-style vaccine. National File reported, "'The current RNA based SARSCoV-2
vaccines were approved in the US using an emergency order without extensive long term safety testing,' the report declares. 'In this
paper the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was evaluated for the potential to induce prion-based disease in vaccine recipients.' Prion-based
diseases are, according to the CDC, a form of neurodegenerative diseases, meaning that the Pfizer vaccine is potentially likely to
cause long term damage and negative health effects with regards to the brain."
In a shocking new
report on the COVID-19 vaccines, it has been discovered that the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine
may have long term health effects not previously disclosed, including “ALS,
Alzheimer's, and other neurological degenerative diseases.â€
“The current RNA based SARSCoV-2 vaccines were approved in the US using an
emergency order without extensive long term safety testing,†the report declares.
“In this paper the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was evaluated for the potential to
induce prion-based disease in vaccine recipients.†Prion-based diseases are,
according to the CDC, a form of neurodegenerative diseases, meaning that the Pfizer vaccine is
potentially likely to cause long term damage and negative health effects with regards to the
brain.
This is especially concerning since the Pfizer vaccine is an mRNA vaccine, an untested type
of vaccine which creates new proteins and can actually integrate into the human genome , according to
a report from the National Library of Medicine. In other words, degenerative brain conditions
may appear at any time in your life after receiving the vaccine.
“The RNA sequence of the vaccine as well as the spike protein target
interaction were analyzed for the potential to convert intracellular RNA binding proteins TAR
DNA binding protein (TDP-43) and Fused in Sarcoma (FUS) into their pathologic prion
conformations,†explains the report. TDP-43 is a protein known to cause dementia,
ALS and even Alzheimer's, according to Alzpedia . Similarly, the FUS protein is known
to cause ALS and Hereditary Essential Tremors, according to the Human Genome Database .
The experiment done for the report was to determine whether or not these two harmful
proteins embed themselves into our DNA, as an mRNA vaccine is expected to do. The report
determined that “the vaccine RNA has specific sequences that may induce
TDP-43 and FUS to fold into their pathologic prion confirmations,†meaning that
both proteins have the potential to embed themselves into our DNA and cause harmful
neurological diseases.
The report's abstract summary concludes that “The
enclosed finding as well as additional potential risks leads the author to believe that
regulatory approval of the RNA based vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 was premature and that the vaccine
may cause much more harm than benefit.†The report itself ends with this warning:
“The vaccine could be a bioweapon and even more dangerous than the original
infection.â€
National File actually reached out to the CDC to inquire as to why the Pfizer vaccine is
still being distributed despite these credible allegations. No response was received prior to
publication.
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said people will “likely†need a
third dose of a Covid-19 vaccine within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated. His comments
were made public Thursday but were taped April 1.
Bourla said it’s possible people will need to get vaccinated against the
coronavirus annually.
From the very beginning of this crisis, I have been warning my readers that any immunity would
be very temporary.
Natural COVID immunity is very temporary, and immunity conferred by the vaccines is very
temporary too.
The CEO of Pfizer is comparing the COVID vaccines to flu shots. Every year millions of
Americans rush out to get their flu shots, and the CEO of Pfizer is admitting that it looks like
the COVID vaccines will be on a similar schedule
…
“There are vaccines that’s like polio that one dose is
enough, there are vaccines like pneumococcal vaccine that one dose is enough for adults and
there are vaccines like flu that you need every year,†Bourla said.
“The Covid virus looks more like the influenza virus than the polio
virus.â€
If people are going to need a new shot every year, that means that COVID will be with us for a
very long time to come.
This is essentially an admission that the COVID pandemic will not be ending any time soon.
Needless to say, Pfizer stands to make giant mountains of money if COVID vaccines become a
yearly thing, and we need to keep that in mind.
A lot of people that I know are going to be extremely upset when they finally realize that the
two shots that they got only provide temporary immunity.
And of course lots of people are still getting sick after being fully vaccinated. According to
the CDC, so far there have been almost 6,000 documented cases of people being infected after
getting two shots, and dozens of them
have died …
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has reported that roughly 5,800 people who received a
coronavirus vaccine still ultimately came down with the disease anyway, according to CNN.
Of those 5,800, 396 of them (roughly 7 percent) were hospitalized; 74 of the vaccinated
people ultimately died. The report proves that the vaccines, though frequently touted by the
government and the media, are not guaranteed to prevent everyone from contracting the
virus.
That wasn’t supposed to happen.
But it is happening.
Meanwhile, there is a lot of uncertainty about how the current vaccines will fare against
variants that have already developed and variants that will develop in the future.
At this point we just don’t know how effective the vaccines will be, but
the New York Times
is assuring us that we don’t have anything to be concerned
about…
“I use the term
‘scariants,’†said Dr. Eric Topol, professor
of molecular medicine at Scripps Research in La Jolla, Calif., referring to much of the media
coverage of the variants.
“Even my wife was saying, ‘What about this double
mutant?’ It drives me nuts. People are scared unnecessarily. If
you’re fully vaccinated, two weeks post dose, you
shouldn’t have to worry about variants at all.â€
Really?
I have a feeling that Dr. Eric Topol will end up eating those words.
The reason why a new flu vaccine comes out every year is because the flu is constantly
changing and mutating.
The same thing is happening to COVID, and there are already dozens of mutant variations
spreading around the globe.
To me, Dr. Eric Topol’s statement was exceedingly irresponsible, especially
considering some of the studies that have come out lately. Here is just one example
…
Two doses of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine were found to have only a 10.4% efficacy
against mild-to-moderate infections caused by the B.1.351 South Africa variant, according to a
phase 1b-2 clinical trial published
on Tuesday in the New England Journal of Medicine . This is a cause for grave concern as the
South African variants share similar mutations to the other variants leaving those vaccinated
with the AstraZeneca vaccine potentially exposed to multiple variants.
In this article, I haven’t even discussed all of the side effects that we
have been witnessing. A few days ago, the FDA issued an unprecedented order regarding the Johnson
and Johnson vaccine because it was
causing blood clots in a number of cases…
This week, the Food and Drug Administration called for a halt in the administration of the
single dose vaccine for COVID-19 manufactured by Johnson and Johnson. The halt was ascribed to
the rare incidence of blood clots that could potentially be related to the vaccine.
I am glad that the FDA decided to step in, but the order came too late
for this guy …
When the news broke about the pause of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine Tuesday, one Coast
family was already living with a tragedy they believe was caused by the vaccine.
It started out as a normal day for 43-year-old Brad Malagarie of St. Martin. This busy
father of seven spent the morning at his D’Iberville office before heading
to get a Johnson & Johnson vaccine a little after noon.
He returned to work, and within three hours coworkers noticed he was unresponsive at his
desk.
It shouldn’t be controversial to say that rushing experimental vaccines
through the testing process was a really bad idea.
We should be putting the safety of the American people first, and nobody knows for sure what
the long-term effects of these experimental treatments will be.
In this day and age, we all need to do our own research and we all need to think for
ourselves, because the big pharmaceutical companies are more concerned with profits than anything
else.
If you are harmed by their experimental therapies, the big pharmaceutical companies
won’t be there to pick up the pieces for you if something goes horribly
wrong.
* * *
Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The
Future Of America†is now available in paperback and for the
Kindle on Amazon.
So...
Requiring Vaccine IDs or passports violates medical privacy - Right?
Unvaccinated are NOT a threat because the vaccinated are protected - Right?
Preventing unvaccinated from participating in society is discrimination - Right?
_arrow
The Antisoiler 5 hours ago remove link
It appears they are moving in the direction of mandating a vaccine subscription, where you
will pay monthly or yearly.
Trends indicate subscription based revenue generation is a win-win for both producer,
consumer, and eugenicist.
Remember, you will own nothing and be happy about it. You will be free from the burden of
asset management. And, you'll essentially be a slave, working till you drop into a grave or
incinerator.
Fed Supporter 6 hours ago remove link
Sorry Michael Snyder, you are flat out wrong about natural immunity not lasting very
long.
A corona virus from 17 years ago, every year those who were infected get tested for
immunity, and guess what every year for 17 year those previously infected individuals still
have immunity.
Further, the current corona virus , Covid, is 80% similiar to the one from 17 years ago.
Some virologits estimate that 30% of the world has cross immunity and can not get Covid.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you need to do more research. You are parroting the MSM
outlets who were selling fear and citing quacks from stanford, etc that said "we just don't
know", No they do know they just wanted to ramp fear sky high. Memory T cells are a thing.
May 18, 2020 â€" Blood samples from the patient, who had SARS in 2003, contained
an ... Antibody that inhibits the new coronavirus discovered in patient who had SARS 17 years
ago ... Antibodies form part of the body's immune response to pathogens. ... But Vir
Biotechnology has fast-tracked the antibody for development ...
Here we studied T cell responses against the structural (nucleocapsid (N) protein) and
non-structural (NSP7 and NSP13 of ORF1 ) regions of SARS-CoV-2 in individuals convalescing from
coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ( n = 36). In all of these individuals, we found CD4 and
CD8 T cells that recognized multiple regions of the N protein. Next, we showed that patients (
n = 23) who recovered from SARS (the disease associated with SARS-CoV infection) possess
long-lasting memory T cells that are reactive to the N protein of SARS-CoV 17 years after the
outbreak of SARS in 2003; these T cells displayed robust cross-reactivity to the N protein of
SARS-CoV-2. We also detected SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells in individuals with no history of
SARS, COVID-19 or contact with individuals who had SARS and/or COVID-19 ( n = 37).
SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells in uninfected donors exhibited a, etc.
Fed Supporter 6 hours ago
BTW natural immunity is way better than Mrna vaccines, which are narrowly tailored to target
proteins on the spike protein. Once it mutates, like the South Africa and UK mutations, the
pfizer vaccine will need modified to target the new mutations hence yearly boosters at $180 a
pop. We will be chasing this thing forever, always behind on catching the mutated viruses.
Invest in Pfizer their stock will go so high, they are going to make a ton of money off the
sheep.
Also, some doctors, said it is not wise to get vaccinated for corvid if you already had
it.
Also isn't peculiar the mutations all occurred in countries that ran human trials, Brazil,
UK, SA, Israel. These countries were the first to have humans vaccinated and they are the first
to have mutations.
Bacon's Rebellion 4 hours ago
"Just look at the number of medicines pulled from pharmacies in the last 20 years that the
FDC originally said were perfectly safe"
Think for yourself 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link
also, the mRNA vaccine 'targets' the s-proteins by genetically hijacking your cell to
construct biochemical factories to create these s-proteins. Not only is it a fixed overhead (no
off switch, it's in your genes now) but that overhead is spent building parts that are designed
to inflame your immune system. Even after so-called 'immunity' is acquired, those biochemical
factories will keep working to produce, the immune system will keep working against the
low-level inflammation, so the cells will not only be spending fuel on negative output, but the
spare viral proteins floating around it's creating are just begging to be assimilated into even
more mutant strains.
I am convinced that the mRNA 'vaccine' is exponentially increasing the mutation potential of
covid-19.
Libertarian777 5 hours ago
THIS GUY GETS IT. Lack of antibodies does not mean immunity disappears.
Pazuzu 4 hours ago
Upvoted for clever use of term 'virologits'. If ever there were a bunch of gits the virology
bunch fits the bill.
Josey Yahoo 6 hours ago remove link
Is anybody else stating to feel like they are being played?
For a year now I have been saying that this is a flu, just another flu, being blown into a
major issue to literally destroy our nation.
First the lockdowns, to destroy small business, as the large companies will gladly assist in
the elimination of cash. NOTE, the immediate calls for cash not to be used as it would transmit
the virus, then all of a sudden a coin shortage, when was the last time that happened, oh,
that's right, NEVER!
....
freedommusic 4 hours ago (Edited)
> Huh? Unvaccinated are a threat to other Unvaccinated people who want to get vaccinated
and don't want to die.
No problem that's what your double mask, self isolating, and social distancing is for. Since
it is SO EFFECTIVE , it will provide the necessary protection until all the smart people get
vaccinated.
Then all the unwashed, ignorant, unvaccinated fools will die off as a result of natural
selection.
Everyone wins here and nature wins.
RIGHT?
taketheredpill 6 hours ago
Or maybe the vaccine is 99.9925% Effective (6000 sick out of 80 Million with full dose) and
Pharma guys rounded up?
Bacon's Rebellion 6 hours ago (Edited) remove link
ummm.
Assuming 100% accuracy of the "cause of death" being Covid19:
Covid19 survival rates for all age groups:
563,000 dead / 329,000,000 total population = 99.829% survival.
Covid19 survival rates over the age of 75:
245,000 dead / 55,000,000 people = 99.555% survival rate.
Covid19 survival rates under the age of 55:
40,000 dead / 229,000,000 people = 99.983% survival rate.
Covid19 survival rates under the age of 25:
550 dead / 103,000,000 people = 99.9995% survival rate.
Explain to us why in the world we need to vaccinate the 16 to 25 folks? Vaccination DOES NOT
MEAN you can't catch it or spread it...
"" We don't know yet whether or not it prevents you from getting infected where you're not
with symptoms...but you have virus in your nasopharynx that you could then infect an
unvaccinated person who might be vulnerable, and you will inadvertently and innocently get them
sick," Fauci explained."
The whole vaccine jive talk is packed with "Could", "Maybe", "Possibly", "Likely",
"Unknown"...ect.
"UNLESS....you get people to lock down, wash hands, wear masks etc."
Yeah, we did that, and we have 31,000,000 confirmed cases.
How many people contracted Covid19 but were never tested?
Estimating the Fraction of Unreported COVID-19
"The results are striking: ...The range of results across model assumptions and time periods
utilized vary between 6 to 24 unreported cases."
So, at 6 unreported for every reported, more than half of the US population has been
exposed...your masks and lockdowns have been a huge failure....
186,000,000 infections and 563,000 dead = .3% death rate.
Bacon, don't confuse taketheredpill with facts, his mind is already made. I'll bet he is a
paid sock puppet or just some sick liberal trolling one of the few places post comments that
make sense, and that aren't a bunch of collectivist mindless sheep.
russellthetreeman PREMIUM 6 hours ago
It's not a vaccine. It doesn't even come close to halfway meeting the definition of a
vaccine.
It's not a pandemic. It doesn't even come close to halfway meeting the definition of a
pandemic.
The sars cov 2 virus has a known survival rate of WELL over 99+%.
sun tzu 6 hours ago remove link
The average sheep thinks over 30 million Americans died of covid-19 last year. Idiocy
rules
A Lunatic 6 hours ago (Edited)
That still pales in comparison to the 150 million gun deaths we had last year, according to
Joe.
Bacon's Rebellion 5 hours ago
"It's not a vaccine"...correct, it's a drug that forces your immune system to do something
it doesn't want to do.
The original mRNA researcher when it actually, sorta, worked "I felt like God!"
All BS. My wife and I are unvaccinated and have travelled half the country, always maskless,
over the past year. Not sick, haven’t been sick. Our dog is fine, too.
sun tzu 6 hours ago
Same here. I've been to Mexico 3 times too. Nobody around me, family and co-workers, has
gotten sick or died.
Lead Engineer PREMIUM 6 hours ago
And the CDC estimates that over 30% of the population has been infected. So if we assume
that another 20% had previous natural immunity and another 50% of the susceptible have been
vaccinated, then you can see that this pandemic is rapidly going extinct.
Captive1 6 hours ago (Edited) remove link
" From the very beginning of this crisis, I have been warning my readers that any immunity
would be very temporary. Natural COVID immunity is very temporary, and immunity conferred by
the vaccines is very temporary too."
Disqualifying statement. There is no data to support this statement. Antibody surveillance
studies have shown durability and case studies have demonstrated no reinfections to those who
had an initial antibody response on the first infection. Not to mention T Cell memory. He
doesn't know what he's talking about. Immune memory to COV2 is long lived and protective across
multiple strains. I would link the papers but I'm not helping people not be retarded anymore.
Big pharma wants you to believe that immunity is temporary to drive profit. It's not.
Huxley's Ghost 6 hours ago remove link
We know so little about the immune system (really the entire human body); basic concepts,
yes but effect of environment, innate experience, stressors, diet, etc..not a clue. Individual
immune systems because of all these factors are more like fingerprints--vastly unique to each
unit. The endocrine and immune systems are black boxes to the medical community but they act
like are doing more than spit-balling.
Huxley's Ghost 5 hours ago remove link
In theory, they (vaccine companies) annually analyze what strains are prevalent in the world
and predicted to have the greatest impact. Those strains get selected for production of the
annual flu shot; it could be the case that the same strain(s) prevailed. Or not. These days you
can't believe anything anymore.
Last time I had the flu shot was over 30 years ago. I had flu once since then and took
Tamiflu, which was miraculous in its speed (identify and dose early while viral load is low) of
effect, minimal/no side effects, and efficacy. I was back on my feet in about 36 hours--fully.
I have heard people report horrible abdominal/GI issues (temporary). I was lucky.
strych10 3 hours ago remove link
OK, I've said this before but I will repeat it, ultra basic here:
Natural immunity tends to be both "deeper" and "broader" than what one of these mRNA
(straight up or adeno vector, doesn't matter) can provide.
When a virus infects you there are a lot of different things that happen. The two that
matter the most for the purposes of this discussion are as follows:
1) Your body sees a wide array of viral surface proteins and gets a look at the actual
capsid and lipid envelope too. Particularly after you immune system shreds up some of the
buggers and looks at the pieces.
2) Your body gets to see millions of variations on this, including the most statistically
common variations in surface protein structure.
This means that your body develops a set of antibodies that is much wider than a single
introduced protein can provide.
With the vax you get one structure, lab controlled QC, a single "image" of the target if you
will. In the wild you get a bunch of various proteins and a ton of variation in their physical
shape, hundreds or thousands of images from various angles.
The result is that you get a relatively wide array of antibodies and a hugely wider picture
of what is "not self". This makes it easier for your body to recognize the same or similar
infectious agent/infection next time. You also now have a set of antibodies with variable
structure making it more likely that they can neutralize a mutant strain of the same virus (or
something substantially similar) or at least blunt the next virus' attack long enough to buy
time for your immune system to learn about it without you getting a serious illness.
duck_fur 2 hours ago
You seem to have a background in virology. What of the issue of coding errors - either
during or after manufacture - within the mRNA payload? What of the possibility of the expressed
protein exhibiting a fold due to the error(s)?
strych10 1 hour ago
I'm not a virologist. I'm a cell biologist.
So, trying not to make this a full on basic genetics class...
Yes, what you're asking is possible. It's also statistically rare. The root of misformed
proteins tends to be genetic code error or a mistake in copying that code into mRNA.
Ribosomes, which translate mRNA into a protein, tend to be very good at their job and if
they make an error can often detect it, back up and fix it and then begin sequencing again.
Errors do occur but they're rare. At this stage more common is an issue of improper folding of
the protein resulting in an improper tertiary structure and the inability to form a quaternary
structure due to this. (A quaternary structure is an overall structure formed by multiple
proteins folded to fit together into a larger unit which serves a purpose. For example,
hemoglobin is formed from four separate proteins that fold up and then can fit together to form
hemoglobin.)
So, assuming that the QC is good, which I have no reason to believe that it is not, coding
errors are not really a problem. It's the fact that the QC is too good.
But then you have to step back and ask if this matters. Yes and no, and I'll give you a
quick explanation of each.
An antibody is, essentially, like a Y of gum you're sticking on the key to a lock. The virus
has a key that unlocks the cell, the antibody prevents these two things from coming into
physical contact so the key can never open the lock. Once bound this antibody also marks
whatever it has bound to for destruction by other parts of the immune system. That in
mind...
Yes: If CoV-2 were to mutate to the point that the spike proteins in question changed enough
that an antibody couldn't bind to the virion then the virus could evade the antibodies that
neutralize the virion and mark it for destruction.
No: In order to do this, generally, you need quite a bit of mutation to change the physical
structure of the spike. In a lot of cases this would make the virion non-operational because
the same change that allows it to avoid the antibodies also means it can no longer fit that key
into the desired lock.
So, does it really matter? Again, yes and no. If the virus can "figure out" a key that still
opens the desired lock (or another one) and doesn't fit the antibody it will avoid the immune
system until the immune system figures out what's going on. This takes some time. Infected
cells have to signal that they're infected, inspection has to be done, antibodies synthesized
etc.
So, IMHO, and it's just my opinion: the fear of "breakthrough" is rather overblown. However,
it is still real. In a natural infection there is less chance of this kind of "breakthrough"
because your body has more data on the invader meaning that the invader usually needs to change
a lot more in order to evade the immune system hence "broader" and "deeper". That said, there
are viruses that are pretty good at this. Influenza A is one of them.
This is the root of what you may have heard last year about "T-cell immunity". People had
previously encountered a disease substantially similar to CoV-2 and it was similar enough that
they produced an antibody that neutralized CoV-2.
Quasimodo. 48 minutes ago remove link
If you have breakthrough, you have a new virus. A mutation, not just a variant. Most
variants have only slight changes in protein. A variant is more likely to spread and be more
virulant if it is less deadly since the host survives long enough to spread the virus further,
while a deadlier form (although could happen) will die out quickly as more hosts will die
strych10 15 minutes ago
I actually had to ask my wife about the technical definition about this.
For CoV-2 to change enough to be "not CoV-2" it would require significantly more alteration
than you're stating here.
The things that would change the classification are things like capsid shape, nucleic acid
type, mechanism of infiltration or exfiltration.
You need far more than simply the ability to evade current immune response. Hence why
Influenza A can jump species, come back and still be Influenza A.
Codery 1 hour ago
Ya but that’s just like science, can you explain how any of that helps
get rid of Trump?
strych10 1 hour ago remove link
Yes, in three letters. CNN.
sun tzu 6 hours ago remove link
Stay away from big hospitals. They are contract killers for big pharma
Sluggo315 3 hours ago
My older brother that has three or four co-morbidities (weight, BP, asthma, one more I
think) was rushed to the hospital for a bowel blockage. He spent the night in the emergency
room, and was admitted into the hospital for tests. They put him on the COVID floor. Tell me
these hospitals are not in on it too!!!?
TheTruthisSomewhere 5 hours ago remove link
The article unfortunately is going from the erroneous position that this is worse than the
flu. It is not the statistics are cooked and it is a testdemic. Variants are always less potent
and yes people have natural immunity to this. It is almost a Gaslighting article based on quasi
facts and hearsay.
Joe Rogan: "I think it's safe to get vaccinated, but if you're 21 years old ... if you're a
healthy person and you're exercising all of the time and you're young and you're eating well, I
don't think you need to worry about this." https://twitter.com/i/status/1387077145156063234
It is unclear how Fauci response correlates with the fact that existing vaccines are less
effective or (in case of Pfizer and South African strain) ineffective against new mutations. Does
he acts as Big Pharma lobbyist, or what ?
Also, you have to be skeptical of pharmaceutical companies and the fact that they cannot be
sued if something goes wrong with the vaccine.
White House
health adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci and communications director Kate Bedingfield have made a point
of belittling and attacking podcaster Joe Rogan for daring to have a mixed opinion on Covid-19
vaccines.
As Rogan has skyrocketed over the years to arguably the most influential and successful
podcaster around, he has also turned into an intensely controversial figure, mainly for
liberals who fear his willingness to give a platform to right-wing figures like Alex Jones and
his less-than-PC takes on everything from transgender athletes to Covid-19 vaccines.
The latter is what landed the former 'Fear Factor' host in the hot seat this week as a clip
from a recent episode of 'The Joe Rogan Experience' made its way across social media and
critics painted Rogan as an anti-vaxxer spreading disinformation.
The controversy stems from Rogan saying, during a conversation with fellow comic Dave
Smith, he would not recommend that a healthy person in their early 20s get a Covid-19 vaccine
as they are not as vulnerable to the virus as older generations (who account for the majority of Covid
deaths in the US) and people with preexisting medical conditions.
The Spotify podcaster also said pushing for kids to be vaccinated is "crazy," citing his
own childrens' history with getting Covid-19, as both recovered relatively quickly.
Critics painted Rogan's comments as an angry anti-vaxx rant, urging his millions of
listeners to avoid getting inoculated against Covid-19. However, they ignored the fact that
Rogan says in the clip (and has said in the past) that getting vaccinated seems mostly safe
and is indeed "important" for certain people.
Criticism of Rogan reached a bizarre new level on Wednesday when the White House appeared to
launch a coordinated effort to disparage and belittle the podcaster, completely dismissing his
opinions.
In multiple interviews, Fauci blasted Rogan for ignoring "societal responsibilities,"
arguing even young and healthy people should get vaccinated as asymptomatic individuals can
still spread the virus.
The infectious disease expert also believes "kids of all ages" will be vaccinated by the
end of the year – there are no vaccines on the market in the US approved for anyone under
16 – and everyone should "absolutely" get inoculated.
Bedingfield also dismissed Rogan's opinion in a CNN interview where she said Rogan not being
a doctor basically strips his words of any merit.
"I guess my first question would be, did Joe Rogan become a medical doctor while we
weren't looking?" she asked. "I'm not sure that taking scientific and medical advice
from Joe Rogan is perhaps the most productive way for people to get their information."
Initial social media criticism of Rogan is one thing, but the White House pitting themselves
against a private citizen having an open and frank discussion on a podcast is concerning. It's
alarming enough that White House officials busy with vaccination efforts and a still-fresh
administration would take the time to debate Rogan on the subject, but the responses to his
discussion also show that administration officials are fearful of open debate and conversations
about the vaccines. If one even strays from the belief that vaccines are 100% safe and every
single person, regardless of age or health, should take them, they are attacked, at least if
you have the following that Rogan has.
Rogan's discussions on Covid-19 vaccines do not boil down to a debate on whether getting
inoculated against the virus is good for everyone or not. The recent viral clip even opens with
the podcaster saying vaccines are safe, and he acknowledges that what he says about children
and young, healthy people is not true across the board. He merely expresses concerns as a
father and gives a personal opinion that in no way discourages everyone from getting a
vaccine.
Looking at Fauci and Bedingfield's responses, it appears they aren't even debating what
Rogan actually said.
Fauci, who has been a controversial figure himself and
accused of flip-flopping multiple positions during the pandemic, argues that it is the
potential transmission of the virus from one person to another that is the reason everyone
should be vaccinated. Rogan never talks about the risk of transmission though. He simply makes
the argument that a healthy individual who is younger may not need a vaccination to protect
themselves from the deadlier aspects of Covid.
Bedingfield's argument is even lamer as she says without a "Dr." title, Rogan simply
can't have concerns about vaccinations for children and others. She argues no one should take
"medical advice" from a podcaster, setting Rogan up as a man who presented himself as
some kind of expert on vaccines, dishing out advice to his listeners, who apparently aren't
intelligent enough to make up their own minds, according to these critics.
Fauci and Bedingfield and any other White House official who decides to paint Rogan as the
face of anti-vaxxers should be ashamed of themselves. Their personal attacks are an
opportunistic way to take a shot at someone who has somehow become a near-pariah on the left,
and to discourage open and frank discussions about vaccines. Their swift dismissal of a
comedian who is not quite waving the flag for every single person to be vaccinated shows that
they don't want discussion from citizens they want compliance and for people to keep nodding
their heads at their ever-changing talking points and guidelines.
It really doesn't matter who is right in the White House versus Joe Rogan debate because
there shouldn't be a White House versus Joe Rogan debate. Ironically, Fauci and Bedingfield
have probably made more people aware of Rogan's comments by addressing them. They and other
officials have taken questionable criticism of a fairly harmless conversation and used it to
create a false narrative about one man to strike fear into anyone who would dare consider what
he or anyone else would say above what they do.
CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourla is a veterinarian! Ha ha ha. Franci depends on this guy to give
out experiment mRNA treatments to humans...what a total joke
AGuy 2 hours ago
CEO runs a business, not scientific R&D! Pfizer has thousands of employees to do the
R&D work.
That's said, I don't have much faith in the vaccines. I think efficiency will drop over time
requiring frequent booster shots as well as virus strains that render the current vaccine
useless. Time will tell.
"... In the hard-hit state of Maharashtra, the double mutant has already become the dominant strain, according to Dr. Anurag Agrawal, director of the CSIR Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology. In samples collected in the state from January to March, over 60% were of the double-mutant variant, according to a study by the National Institute of Virology in Pune ..."
"... That research could inform future vaccine development, especially booster shots that will target particular variants of Covid-19, Dr. Pinsky said. ..."
...The Indian variant has 13 mutations, but gets its name from two mutations similar to those seen separately in other variants.
In other variants, one mutation is associated with making the virus more infectious and appears better at evading antibodies, while
the other is similar to one that has shown signs of being able to sidestep some of the body’s immune responses.
It was first discovered in India in a sample collected in October, said Dr. Rakesh Mishra, director of the CSIR Centre for Cellular
and Molecular Biology, which operates one of the 10 state-run labs charged with genomic sequencing of the virus. Recent data points
to its rapid spread through some regions of India.
In the hard-hit state of Maharashtra, the double mutant has already become the dominant strain, according to Dr. Anurag Agrawal,
director of the CSIR Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology. In samples collected in the state from January to March, over
60% were of the double-mutant variant, according to a study by the National Institute of Virology in Pune
For the country overall, this variant made up 70.4% of the samples collected during the week ended March 25, compared with 16.1%
just three weeks earlier, according to Covid CG, a tracking tool from the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. The tool uses data
from the GISAID Initiative, a global database for coronavirus genomes.
... The virus has already hopped to at least 21 countries, according to researchers at four universities that track viral lineages.
Genetic sequencing has turned up cases in the U.S., Germany, Turkey and Nigeria, among others. In the U.K, genome sequencers have
found the variant among people who haven’t traveled, suggesting it has spread within the community.
... In California, at least 20 confirmed or presumptive cases of the double mutant have been discovered since late March, according
to Dr. Benjamin Pinsky, director of Clinical Virology Laboratory at Stanford University. Dr. Pinsky said samples have already been
sent to collaborators at other laboratories, where research is under way to test how the virus reacts to monoclonal antibodies and
plasmas from infected or vaccinated people.
That research could inform future vaccine development, especially booster shots that will target particular variants of Covid-19,
Dr. Pinsky said.
Many young people are now falling ill and showing up at hospitals with severe symptoms, doctors and public-health experts said.
In this surge, people age 26 to 44 account for about 40% of total cases and 10% of deaths, Dr. Kant said, compared with the previous
wave, when almost all of the deaths were those aged 60 and above.
Note one of the qualifiers in the death stats: "(3) No clear link between vaccinations and deaths has been found to date" --
it appears these public health agencies have set a high bar for causation in order to obfuscate the truth.
Another lie used by the Western governments is the claim about the need for 'herd immunity' via vaccination and the aim of
70% of a population.
In fact, giving the vaccine to the +70 and the people who consider themselves at risk and want to be vaccinated is enough to reduce
the mortality drastically.
When smallpox was extincted the WHO goal was 80% vaccination. Not achieved anywhere. Smallpox is gone.
The ‘vaccine’ does not make anyone immune. It creates antibodies that circulate in bloodstream. It is an airborne respiratory
disease. Inside surface of lungs is principal locus of infection. There is no blood on inner surface of lung and thus no antibodies.
The blood is close enough to the lung surface for exchange of O2 and CO2, the larger antibody molecule remains in the capillary.
The epithelial cells lining the lung become infected with no resistance from any ‘vaccine’ related antibody. If the antibody
is useful it will be much later in course of disease.
This is why vaccines for airborne diseases have always been difficult, unreliable. Suddenly, under political pressure, all
sorts of non-possible things are claimed. Or inferred and suggested.
We have no idea how far along herd immunity might be. No one is looking. Anyone who wants to investigate herd immunity is a
political enemy. The sort of testing that would be required Is possible, can be done, has been done, is relatively slow and difficult.
Would need big grants from political bodies. When this all started survivors of SARS-COVID One (from 2003-2005) were asked to
give blood. When that blood was exposed to samples of SARS-COVID2 t-cells remembered just what to do, immediately identified the
2 virus as a familiar antigen and ripped it apart. After fifteen years the t-cells still knew what to do. The One virus is only
80% similar to the 2 virus. Herd immunity will happen. Nothing is being done that will make that come any sooner.
I have read enough articles about the side effects of these "vaccines" to think that the countries denied the opportunity to
be injected should almost be thanking their lucky stars. What is even more remiss, IMO, is that no one anywhere is being apprised
of the NEEd for adequate Vit. D levels to combat the virus, nor of at least 2 of the relatively cheap and available therapeutics
that can be given in a protocol including other medications/vitamins (hydroxchloroquine and ivermectin).
"... Science now means refusing to know anything but the narrative. There is just no way we shall know how bad a problem the vaccine is. My supposition that the son-in-law's problems are connected to vaccine could be pure ex post facto rubbish. We shall never know because we refuse to look. ..."
Regarding the three articles posted on covid and thrombosis.
The first article, the NEJM article, reports six younger patients died of thrombosis,
presumably cerebral venous thrombosis. Although the article is so poorly written it is hard
to even know. Patients were in "Germany and Austria" but past that all we have is lab test
reports. Not even clear if the authors ever saw the patients. Cerebral venous thrombosis is
extremely rare in younger patients. The article does make the Astra Zeneca jab the cause of
death, obscuring that by referring to it as ChAdOx1 -Covid-19
Second article is basically "nothing to see here" plus "Look! -- - A squirrel!!!" And
would be entirely dismissed but for the third article, from Gamaleya Center which basically
says "You filthy swine! You inject your citizens with raw sewage and then act surprised you
have problems."
The son-in-law has had a series of cardiac problems. Following his vaccination. Doctors
tell him the vaccination is entirely safe, absolutely no reported cardiac or circulatory
problems reported anywhere. And any who say otherwise are conspiracy theorists he should quit
listening to. Making NEJM conspiracy theorists.
Science now means refusing to know anything
but the narrative. There is just no way we shall know how bad a problem the vaccine is. My
supposition that the son-in-law's problems are connected to vaccine could be pure ex post
facto rubbish. We shall never know because we refuse to look.
Yesterday there was a multitudinary demonstration in London against pandemic measures and mainly against implementation of
"vaccination passports" not reported by the media, not even the alt-media...
Also there were these past days huge demonstrations in Germany agsint Special Pandemic Powers Laws, currently being signed
thorughout the whole EU without people´s knowledge nor escrutiny...
Increasingly are appearing unknown vaccines side effects, as cardiologic ones and effects on menstrual cycle...
Also registered in Israel, Pfizer vaccine caused more deaths only in Israel than even AstraZeneca in whole Europe..
Then this is the vaccine currently monopolizing EU strategy of vaccination through lobbyist like Thierry breton, responsible
for EU internal market, The European Council of Foreign Relations ( which labels the Russian vaccine as a risk on EU health security,
and pressures coming from the US DoS...
Anyway, the risk of suffering a blood clot with AstraZeneca has doubled in 15 days...and Boris Johnson has already announced
that Covid-19 vaccines will not end the pandemic and that "new" meds will be needed to counter next highly likely next fall coming
waves...in spite of alleged British succes with vaccines...
It is a matter of time that the EU citizenry becomes aware that there are spurious interests in blocking EU acess to safe,
efficient and cheap vaccines while promoting dangerous ones as a single possiblity which not only offer more risk thatn benefits
but also will not provide any kind of immunity, in the best case they prived a slight protection against serious Covid-19 infection.
Who are those profitting from the vaccines...and why there is a war on vaccines, as this is a mutibillion business with no
end in sight, as the pandemic will be eternal by design..
Taking into account who are the main shareholders, one is prone to think that this is the way some countries have decided they
will capitalize their accute debt crisis, by looting from others, as always...
Also, how is that Moderna registered the patent of its vaccine already in September, past year, when the pandemic was not even
declared yet, not even in China...????
A resistance movement against the "new pandemic fascist world order" in surging in Europe.
Images of yesterday greatest in recent history demonstration so far in UK against lockdowns, masks, "vaccine passports" and
authoritarian measures on this pandemic alibi..
Also, a resistance movement has surged in France on initiative of artists, philosophers, intellectuals and fed up people who
usually think on the arbitrariness and absurdity of certain pandemic measures especially outdoors...with a song "Danser Encore"
rising a new resistance hymn...
- On z/h was a posting claiming that in US, there is poor correlation between states enforcing
stricter measures and states having better outcomes. Difficult to assess because they play very loose with the died of covid assessment.
I suspect this is valid as I dont see the pandaphiles pointing finger at florida texas with any effect.
- It has been noted that the promoters of the pandemic seem to have very low confidence in performance of the vacine as they
propose to continue strict control measures.
- Institutions are requiring vacination and signing of release - requiring people to accept medical treatment with a vaccine
which is not approved by FDA. Frightening on many levels.
A comprehensive analysis of adverse events during clinical trials and over the course of
mass vaccinations with the Sputnik V vaccine showed that there were no cases of cerebral venous
sinus thrombosis (CVST).
All vaccines based on adenoviral vector platform are different and not directly comparable.
In particular, AstraZeneca’s ChAdOx1-S vaccine uses chimpanzee adenovirus to
deliver the antigen, consisting of S-protein combined with leader sequence of tissue-type
plasminogen activator. The vaccine from Johnson&Johnson uses human adenovirus serotype Ad26
and full-length S-protein stabilized by mutations. In addition, it is produced using the PER.C6
cell line (embryonic retinal cells), which is not widely represented among other registered
products.
Sputnik V is a two-component vaccine in which adenovirus serotypes 5 and 26 are used. A
fragment of tissue-type plasminogen activator is not used, and the antigen insert is an
unmodified full-length S-protein. Sputnik V vaccine is produced with the HEK293 cell line,
which has long been safely used for the production of biotechnological products.
Thus, all of the above vaccines based on adenoviral vectors have significant differences in
their structure and production technology. Therefore, there is no reason and no justification
to extrapolate safety data from one vaccine to safety data from other vaccines.
The quality and safety of Sputnik V are, among other things, assured by the fact that,
unlike other vaccines, it uses a 4-stage purification technology that includes two stages of
chromatography and two stages of tangential flow filtration. This purification technology helps
to obtain a highly purified product that goes through mandatory control including the analysis
of free DNA presence. In addition, the volume of nucleic acid is several dozen times lower in
adenoviral vectors compared to Pfizer and Moderna vaccines (1 to 2 mcg vs 50 to 100 mcg,
correspondingly).
A study published in The New England Journal of Medicine on April 9, 2021, discusses that
the cause of the thrombosis in some patients vaccinated with other vaccines could be
insufficient purification that leads to the emergence of significant quantities of free DNA.
Insufficient purification or use of very high doses of target DNA/RNA can result in adverse
interaction of a patient’s antibodies that activate thrombocytes with
elements of the vaccine itself and/or free DNA/RNA, which can form a complex with the PF4
factor.
The Gamaleya Center is ready to share its purification technology with other vaccine
producers in order to help them minimize the risk of adverse effects during
vaccination.
I think the scale of deployment of Pfizer vaccine is tremendously greater then all other combined. For example in NJ it
is almost the only game in town now. That's might explain this statistic.
Notable quotes:
"... During the first two months of the rollout of Pfizer and Moderna "vaccines" in 2021, 95 percent of deaths from vaccines recorded in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) were for those agents ..."
During the first two months of the rollout of Pfizer and Moderna "vaccines" in 2021, 95
percent of deaths from vaccines recorded in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
(VAERS) were for those agents, meaning only five percent of reported deaths involved all the
other vaccines put together.
Compared to 2019, deaths in VAERS are up 6,000 percent.
Thirty-six deaths were recorded in the first quarter of 2020 versus 1,754 in the first
quarter of 2021.
Statements in this site are substantiated with facts that will stand in a court of law. Informed Consent requires a flow of information.
Click on the hyperlinked sections to direct you to primary sources such as CDC, WHO, FDA documents.
Anyone trying to take down this site will be named as codefendant in Nuremberg 2.0 for being an accomplice to crimes against humanity.
That includes social media. Lawyers are standing by.
Did you know?
1. The FDA did not approve
Moderna or Pfizer mRNA gene therapeutics they dubbed "vaccines".
It simply authorized them. Fauci
confirms. 19 doctors warned
the world of the dangers. AstraZeneca is being dropped by 24
countries . Johnson & Johnson
is a
Viral Vector (1) vaccine that was given
Emergency Use Authorization on Feb. 27, 2021. Several States have halted its distribution due to
formation of blood clots . The CDC confirms.
It also confirms (2)
the Pfizer & Moderna jabs are the
deadliest of all "vaccines"
3. The FDA & CDC have not revealed to the public over 20 adverse effects, including Death, related to Covid19 vaccines, which
were discussed in an
October 2020 meeting
. 3,186 deaths from Covid19 vaccines are reported by the
National Vaccine Information Center as at 4/16/2021, and
one-third of the deaths occurred within 48 hours. For clarification purposes in this article, Covid19 is regarded as an influenza
variant. Some will argue that it was developed in a
Gain-of-Function lab. That is moot. The primary
consideration is whether an experimental vaccine is warranted for a disease with a 99.9% survival rate. I am for tried, true and
tested (safe) vaccines. I am NOT for experimental vaccines backed by disastrous animal studies
Others call it
Information
Therapy that hacks the software of life, according to Moderna's [Mode RNA] chief scientist. You essentially become a GMO.
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny has mapped out eight mechanisms
of how the Covid jab is going to kill people
5. The mRNA jab does
not prevent you from contracting Covid19 or from transmitting it. Dr. Steve Hotze
elaborates .
Fauci confirms . The
CDC
graph underscores that reality, proving vaccines are ineffective and vaccine passports are totally useless. 87 million Americans
have been vaccinated as at 4/20/21, of which 7,157 have contracted Covid after being
vaccinated , resulting
in 88 deaths
Did you also know?
6. The CDC inflated the death rate for Covid19 - that was not isolated - by instructing medical practitioners in its
March 24, 2020 directive to ascribe the cause of death as Covid19 for all deaths, irrespective if patients were tested positive
for Covid19 or if they had other comorbidities, so as to ramp up the fear, and doctors have publicly stated they are being pressured
to mark Covid19 on death certificates, here is a list:
and that 60,000
Americans have been dying weekly, consistently, before and after the covid scare - more
data - while
deaths by influenza and other diseases have plummeted
7. The CDC later admitted that
94% of deaths had underlying conditions. That means that of the 527,000 deaths reported as Covid19 - the influenza variant
- only 6% were caused directly by Covid19, or 31,620. That brings the true case fatality rate to 0.12% out of the 27 million cases
8. The survival rate for Covid19 is, therefore, roughly 99.9%. When using the state population as the denominator, the death
rate is even lower, ranging from 36 to 247 deaths per
100,000 . As at March 19, 2021, even with the doctored numbers and faulty tests, the CDC arrived at the following
survival rates :
Ages 0-17 99.998%
Ages 18-49 99.95%
Ages 50-64 99.4%
Ages 65+ 91%
9. The CDC lumped
pneumonia, influenza, and Covid19 into a new epidemic it called PIC in order to inflate Covid19 deaths. The
CDC
stats for week of July 3, 2020 confirm that pneumonia and influenza combine with Covid to inflate the death rate. The Feb.
5, 2021
report
does the same. The duplicity is underscored in the
search results page , where only "(P&I)" is mentioned, but PIC graphs appear upon clicking the links. Deaths by influenza
have dropped from 61,000
in 2018 to 22,000 in 2020, while
medical
malpractice is the third leading cause of deaths in the US
10.
Hospitals are paid $13,000 for every Covid19 admission, and $39,000 for every patient that is put on a ventilator, on average.
More proof
Are you aware that...
11. The PCR tests do not detect SARS-CoV-2 particles, but particles from any number of viruses you might have contracted in
the past, and that a lawsuit for crimes against humanity
is being launched by a German attorney for this fraud. Even
Fauci admits PCR
tests don't work. The WHO
backs him up . In this CDC document , testing guidelines
state that false negatives and positives are possible - page 39. The PCR test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial
or viral pathogens - page 40. But most importantly, on page 42, SARS-CoV-2 was never isolated in the first instance: "Since no
quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted,
assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA".
Neither the CDC can provide samples of SARS-CoV-2, nor can
Stanford and Cornell
labs , and in a CNN interview
Fauci said he was not getting tested and there is no need to test asymptomatic people. He
reiterates that asymptomatic people have never been the driving force
of a pandemic. Again, the
WHO backs him up
12. There are
class action lawsuits in the works, naming Anthony Fauci as defendant, amongst others. Here's a partial list :
- a lawsuit against the
CDC was filed for illegally withholding information under FOIA
- the WHO has a lawsuit brought against
it by German lawyer, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, for crimes against humanity. Here is an
update
- nurses are suing a hospital CEO for covering up
the Covid fraud
- California teachers are
suing for being pressured to get an experimental vaccine, the
press release
- the Government of Norway is facing a crimes against humanity
lawsuit
- the UK Goverment will be facing a
lawsuit for crimes against humanity
- Human Rights attorney, Leigh Dundas , is going after California
for trying to vaccinate children without parental consent
- a British law firm is fighting
against 'No Jab, No Pay, No Job'
And we're just getting warmed up
13. Therapeutics and prophylactics for coronaviruses, like Hydroxychloroquine, have been approved in
WHO ,
CDC and NIH websites, but were intentionally kept
out of the public eye in order to fast track vaccines. Now, some
doctors are pleading that Ivermectin be used as a sure
cure
14. Front Line Doctors
who try to explain the benefits of proven therapeutics are being silenced, and some have had their license
suspended . A concise summary by Dr. Simone Gold, who is also an attorney and founder of
America's Front Line Doctors , is a
must watch . As well, the
British Medical Journal has broken rank and is citing
corruption and suppression of science
15. Fauci and the CDC
has flip-flopped on masks ,
contaminated surfaces ,
asymptomatic spread ,
testing ,
and has only recently acknowledged that
herd immunity is achieved
when antibodies are spread by those who beat the disease (the 99.9%), but still recommends social distancing, only now from
6 feet to 3 feet , resulting in this lockdown
map . Speaking of
herd immunity, the WHO changed its
June 7, 2020 definition "Herd immunity is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population
is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection" to "Herd immunity', also known as 'population
immunity', is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination
is reached. Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it" in
Nov. 13, 2020
... and that
16. Injuries
and deaths by mRNA jabs keep rising.
VAERS reports 10,152 serious injuries as at 4/16/21. In the first quarter of 2021 there has been a 6000% increase in vaccine
deaths from the same period a
year ago
17. The CDC at one time recommended DDT for in home use, and used
the same fear tactics to sell vaccines for
H1N1
18. Documents prove that the media was to be the
key player in creating the
hype leading up to the promotion of vaccines, that a VACCINATE WITH CONFIDENCE
paper by the
CDC exists, along with its
British equivalent
, and that lockdowns are used as a
carrot .
19. Politicians are caught on camera talking about the
theater of wearing masks, and the NCBI,
a division of the NIH, published a paper on
the complete ineffectiveness of masks. Even the
CDC warns of the dangers of masks
20. The CDC owns the patent for the coronavirus that is transmitted
to humans; a patent for a
Covid19 test was filed in 2015, and Covid19 test kits were being shipped
around the world in 2018
... or that
21. The Covid19 Vaccine was developed in just a
few hours
23. Bill Gates, who
invested $10 Billion into vaccines,
boasts of how he injects kids with genetically modified organisms, and can't wait for the next pandemic
to hit
24. Bill Gates is on record pushing for vaccine
passports . Parenthetically, various domain names for
"vaccinepassport" were
filed in 2016 by an entity in Milan, Italy
25. Bill Gates is on record pushing for the right vaccines to
lower the world population by 10% to 15%, and a call
has been made for his arrest and trial at the International Criminal Court
for crimes against humanity
Finally, did you know?
26. Covid variant vaccines are to be marketed without
safety trials
, Fauci confirmed it
, and that antibodies/antigens to SARS-CoV-2 are found in
saliva , making the use of masks counterproductive
in achieving herd immunity
27. The CDC, that props itself up with statements like:
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is the agency Americans trust with their lives. As a global leader in
public health, CDC is the nation's premier health promotion, prevention, and preparedness agency. Whether we are protecting the
American people from public health threats, researching emerging diseases, or mobilizing public health programs with our domestic
and international partners, we rely on our employees to make a real difference in the health and well-being of people here and
around the world."
buys and resells vaccines at a markup, about $4.6 Billion worth every year, and owns over 20 vaccine patents - according to
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. - and is listed on
Dun & Bradstreet
28. The consent forms in hospitals
disguise vaccines as "biogenics", and
blood brokers have paid up to $1,000 for blood samples of recovered Covid19 people
29. It's against the Nuremberg code to force vaccinations
on a person, and informed consent overrides public
policy. Federal law prohibits employers and others from using vaccines under EUA as a
condition of employment. A Nevada attorney is ready to do battle
- September 2019. The WHO's Global Preparedness Monitoring Board established as one of its progress indicators the release
of two lethal pathogens by September 2020.
See pg 39
- 2018. Bill Gates' INSTITUTE FOR DISEASE MODELING released a video modeling a pandemic starting at
Wuhan,
China
33. The Pfizer, Moderna and J&J jabs were developed using fetal cell lines, that is, cells grown in labs originally obtained
from aborted fetuses
decades ago . The argument used by pro-vaxers is that these are not the original cells, but descendants or duplicates of the
originals. The medical term is MRC-5 . You have a right
to decline any vaccine that was developed with or contains MRC-5. Furthermore, there are people who cannot take vaccines because
of medical contraindications. A vaccine passport would discriminate against these people as they attempt to live life in American
society. A vaccine passport violates The Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Section 12101) .
34. Lockdowns have had no effect on the
death rate . Here's
another
report . And here we can
see how Covid
respects borders
35. On March 2020, the British Government discussed tactics it would use to ensure citizens complied with the loss of their
rights and freedoms and these have included –
Using media to increase the sense of personal threat
Using media to increase the sense of responsibility to others
Using and promoting social approval for desired behaviors
Using social disapproval for those who do not comply
If ten percent of vaccinated people still get the virus it is hoax not vaccine. The argument
that it prevents serious illness is moot as serious illness is probably less then 1% of COVID-19
infections and happens most to people at risk (over 70, with several other serious medical
conditions, morbidly obese, with compromised immune system, etc)
The jab is great. Except now you need THREE of them. And except from the fact that you can
still get covid. And that you are still adviced to keep distance. And to wear a mask. And a
vaccine passport. And all the side effects. Like death. Great! I want it!!!
get nothing and like it 3 hours ago (Edited)
But for gods sake you must get the jab. Otherwise you "could" get the virus 50/50 chance,
which would kill you .01% of you are under 60 and healthy, or put you in the hospital maybe
.1%, or make you really sick like the flu 25% chance and the jab does that with 50% of people
or you don't even know you have it 30%. And if you do by chance get it, you have natural
immunity. So yes get the jab for sure ...
3rd Dose Of Pfizer's COVID Vaccine "Likely" Needed To Combat Mutant COVID Strains, CEO Says
BY TYLER DURDEN
THURSDAY, APR 15, 2021 - 03:33 PM
As American waits for the CDC to finish a review of blood-clotting risks associated with Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine,
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourlas has warned reporters that recipients of the Pfizer vaccine - the most widely distributed jab in the
US - will "likely" need to receive a third "booster" shot within 12 months of being vaccinated, and possibly as early as six
months after receiving their second dose.
The news is hardly a surprise. Comments and rumors about the need for booster shots have been reported by the US media
since
late last year
. But on Thursday, Bourlas said a booster shout would likely be necessary, and that patients may need to be
vaccinated against COVID annually, similar to the way that flu vaccines are developed and distributed.
"It is extremely important to suppress the pool of people that can be susceptible to the virus," he told CNBC's Bertha Coombs
during an event with CVS Health. Bourlas added that vaccines will need to be used to combat not just COVID, but the evolving
mutant strains - or "variants" - like B.1.1.7, known as the "Kent" strain, which has been blamed for some of the botched
rollout in the US.
Bourlas isn't the only major public health official warning about the need for booster shots. On Thursday, the Biden
administration's Covid response chief science officer David Kessler said Americans should expect to receive booster shots to
protect against coronavirus variants. He noted that while the current crop of COVID jabs is highly effective, they could be
"challenged" by the new variants.
New data released earlier this month by Pfizer said that updated data from its clinical trial showed its vaccine to be highly
effective six months after the second dose. The data was based on more than 12K vaccinated participants. More data is still
needed to determine whether protections last after six months, however. Pfizer and German partner BioNTech began studying a
third dose of their vaccine in late February.
The booster shot is aimed at protecting against future variants, which may be better at evading antibodies from vaccine than
earlier strains of the virus. About 144 volunteers will be given the third dose, mostly those who participated in the
vaccine's early-stage U.S. testing last year.
"We don't know everything at this moment," he told House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Response. "We are studying the
durability of the antibody response," he said. "It seems strong but there is some waning of that and no doubt the variants
challenge...they make these vaccines work harder. So I think for planning purposes, planning purposes only, I think we should
expect that we may have to boost."
Bourla said the company would likely try out the third doses first on a select group of individuals who participated in the
original studies.
Yearly
Shot = Damn people are stupid. Maybe I can make it monthly
S. Archer
37 minutes ago
It
won't end with a 3rd shot. This crap is going to become annual. Every year we'll be harassed about whether
we have had our covid shots or not. I for one will not be participating. GTFO with that crap.
Around 20 years ago, the work of two researchers -- Drew Weissman and Katalin Karikó -- helped overcome two primary barriers that had
been standing in the way of utilizing mRNA technology: an inflammatory effect on the body that made test animals ill, and the
fragile nature of the molecule itself, both of which hindered its utility.
Despite those advancements, and the wealth of research that's been carried out since, the fact remains that the two mRNA vaccines in
use today are the first of their kind. That may be in part because it's difficult to generate interest and funding to support
pursuing "non-mainstream" science outside of a crisis, Duprex said -- what he characterized as "a shortsighted way to think about
biology."
Only now, amid a devastating pandemic, has this technology reached mainstream prominence. "Given the choice, I would have rather
avoided this past year," Weissman said. "But we didn't, and now RNA is going to be our future."
Here's a look at how, exactly, these vaccines manage to pull off this feat and some of the key research breakthroughs that made this
moment possible.
How messenger RNA vaccines work
In order to develop these vaccines, researchers took the RNA-based genetic sequence of the coronavirus and turned it into DNA. This
crucial step allowed them to identify the "instructions" necessary to create the spike protein, engineer corresponding synthetic
mRNA and package that into their vaccines.
mRNA, as its moniker implies, is a messenger. This particular type of RNA is tasked with delivering messages to microscopic cellular
machines called ribosomes, located in the cytoplasm of our cells, which are responsible for synthesizing proteins. Those ribosomes
then interpret that message to make proteins and start executing its instructions, explained Phillip Sharp, a molecular biologist
and MIT professor who shared the 1993 Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine for his contribution to our understanding of RNA.
Dendritic cells, the watchdogs of the immune system, play an essential role in responding to pathogens. They patrol the body in
search of foreign invaders and, when they find one, start stimulating an immune response. When these cells encounter mRNA that's
been injected via vaccination, their ribosomes decode the message and allow the cells to temporarily display spike proteins
identical to the ones found on the coronavirus's exterior, Weissman said.
"Dendritic cells make the spike protein and then they present it to other immune cells and activate them to start the immune
response," he added.
An
animated visual of the coronavirus. Megan McGrew/PBS NewsHour
What does the coronavirus look like?
Like the other members of its viral family, SARS-CoV-2 -- the official name for the coronavirus -- is an RNA virus. Simply put,
each individual virus is composed of single strands of genetic material protected by a fatty outer layer that's coated in
spike proteins. Those "spikes" are what the virus uses to hijack our cells and use our molecular machinery to make more copies
of itself.
The proteins allow the dendritic cells to alert two more key players in the immune system -- T cells and B cells -- that if they see
those same spikes on any other cell, they should recognize them as a foreign invaders and either destroy them or generate antibodies
to neutralize them immediately.
"There's a memory component of those cell populations, and that stays in your body over a long period of time," Sharp said. "If a
similar virus infects you, those memory cells are ready to go. They are all perfected to go out and kill that virus."
mRNA naturally degrades rapidly over time, so once it has served its purpose, it simply breaks down. The dendritic cells that
expressed the spike protein eventually die and are replaced by new ones that continue to pick up that vaccine-delivered mRNA and
repeat the process all over again in the course of about two weeks following immunization.
Some members of the public have expressed concern over unfounded speculation that these vaccines could negatively affect the body.
But it is impossible for an mRNA vaccine to alter your DNA because synthetic mRNA operates only in the cytoplasm and is incapable of
entering any other parts of our cells, such as the nucleus.
Like virtually all vaccines, those that use mRNA can trigger temporary symptoms like a fever, fatigue and soreness at the injection
site that dissipate within a few days. But clinical trials that took place before the vaccines were authorized, as well as those
that have followed, all suggest that these vaccines are both safe and effective at preventing serious illness and death.
"It's always, always much more risky to get the disease than it is to get the vaccine," Duprex said.
How did we get here?
mRNA was first
injected
into the muscles of mice in 1990
with the intention to deliver therapeutic proteins. But that effort "didn't go very far,"
according to Weissman, in large part due to the strong inflammatory response it induced, which severely sickened the animals
involved.
That's because in both animals and humans, cells feature a number of different receptors that can recognize mRNA as a foreign
substance that must be destroyed. Those receptors help these cells distinguish their fellow cells from invaders like viruses,
bacteria or even tumor cells.
Both RNA and DNA are composed of four nucleotides. More than a decade after that first injection in mice, Weissman and Karikó, who
now serves as senior vice president at BioNTech, which partnered with Pfizer to manufacture their joint vaccine, figured out a way
to
insert
an modified nucleotide
that allows the synthetic mRNA to masquerade as a normal cell and circumvent those receptors, no longer
triggering extreme inflammation. It also made the mRNA-spurred protein production more efficient.
"Our big discovery was that we could modify the RNA to make it non-inflammatory. And that had a couple of important features to it,
but the first was that it greatly increased the amount of protein made off of the RNA," which increased potency, Weissman said.
With the inflammation problem solved, Weissman and Karikó then turned to tweaking how mRNA is delivered so it could actually do its
job once injected into the body. mRNA is an inherently "labile," or unstable, material that can degrade rapidly to the point of
being rendered ineffective.
After testing around 40 different types of delivery systems, the researchers found their golden ticket: lipid nanoparticles. These
"droplets of fat" coat the mRNA and allow it to successfully enter our cells, which are also encapsulated in an oily substance.
Traditional vaccines are typically formulated with adjuvants that are designed to stimulate the immune response in their recipients.
In what Weissman described as a lucky development, lipid nanoparticles happened to act as an adjuvant that stimulated a specific
type of "helper cell" that promotes antibody responses.
"We use the lipid nanoparticles to get over a lot of the fragility [problems] because that protected the [mRNA] after you injected
it into people, and it promoted these cells to take up the [mRNA] and start the vaccine process," Weissman said.
Where mRNA stands today
In the years since Weissman and Karikó made these breakthroughs, mRNA research has continued to march on. Weissman and his current
colleagues have worked on a variety of mRNA vaccines, including a "universal" flu shot that could cover
a
majority of influenza viruses
and has so far proven to be effective in animal trials.
Compared to traditional vaccine platforms that require a series of complex steps, like growing mammalian cells in massive quantities
and a viral purification process that looks different depending on the pathogen you're working with, mRNA is now easy to manufacture
at a fairly large scale.
Instead of needing "to reinvent the wheel every time you make a new vaccine," Weissman said, "with [mRNA,] it's the same reaction,
and the only thing you have to do is plug in the new sequence for any virus, so that makes it very easy to produce a new vaccine."
Both Moderna and Pfizer's vaccines generated above 90 percent protection after two doses during clinical trials that played out
before new variants of the virus marginally reduced their efficacy. Even so, the two give recipients remarkably high levels of
protection, particularly
against
severe disease and death
.
The CDC recently released new research that found these vaccines reduce a fully vaccinated person's chance of
getting
infected with the coronavirus
by 90 percent in "real-world" settings like the workplace.
Given that no vaccines have ever been approved to immunize people against any kind of coronavirus, and that the FDA's original hope
was to secure one with
at
least 50 percent efficacy
to curb the pandemic, these results represent yet another significant milestone in annals of RNA
technology.
Much more research lies ahead for these vaccines, both of which have been rolled out in the United States and in some other
countries over the past few months. In addition to continuing to track safety and efficacy data, researchers need to know how well
these vaccines
prevent
recipients from transmitting COVID-19
and how long the protection they offer lasts. Until we know the answers to those
questions, recipients should keep following pandemic precautions like wearing a mask, even after they've gotten their two doses,
experts say.
Johnson & Johnson's vaccine, a one dose shot that uses a
different
yet similarly innovative platform
to deliver immunity compared to mRNA, has also been authorized for use in the United States.
Its strong efficacy and ability to be stored at a less strict temperature range makes experts hopeful that the rollout of this
vaccine will help
close
some gaps in vaccine access
both in this country and abroad.
In tackling COVID-19, Pfizer and Moderna's vaccines have "paved the way," Duprex said, when it comes to illustrating the utility of
synthetic mRNA. And yet, while he anticipates that researchers will "only get better" at making tweaks that allow for better
delivery and stability of this technology, he notes that we're still in the early days of harnessing its utility -- we also can't
assume that mRNA is "the next big panacea" that will solve all of our problems.
But, Duprex said, "the beautiful thing about this is this just gives us another brush for the palette of novel therapeutics [and]
novel ideas that somebody in the next generation of scientists are going to be able to [use to] paint."
Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a
virologist at the University of California , Riverside. "I'm
shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive," she said.
A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35, she added. Dr. Mina said he would set the figure
at 30, or even less.
Moderna Inc.'s vaccine remained more than 90% effective after six months, according to a new
analysis of data from the company's final-stage trial.
Beginning two weeks after the second dose, the shot was more than 90% effective overall, and
more than 95% effective at preventing severe cases, according to a statement. The company
didn't release further details and said the follow-up results were preliminary as the study is
continuing.
If we assume that 10% of vaccinated who get infected (the vaccine does not prevent infection but does prevent development of
virus pneumonia) will get virus pneumonia and if the effectiveness will drop further in 12 month this means that this particular
vaccine is a grandiose failure.
Notable quotes:
"... Actual death count means the number of death where CODID-19 is primary cause means deaths from virus pneumonia only. All other needs to be excluded, IMHO. As money are involved, I think the statistics is grossly exaggerated. ..."
"... If we assume that 10% of vaccinated who get infected (the vaccine does not prevent infection but does prevent development of virus pneumonia) will get virus pneumonia and if the effectiveness will drop further in 12 month this means that this particular vaccine is a grandiose failure. ..."
Scientists at the VA's Office of Research and Development in White River Junction, Vermont, have found that the vaccines can provide
immunity for at least seven to nine months, a time frame similar to the immune response generated in people who have had COVID-19.
The study examined antibodies in some of the 240,000 veterans who have contracted COVID-19, Dr. Richard Stone, VA's acting under
secretary for health, said Friday.
Speaking to reporters during a news conference Friday with VA Secretary Denis McDonough, Dr. Richard Stone:
"The evidence is that between seven and nine months, we can feel comfortable that you are still protected. We think it will
be longer than that. That is not a limitation,"
While several studies have shown that immunity following a COVID-19 infection can last at least six months, and perhaps as many
as eight months, research on the lasting impact of COVID-19 vaccines is ongoing, and scientists have been hesitant to discuss the
time frame before all the data is compiled.
But the VA's findings, Stone said, could "extend" the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's message that immunity from
a vaccine lasts at least six months. Dr. Richard Stone:
"Right now it appears we will be able to publish in the next few weeks."
The belief right now in Covid-19 like the flu is an endemic disease just like influenza. The issue then is how to reduce mortality
and hospitalizations going forward
Likbez, April 13, 2021 6:18 pm
> The issue then is how to reduce mortality and hospitalizations going forward
In order to reduce mortality it is important to have valid statistical data of the number of infections (not positive PcR tests
without specifying the number of amplifications )
This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in
the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.
[why?]
The C.D.C.'s own calculations suggest that it is extremely difficult to detect any live virus in a sample
above a threshold
of 33 cycles. Officials at some state labs said the C.D.C. had not asked them to note threshold values or to share
them with contact-tracing organizations. [why?]
Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of
California, Riverside. "I'm shocked
that people would think that 40 could represent a positive," she said.
A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35, she added. Dr. Mina said he would set the figure at 30, or even less.
Actual death count means the number of death where CODID-19 is primary cause means deaths from virus pneumonia only.
All other needs to be excluded, IMHO. As money are involved, I think the statistics is grossly exaggerated.
In this respect, one effect that does need a valid explanation is almost total elimination of deaths from influenza this season.
How this could be?
Development of direct methods of treating COVID-19 is also important and can help to reduce "real" mortality. This policy of
putting all money on a single method - vaccination - looks pretty questionable to me, taking into account that coronaviruses mutate
rapidly which limits the duration of vaccination, and the possibility of discovering long term side effects.
What about effective antibody treatment and new medications that supposedly can prevent the development of virus pneumonia?
Which means that death from COVID-19 can be eliminated without vaccination as only pneumonia is deadly in this case.
Traditionally pneumonia is the main cause of deaths among elderly so the fact that now this is the COVID-19 pneumonia changes
very little in statistics of death for the elderly. Post-influenza bacterial pneumonia is dangerous enough for this category of
people, so COVID-19 pneumonia changes almost nothing here.
This wide-scale biological experiment with vaccination for age groups below, say, 50, does not look too promising if the effectiveness
of the vaccine is limited to a single virus season. Which is what the CEO of Pfizer hinted recently.
If we assume that 10% of vaccinated who get infected (the vaccine does not prevent infection but does prevent development of
virus pneumonia) will get virus pneumonia and if the effectiveness will drop further in 12 month this means that this particular
vaccine is a grandiose failure.
Also constant vaccine cheerleading in neoliberal MSM became a little bit annoying as for age groups below, say 50, this virus
does not represent serious, statistically significant danger.
And what if we discover serious side effects of Pfizer or Moderna vaccine a year or two from now ? Then what?
IMHO attempt to immunize people below 25 or 30 years old without serious health problems would be highly questionable and possible
harmful. And, unfortunately, I saw many such people in lines.
Also, one size does not fit all here. There areas with high density of population like NYC and vicinity (NY metropolitan
area). Where the risk is highest and the virus represent serious and immanent threat due to the specifics of this env. Which
is unhealthy env to start with.
And there are rural areas ( like in PA ) where so far there were no cases of COVID-19. At all.
It is wrong to treat them identically.
Also the value of vaccination depends on occupation, along with the age and general health. People who need to contact
many other people can benefit more from the vaccination.
For them the small risk of complications from the vaccine is far less than the risk of being infected and develop COVID-19
pneumonia. For people living more or less isolated life, and, especially, people paranoid about this virus - not so much.
"... Dr. Kaplan is a faculty member at the Stanford School of Medicine Clinical Excellence Research Center and the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health. He has served as associate director of the National Institutes of Health and chief science officer at the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. ..."
Distrust of the establishment plays a role in vaccine hesitancy, but it's probably time to
back off on the prevailing commentary suggesting that those avoiding vaccines are
irresponsible, uninformed or politically manipulated. Achieving herd immunity requires that
about 70% of Americans are vaccinated or contract Covid and develop natural immunity, which
official numbers place around 10% of the population. Polls consistently show that 21% say they
will definitely not get the vaccine and about a third rate their chances of taking the vaccine
as less than 50%. It's better to address common fears and concerns respectfully and
informatively than with hectoring and condescension.
Dr. Kaplan is a faculty member at the Stanford School of Medicine Clinical Excellence
Research Center and the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health. He has served as associate
director of the National Institutes of Health and chief science officer at the U.S. Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality.
I just checked the CDC Covid vaccine tracker and most states are under 30%.
I think they may get 5% more to take the jab, but thats about it!
Txjac 20 hours ago
At the hospital where my sister works they have had to ask them to stop shipping the
vaccine. Not many are lining up to take it. Seems like we have an overabundance of it here in
Houston
The EU handling of the vaccine supply has also caused splits within the EU. Many countries
including Austria, Hungary and Czech republic are going to be using the Sputnik vaccine
despite it not being approved by the EMA. This is a definite ite deplomatic win for Russia
and further shows that these countries will no longer sacrifice national interest when
ordered to do so.
The experimental mRNA injections are not vaccines. They do not give immunity or prevent
transmission. Their purpose is to mitigate symptoms so that the sick person does not get sick
enough to require hospitalisation and emergency approval was given on that basis.
Typically vaccines, such as the one for measles, provide lifelong immunity. It is unclear how
coronavirus vaccines fair against mutations of COVID-19. The question is can vaccinated people
provide for COVID-19 the new platform for mutations.
Efficiency is probably aroun 80% ( if calculated as (850-77)/(850+77) ) not 91% as the
article claims.
The Covid-19 vaccine from Pfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE remains highly effective six months
after its second dose, an indication that protection could last for an even longer period.
The findings, released on Thursday, emerged from a continuing review of how volunteers in
the shot's late-stage trial were faring and whether they contracted Covid-19 with symptoms.
... Of the 927 cases of symptomatic Covid-19 observed through March 13, 850 were in people
who received a placebo and 77 in people who were vaccinated, according to the companies.
That corresponds to a vaccine efficacy of 91.3% up to six months after getting the second
dose, Pfizer and BioNTech said.
The protection remained generally consistent across age, gender, race and ethnicity, as well
as among individuals with underlying health conditions, the companies said.
The vaccine was also 95% to 100% effective against severe disease, with the precise figure
depending on whether researchers used a definition of severe disease from the U.S. Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention or one from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Some 800 trial subjects were enrolled in South Africa, where a more contagious variant of
the virus was first identified. Among those volunteers, there were nine cases of Covid-19, all
in people who got a placebo. Sequencing confirmed six of the nine cases were of the variant.
...the vaccine generated a slightly lower immune response against the variant than the more
common strain circulating in the U.S., but was
still effective at neutralizing the variant virus .
Of the 697 cases of symptomatic Covid-19 among study subjects in the U.S., 647 were in
people who received a placebo, with the rest in vaccinated subjects, indicating 92.6% efficacy,
according to the companies.
...They are also in discussions with regulators about studying a tweaked version of their
vaccine that researchers designed to protect against the variant found in South Africa.
Pfizer has previously said it anticipates producing the Covid-19 shots for at least several
years on the expectation that booster shots will be needed annually or every few years to
maintain protection.
There are a lot of issues with vaccine rollout. One issue is that they do not check if a person has immunity to
the virus or not.
Another issue is how long vaccine will be effective is the next year we might face yet another strain of the virus.
Coronaviruses are mutating viruses and that's why previous attempts to create vaccine failed.
Are those people who demonstrate a severe reaction to the vaccine the same people who would get severe case of COVID-19 if
infected ?
Yes another issue is "emergency use". Long time effects are not known. We do not know why immunity for some people do not emerge
and they became ill even after being immunized. We do not know how long immunization status hold. Will it weaken in six months
to the level when infection became possible again or. and how effective it is against new strains.
So this rush with vaccine rollout is a large scale biological experiment with uncertain consequences.
For the past few weeks on Twitter, Berenson has mischaracterized just about every detail regarding the vaccines
to make the dubious case that most people would be better off avoiding them. As his conspiratorial nonsense accelerates
toward the pandemic's finish line, he has proved himself
the
Secretariat of being wrong
:
He has blamed the vaccines
for causing spikes
in
severe illness
, by pointing to data that actually demonstrate their safety and effectiveness.
He has suggested that
countries
such as Israel have suffered
from their early vaccine rollout, even though deaths and hospitalizations among
vaccinated groups in Israel have plummeted.
He has implied that for
most non-seniors, the side effects of the vaccines are worse than having COVID-19 itself -- even though, according to the
CDC, the pandemic has killed
tens
of thousands of people
under 50 and the vaccines
have
not conclusively killed anybody
.
Usually, I would refrain from lavishing attention on
someone so blatantly incorrect. But with vaccine resistance
hovering
around 30 percent of the general population, and with 40 percent
of Republicans saying they won't get a shot, debunking
vaccine skepticism, particularly in right-wing circles, is a matter of life and death.
Berenson's TV appearances are more misdirection than
outright fiction, and his Twitter feed blends internet-y irony and scientific jargon in a way that may obscure what he's
actually saying. To pin him down, I emailed several questions to him last week. Below, I will lay out, as clearly and
fairly as I can, his claims about the vaccines and how dangerously, unflaggingly, and superlatively wrong they are.
Before I go point by point through his wrong
positions, let me be exquisitely clear about
what is true
. The vaccines work. They
worked in the clinical trials, and they're working around the world. The vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and
Johnson & Johnson seem to provide
stronger
and more lasting protection
against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants than natural infection. They are
excellent
at reducing symptomatic infection
. Even better, they are extraordinarily
successful
at
preventing severe illness from COVID-19. Countries that have vaccinated large percentages of their population quickly, such
as the U.S., the United Kingdom, and Israel, have all seen sharp and sustained declines in hospitalizations among the
elderly. Meanwhile, countries that have lagged in the vaccination effort -- including the U.K.'s neighbors France and Italy,
and Israel's neighbor Jordan -- have struggled to contain the virus. The authorized vaccines are marvels, and the case against
them relies on half-truths, untruths, and obfuscations.
Berenson's claim:
In country after country, "cases rise after vaccination campaigns begin," he wrote in an
email.
The reality:
In
country after country, cases decline after vaccination campaigns begin.
One of Berenson's themes is that the mRNA vaccines
are badly underperforming outside the clinical trials and are possibly even causing a spike in cases after the first shot.
But just this week, CDC researchers studying real-world conditions came to the opposite
conclusion
:
The mRNA vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer are 90 percent effective two weeks after the second dose, in line with the trial
data. "COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for all eligible persons," they concluded.
Still, Berenson pushes the argument that the vaccines
are causing suspicious illness and death. On
Twitter
and
in his email to me, Berenson claimed that
an
"excellent" Denmark study
showed a 40 percent rise in infections immediately after nursing-home residents received
their first vaccine shot.
I reached out to
that
study's lead author
, Ida Rask Moustsen-Helms at the Statens Serum Institut, who said that Berenson had mischaracterized
her findings. She explained to me that the Danish nursing homes in question were already experiencing a significant
COVID-19 outbreak when vaccinations began. Many people in the long-term-care facilities were likely already sick before
their vaccine was administered, and "these people would technically count as vaccinated with confirmed COVID-19, even if
the infection happened prior to the vaccination or its immune response," she said. With limited vaccines, countries ought
to give the first vaccines to the groups most likely to get COVID-19. That's exactly what seems to have happened here.
Berenson is scaremongering about the vaccines by essentially criticizing their wise distribution.
In our emails, Berenson further argued that many of
the perceived benefits of the vaccines are illusory. "It is very hard to distinguish the course of the epidemic this winter
in countries that have vaccinated heavily, such as Israel and the UK, and those that have not, such as Canada and Germany,"
he wrote.
This is hogwash. In the U.K. and Israel,
hospitalizations have fallen by at least 70 percent since mid-January, and they remain low. In
Canada
,
hospitalizations fell by significantly less, and in Germany, the seven-day average of COVID-19 cases has more than
doubled
since
mid-February; its government has
debated
a new lockdown
.
This stage of the pandemic is a race between the
variants and the vaccines. In many states, such as Michigan and New York, normalizing behavior combined with more
contagious strains of the virus are pushing up cases again. This is not evidence that America's vaccination campaign isn't
working. Quite the opposite: It highlights the urgency of moving faster to deliver vaccines, which are our best chance to
control the spread of contagious variants.
Berenson's claim:
Pfizer-BioNTech's clinical-trial data prove that the companies are being shady about vaccine
efficacy.
The reality:
His
"proof" is a total mischaracterization of trial data.
Berenson seems to enjoy spelunking through research to
find esoteric statistics that he then dresses up with spooky language to make confusing points that sow doubt about the
vaccines. Arguing that COVID-19 cases spike after the first dose, he
directs
people
to the
Pfizer-BioNTech
FDA briefing document
, which reports hundreds of "suspected but unconfirmed" COVID-19 cases in the trial's vaccine
group that aren't counted as positive cases in the final efficacy analysis.
But "suspected but unconfirmed" doesn't refer to
participants who were probably sick with COVID-19. On the contrary, it refers to participants who reported various
symptoms, such as a cough or a sore throat, and then took a PCR test --
and then that test
came back negative.
"His point is absolutely stupid, and I would know
because I enrolled participants in the Pfizer-BioNTech trial," Kawsar Talaat, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins
University, told me. "He's talking about people who call in and say, 'I have a runny nose.' So we mark them as 'suspected.'
Then we ask them to take a PCR test, and we test their swab, and if the test comes back negative, the FDA says it's
'unconfirmed.' That's what
suspected but unconfirmed
means."
When I emailed Pfizer and BioNTech representatives
about Berenson's claim, they struggled to even understand what I was talking about. Someone was taking a group of several
thousand people who had tested negative for COVID-19 and, from afar, diagnosing all of them with COVID-19? "Does not make
sense," a BioNTech spokesperson responded curtly.
If you were enrolled in Berenson's vaccine trial for
SARS-CoV-2 and never contracted the virus, but one day you told a clinician that you had a bit of a cough, Berenson would
mark you down as "infected with COVID-19" and blame the vaccine. That's the logic here, and, as you can tell, it's not
really logic; it just seems like an attempt to find something -- anything -- wrong with the vaccines.
Berenson's claim:
The mRNA vaccines dangerously suppress your immune system, possibly causing severe illness
and even death.
The reality:
His
claim is based on a total misunderstanding of how the immune system works.
Berenson wrote in an email that "the first dose of
the mRNA vaccine temporarily suppresses the immune system." He has claimed on
Twitter
that
the mRNA vaccines "transiently suppress lymphocytes," or our white blood cells, and suggested that this might lead to
"post-vaccination deaths."
Scientists tore this one to shreds. "The claim he is
making is simply fearmongering, connecting a simple physiological event with bogus claims of deaths," Shane Crotty, a
researcher at the Center for Infectious Disease and Vaccine Research at the La Jolla Institute for Immunology, told me.
"The observation of lymphocyte numbers temporarily dropping in blood is actually a common phenomenon in immune responses."
A little background is useful here: White blood cells
are the immune system's scouts. After an effective vaccination, some of them leave the blood and go to the site of
inflammation, such as the arm that received the shot. "The cells are not gone," Crotty said. "They come back to the blood
in a few days. It is generally a good sign of an immune response, not the opposite." To demonstrate that the vaccines are
counterproductive, then, Berenson is pointing to the very biological mechanism that strongly suggests they're working just
as scientists expected.
Readers are surely familiar with other biological
events that sound bad in the short term but are part of a normal, healthy process. When you lift weights at the gym, your
muscles experience small tears that recover and then strengthen over time. Imagine if some loudmouth started screaming in
the middle of the weight room, "You all think you're building your muscles, but actually you're tearing them to shreds, and
it could kill you!" You would probably carry on calmly, assuming that this guy just got a little overexcited after finding
a Yahoo Answers article about muscle formation and stopped reading after the first paragraph. Berenson's claim is basically
a version of that, but for your immune system.
"Actually," Talaat said, "his argument is even worse
than your analogy. Muscles really do tear at the gym. But lymphocytes don't go away. They just move. What he's describing
as dangerous in these tweets is just the regular functioning of our immune system."
Berenson's claim:
In Israel, the shots are causing a scary number of deaths and hospitalizations.
The reality:
Israel
is a sensational vaccine success story: a nearly open economy where COVID-19 rates are plunging.
See
for yourself!
On February 11, Berenson
warned
his
followers that early data from Israel proved that vaccine advocates "need to start ratcheting down expectations." This was
a strange claim to make at the time: An Israeli health-care provider had
reported
no
deaths and four severe cases among its first 523,000 fully vaccinated people. But the claim seems even more ridiculous now,
in light of Israel's incredible success since then. New positive cases in Israel are down
roughly
95 percent
since January. Deaths have plunged, even though the economy is
almost
fully open
.
When I asked Berenson to explain his beef with
Israel's vaccine record, he sent
a
link to a news story in Hebrew
that, he said, reported "several hundred deaths and hospitalizations and thousands of
infections in people who have received both doses." I can't read Hebrew, so I reached out to someone who can, Eran Segal, a
computational biologist at the Weizmann Institute of Science, in Rehovot, Israel. He replied by email: "This link actually
shows that the vast majority of those who died were NOT vaccinated." By Segal's calculations, the vaccines have reduced the
risk of death by more than 90 percent in the Israeli population. Segal also said that "numbers of infections only went
down, and even more so among the age groups who were first to vaccinate."
Berenson is wrong about all sorts of little things
when it comes to Israel, but I want to emphasize how straightforward and obvious the big picture is here. Israel is
a
world leader in vaccinations
. Its COVID-19 cases have plunged, and its economy is roaring back to life.
Berenson's claim:
Healthy people under 70 shouldn't get a vaccine.
The reality:
Outside
of extremely rare cases, every adult should get a vaccine -- and if it's authorized for children, children should get it
too.
I wanted to know where Berenson stood on the most
important question: Who does he think should get a vaccine, and who does he think shouldn't? This was the core of his
answer:
For most healthy people under 50 -- and certainly under 35 -- the side effects
from the shots are likely to be worse than a case of Covid. Over 70, sure. The grey zone is somewhere in the middle and
probably depends on personal risk factors.
This response has two huge problems. First, although
the disease clearly gets more severe with age, drawing a line at 70 is nonsensical. Those in their 50s and early 60s are
three times more likely to die from this disease than a 40-something, and
400 times
more
likely to die than a teenager, according to the CDC.
According to virologist and vaccine expert, Geert Vanden Bossche, this experimental
procedure causes the recipients body to start producing antibodies specific for Covid but
practically eliminates a bodies natural ability to produce antibodies capable of eliminating
Covid variants or any other diseases.
In other words, taking the jab ruins our natural immune system. Those who have been
"vaccinated" and travel around freely become super-spreaders of the variant mutations. Notice
the recent news reports indicating a rising number cases involving covid variants.
Very well put, but the window is closed. We are all going to have to pass through the
totalitarian crucible (maybe gauntlet is a better term) unless we die along the way. Too many
people have bought into this nonsense for sense to prevail without a brutal systemic failure.
And it will be a while, so make a point of putting some relevant time capsules together so
that the people of the future will have some real hard copy to study, as the electronic files
will not survive.
I listened to this interview but why does this jab do that but others (flu, measles, hpv,
etc ) do not do the same thing?
I get that part of his argument is that this vaccine is "leaky", that is to say it doesn't
stop the virus but accelerates its evolution/mutation rate. However, I still didn't grok the
way this vaccine is different in terms of compromising our natural immunity compared to other
vaccines which apparently don't (Bossche is not complete anti-vax).
previous vaccines primed the immune system by using offensive dead or attenuated virus
combined with other junk designed to piss off your system.
mRNA vaccines actually create the offending particles by burrowing into your cells and
using them as partial Covid spike protein factories. this REALLY pisses off your immune
system. and it is feared it could cause cytokine storms (dangerous excessive immune response)
upon exposure to the wild virus.
@Vax-r-us ts
rid of the plasma cells making them within a few months.
Our authorities have rejected the use of pharmacological treatments (such as
glucocorticoids in serious cases to dampen cytokine storm, published by Chinese for treating
Covid-19 in March, 2020) and aspirin, to minimize clotting from Covid-19. There are a host of
well-understood approved drugs that in combination may be effective prophylactically. As most
of the censored dissident scientists have noted, just keeping healthy and avoiding vitamin/
nutrient deficiencies (a major problem in the elderly) may be enough to avoid serious case of
Covid-19 without vaccines.
The European Union
's drugs regulator said a link between AstraZeneca Plc 's Covid-19 vaccine and a rare
type of blood clot is possible, identifying at least 62 cases of the condition while insisting
the shot's benefits still outweigh its risks.
The comments further cloud the picture around the vaccine after Germany restricted it to
older people this week amid growing concerns about side effects. That could slow Europe's
already lagging immunization program as virus cases surge anew.
The European Medicines
Agency said its safety committee will probably issue an updated recommendation next week.
If the panel concludes there's a connection between the clots and Astra's vaccine, the EMA will
change its recommendations to patients and health-care officials, Executive Director Emer Cooke
said.
"At the moment, at this stage of our investigations, the link is possible, and we cannot say
any more than that at this point," Cooke said in a press conference. For now, there's no
evidence to support restricting use of the vaccine in any population of people, she said.
... .... ....
Concerns surrounding the Astra shot have focused on an unusual type of blood clot known as
cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. It's associated with a low number of blood platelets and
occurs most commonly in women between the ages of 30 and 45 -- a group that, in the EU, has
been disproportionately vaccinated with Astra's shot, EMA officials said.In individuals under
the age of 60, health authorities are seeing more cases of the rare clots in people who
recently got the Astra vaccine than would be normally expected, said Peter Arlett, EMA's head
of pharmacovigilance and epidemiology. The agency has identified about one report per 100,000
people under the age of 60 who got the vaccine in the European economic area. It hasn't yet
been able to identify specific risk factors, however, such as age, gender or previous medical
history of clotting disorders.
The figure of 62 cases of the rare clots includes all side effects reported in the EMA's
EudraVigilance system, which includes cases both in and outside Europe, the agency said.
The count dates to March 22, and additional cases have occurred since then.
Looking beyond the rare clots, most of the adverse reactions reported in patients who had
received Astra's vaccine occurred in the U.K., where it has been used most and where the
government has defended the homegrown shot. A March 8 review identified 246 reactions
involving various types of artery blockages or blood clots in Britain, including a range of
conditions. That's out of 269 instances in a dozen countries, which included about 40 deaths,
the regulator
said . Just because the reactions were reported after vaccination doesn't mean they're
linked to the vaccine.
So, the New Normals are discussing the Unvaccinated Question. What is to be done with us?
No, not those who haven't been "vaccinated" yet. Us. The "Covidiots." The "Covid
deniers." The "science deniers." The "reality deniers." Those who refuse to get "vaccinated,"
ever.
There is no place for us in New Normal society. The New Normals know this and so do we. To
them, we are a suspicious, alien tribe of people. We do not share their ideological beliefs. We
do not perform their loyalty rituals, or we do so only grudgingly, because they force us to do
so. We traffic in arcane "conspiracy theories," like "pre-March-2020 science," "natural herd
immunity," "population-adjusted death rates," "Sweden," "Florida," and other heresies.
They do not trust us. We are strangers among them. They suspect we feel superior to them.
They believe we are conspiring against them, that we want to deceive them, confuse them, cheat
them, pervert their culture, abuse their children, contaminate their precious bodily fluids,
and perpetrate God knows what other horrors.
So they are discussing the need to segregate us, how to segregate us, when to segregate us,
in order to protect society from us. In their eyes, we are no more than
criminals , or, worse, a plague , an infestation. In the
words of someone (I can't quite recall who), "getting rid of the Unvaccinated is not a question
of ideology. It is a question of cleanliness," or something like that. (I'll have to hunt down
and fact-check that quote. I might have taken it out of context.)
Nice thoughts but the high priests of the new secular cult of scientism are playing a zero
sum game. It's an either/or for them; slavery or scalp. The rituals of the cult reinforce the
dogma. The continual washing of hands as an act of purification. The mask as an act of
penance for your defiling breath. Forced solitude to keep you in front of the 24 hour Cult
broadcasts on tv. Social distancing as a way to inculcate insular thinking. Any resistors to
the new rituals will be brought to a tribunal of neo torquemadas. Perhaps a better way to be
thinking of the resistance is in terms of knighthood.
" immediately suffered anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction, during the 15-minute
waiting period after the experimental shot. She was transported to Stormont Vail Health in
Topeka, where she was pronounced dead "
she was 68 – sounds like she was dead in about 15 min.
Why nobody answer the question how long vaccine will be effective for this mutating
coronavirus. Pfizer CEO has had the audacity to suggest that people should be vaccinated each
year. Bit as we know "Ye cannot serve God and mammon"; so any such CEO pronouncement should be
taken with a grain of salt. He is a corporate crook first and foremost trying to maximize the
profits at the expense of people. In 2009 Pfizer was assessed the largest fine in history for
deliberate medical fraud
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history
but after lengthy appeals their attorneys managed to get the judgment reduced by almost two
billion dollars.
In the study of efficiency of Pfizer vaccines out of 36,000 participants split into two
groups (one greo got real vaccine, the other placebo), nine vaccinated participants became
infected with the virus, compared with 169 individuals injected with the placebo. But one
individual in the vaccinated group had a sever case of COVID-19 which raises a lot questions. Why
this could ever happen?
So the vaccine in not 100% protective even against the strain of the virus it was developed
for. But there is a difference both in the number of infected and the outcomes in two groups. We
cannot presume that the experiences of 19,000 vaccinated individuals will extrapolate to millions
of people. For example, it's impossible to detect less common side-effects. It is clear that the
efficiency of the vaccine in real world will be lower than in controlled groups study and side
effects might be more pronounced.
The open question is whether it will provide any protection in one year. It's almost certain
that the immune response initially generated will wane over time. If not, this is a very
questionable initiative: taking substantial risk for very little temporary benefit. It is also
unclear whether it will be effective against new strains, or vaccinated people will serve as a
catalysts for the development of new strains.
That's why previously there were no vaccines against the coronaviruses at all. The second
question is whether vaccinated people can curry and spread the virus beciang a danger to all
other people. And the last is whether vaccinated people will became a platform for development of
the new strains of the virus. And we now know that it is possible to became infected aeven after
being vaccinated, so vaccinated people can serve as the platform for development of new strains
of the virus.
my intention is not to criticize the vaccines themselves, but the manner by which they are
being shoved down our throats. That, I object to strongly because it violates the people's
right to informed consent. A lopsided, nationwide public relations blitz that relentlessly
glorifies vaccines while deliberately excluding even the slightest criticism from respected
professionals, does not respect the rights of the people. It's brainwashing, pure and
simple.
And why have behavioral psychologists been employed by the government to promote the
vaccination campaign? Why have they concocted a strategy designed "to change people's beliefs
and feelings about vaccination" to inform "people about the prosocial benefits of vaccination",
and to "intervene on behavior directly", which means that you're given an appointment, and told
that you will be getting your vaccination at the end of the session." Psychologists call this a
"presumptive recommendation" which effectively eliminates the element of personal choice by
creating a scenario in which getting vaccinated is a fait accompli. How is this not
coercion?
It is coercion, subconscious coercion. The doctor is strong-arming the patient into getting
vaccinated by making it look like its standard procedure. That puts pressure on the patient to
follow the path of least resistance, which is compliance. It's a clever tactic, but it is also
transparently manipulative.
The behavioral psychologists who have helped to shape the government's policy, believe that
the emphasis should be placed on the "safety and effectiveness" of the vaccines. That's the
cornerstone for building public support. At the same time, they show no interest in providing
evidence that would support their claims, which suggests that "safe and effective" is nothing
more than a meaningless bromide that is invoked to dupe the sheeple into getting
inoculated.
You might have also heard the term "vaccine hesitancy" used to describe the people who have
decided not to get vaccinated. The moniker is clearly intended to denigrate vaccine skeptics by
suggesting that they have a mental condition, like paranoid schizophrenia. This is an effective
way to discredit one's enemies, but it also shows the glaring weakness of the pro-vaccine
position. If the proponents of vaccination had something of substance to offer, they would rely
on facts and data rather than ad hominin attacks. As it happens, the facts do not support their
position. Besides, "vaccine hesitancy" is not a character flaw or a mental condition, it's the
sign of someone who has taken responsibility for his own health and welfare. Ask yourself this:
Why would a normal, rational person be eager to have an experimental cocktail injected into his
bloodstream potentially triggering all manner of long-term ailments or death? Is that the
choice a normal person would make?
As far as I can see, behavioral psychologists are playing a critical role in this mass
vaccination campaign. According to a report put out by the National Institutes of Health, it
appears that a rapid response team has been formed to attack the opinions of people who
challenge the "official narrative". Check out this blurb from the report titled "COVID-19
Vaccination: Communication: Applying Behavioral and Social Science to Address Vaccine Hesitancy
and Foster Vaccine Confidence":
Mitigate the impact of COVID-19-related misinformation
The spread of health-related misinformation was a significant public health concern well
before the COVID-19 pandemic. During the last decade, vaccine-related discourse online and
in the media has been plagued by misinformation. Anti-vaccine groups have leveraged political
and social divisions to diminish trust in vaccines, pushed false narratives questioning the
safety and effectiveness of vaccines, spread false claims about adverse outcomes, and
downplayed the risks of the disease's vaccines protect against. .
COVID-19 vaccine communication efforts cannot ignore misinformation and must take
actions, informed by behavioral and communication research, to identify emerging rumors and
respond in a way that is informed by behavioral science. Real-time, agile, and scalable
monitoring of discourse concerning COVID 19 vaccination -- including conspiracy theories,
rumors, and myths -- can support a swiftly developed and implemented response.
"Misinformation surveillance" efforts should identify the most prominent sources of
misinformation, the tactics being used, and the groups most at risk of being exposed to and
influenced by the rumors. This information, in addition to data regarding the dynamics and
patterns of misinformation spread, could help inform the appropriate response and best
targets for intervention efforts .
Repeat: "Misinformation surveillance""disinformation agents" " the
ulterior motives of these actors "??
Really? Now who's sounding paranoid?
This is very scary stuff. Agents of the state now identify critics of the Covid vaccine
as their mortal enemies. How did we get here? And how did we get to the point where the
government is targeting people who don't agree with them? This is way beyond Orwell. We have
entered some creepy alternate universe.
Here's more on the topic from a statement by Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD, CEO of the American
Psychological Association, in response to the approval by an advisory panel of the Food and
Drug Administration of a vaccine against COVID-19:
"We recognize that there are pockets of resistance to vaccines , distrust of the
medical establishment and misinformation about vaccines generally .Some populations
are understandably less likely to accept vaccinations due to a legacy of mistrust rooted in
unethical public health practices.
"It is critical that leaders across the political spectrum unite behind messages of
vaccine safety and transparency." ..
Enlist credible spokespeople who can connect with diverse communities, especially
those where mistrust and skepticism run high. When leaders talk about vaccines as standard
practices, as opposed to options, people are more likely to accept them. Research
suggests building trust and providing clear information about vaccines can improve
vaccination uptake rates. It is critical that leaders across the political spectrum unite
behind vaccine safety and transparency, clearly explaining what is in the vaccine and what it
does and doesn't do in the body.
Consider the wide variety of factors that motivate human behavior. Behavioral science
indicates that people are more likely to adhere to vaccine recommendations when they believe
they are susceptible to the illness, when they want to protect others, when they believe
the vaccine is safe or at least safer than the illness, and when their concerns and questions
are managed respectfully by doctors and experts." ( "APA Welcomes Step Toward
First U.S. Vaccine Approval" , American Psychological Association)
Is it really ethical for the APA to be involved in a mass vaccination campaign? Is this the
role an organization like this should play in a democratic society? Should the APA use its
unique understanding of human behavior to persuade people on behalf of the government and big
pharma? And, more importantly, if behavioral psychologists helped to shape the government's
strategy on mass vaccination, then in what other policies were they involved? Were these the
"professionals" who conjured up the pandemic restrictions? Were the masks, the social
distancing and the lockdowns all promoted by "experts" as a way to undermine normal human
relations and inflict the maximum psychological pain on the American people? Was the intention
to create a weak and submissive population that would willingly accept the dismantling of
democratic institutions, the dramatic restructuring of the economy, and the imposition of a new
political order?"
These questions need to be answered.
Surprisingly, the resistance to vaccination is nearly as strong today as it was a year ago.
According to PEW Research:
(only) "69% of the public intends to get a vaccine – or already has .
Those who do not currently plan to get a vaccine (30% of the public) list a range
of reasons why. Majorities cite concerns about side effects (72%), a sense that vaccines were
developed and tested too quickly (67%) and a desire to know more about how well they work
(61%) as major reasons why they do not intend to get vaccinated.
Smaller shares of those not planning to get a vaccine say past mistakes by the medical
care system (46%) or a sense they don't need it (42%) are major reasons why they don't plan
to get a vaccine; 36% of this group (11% of all U.S. adults) say a major reason they would
pass on receiving a coronavirus vaccine is that they don't get vaccines generally.
So, despite the nonstop propaganda blitz, a significant portion of the population remains
unconvinced, unimpressed and steadfast. Go figure? Of course, this is just Round 1. Soon,
persuasion will turn into coercion, and from coercion to outright force. It's already clear
that air-travel will require vaccine passports, and that public transit, concerts, libraries,
restaurants and, perhaps, even grocery stores could follow soon after. Vaccination looks to be
the defining issue of the next few years at least. And those who resist the edicts of the state
will increasingly find themselves on the outside; outcasts in their own country.
Right. US government policy is ulterior constraint and coercion of voluntary consent to
medical experimentation in the meaning of Nuremberg Code Article 1, and it's illegal in
federal and universal-jurisdiction law. APA got with the program on torture, so of course
they're going to help with coercive medical experimentation.
The first time it goes to court, they lose. This is why you see Pharma shills like That
Would Be Telling breezily trying to rush approval – Oh, we'll get oodles of data now,
so we don't have to wait so long for final approval!! Final approval opens up new
possibilities for corrupt Big Pharma coercion under color of law.
But the case law encourages deference to emergency action to contain an outbreak. So as
more people knuckle under and get shot up, the outbreak goes away, the exigency no longer
weighs against denial of our rights. If the health emergency continues after extensive
vaccination, well, Why the hell is that? So judicial review is something Big Pharma will
avoid at all costs, not least because it might open the ultimate can of worms, violations of
the *False Claims Act* to obtain a *fraudulent EUA* . Big Pharma corruptly suppressed
alternatives to justify the EUA. This is a litigation bonanza that will make the tobacco
settlement and opioid claims look like chump change.
A pharmaceutical company is typically responsible for the harm done by new drugs it has
developed. The Covid-vaccines are being released under emergency use authorizations which
shield the Pharma companies from such liability under most circumstances.
To minimize the liability related to new drug development, a typical new drug goes through
a development process which takes 6-7 years of a clinical work (testing on increasing numbers
of test subjects) to gain approval. During the clinical phase, 4 out of 5 drug candidates
typically fail because of inefficacy or harmful side effects.
These vaccines are being released after only one year of clinical testing, so essentially,
we are using the entire population as test subjects. And if experience is any guide many of
them (perhaps all of them) will fail due to harmful side effects.
I am going to wait at least two years. By then, we should have a pretty good idea of the
reality of the situation. I am providing a useful service to the drug development process by
being a member of the "control group".
My father was sick for several days with a respiratory illness and tested positive for the
virus. He had had the first of two Moderna shots three weeks prior.
@mongoos opinion." -Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's Reichsminister Of Propaganda
That's right. It was to protect the population from internal enemies.
By then Bernays had already created propaganda techniques, and NSDAP thought leaders were
figuring out ways to combat the big lie from finance oligarchs of the west.
Do you really think that the average sheeple can think for themselves? Only a small fraction
of the population is capable of critical thought. It has always been that way – a large
component of the population wants to be told what to do, and they want to do the right
thing.
If they were critical thinkers they wouldn't be wearing a mask while in their car driving
alone.
They say that vaccines are "safe". My definition of"safe" is that the chance of dying post
vaccine is the same as any other vaccine. VAERS data shows 166 deaths for all of 2020. As of
3-11-21, there have been 1642 deaths, 50X the rate. If they would just come out and say the
death rate is higher but you still have a 1000 times greater chance of dying without it, I'd
get it. But instead I'm wondering what else they're lying about.
Also, they say to trust the science, but I never hear from scientists, only public
relations, profiteers, etc. You'll get a much more honest answer from the car mechanic than the
salesman.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), led by Imran Ahmed, has published a hit
list of the top 10 "anti-vaxxers" they want eradicated from public platforms
CCDH, while anonymously funded, can easily be linked to a number of technocratic centers
within the globalist network that seeks to take over global governance through the Great
Reset
from Dr. Mercola's latest article, of today, March 26th.
The level of corruption of science (and medicine is just a branch of science) in the USA is
really astounding. It is Lysenkoism, pure and simple. And vaccine debate, or absence of thereof
is just a tip of the iceberg, one manifestations of corrupt nature of neoliberalism in the USA
and the level of amorality and corruption of the neoliberal elite. After all the essence of
neoliberalism is "profits before people".
Notable quotes:
"... it's what it looks like to me too... pfizer must be laughing all the way to the bank, or blackrock - whatever.. i guess the johnston vaccine or whatever will have to be pushed harder too.. https://www.holdingschannel.com/13f/blackrock-inc-top-holdings/ ..."
Well these aren't vaccines as much as flu-shots. Indeed they're already buzzing about
combining the annual flu jab with the covid 'vaccine' for inoculation once or twice a year
depending on the severity of variant season. Vaccines are supposed to offer protection
against disease for long periods of time. The flu shot isn't a vaccine and neither are these
Covid jabs. And contrary to a comment above these 'vaccines' have proven very effective to
'cure' serious Covid patients, much like the gene-therapies being used to great effect.
I certainly wouldn't take the experimental mRNA 'vaccines' until much more data is in. Is
there a reason the mRNA rabies vaccine hasn't been approved after years of trying? And of
course folks are quick the forget the Moderna/Pfizer medicines have not been approved either
except for "emergency use."
And now finally there is out in the open debate about the origins of the 'novel' Corona
virus of which so many react as if it is not novel at all. Not to say we'll ever know the
truth - imagine the legal liability of setting off a global pandemic.
There is something rotten in the state of covid. Let's put on our gasmasks and get to the
bottom of it.
Most people are not grasping the serious wrong-headedness of this mass vaccination effort.
I transcribed a germane section of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche's interview so folks here can
please read it until they understand what he's saying. (I inserted punctuation and paragraphs
to make it more readable.)
"If you go to war, you better make sure you have the right weapon. The weapon in itself
can be an excellent weapon, and that is what I'm saying about the current vaccines, I mean
just brilliant people who have been making these vaccines in no time and with regulatory
approval and everything, so the weapon in itself is excellent. The question is, is this the
right weapon for the kind of war that is going on right now? And there, my answer is
definitely no. Because these are prophylactic vaccines, and prophylactic vaccines should
typically not be administered to people who are exposed to high infectious pressure. So don't
forget we are administering these vaccines in the heat of a pandemic.
"So in other words, while we are preparing our weapon, we are fully attacked by the virus
– the virus is everywhere – so that is a very different scenario from using such
vaccines in a setting where the vaccinee is barely or not exposed to the virus. And I'm
saying this because if you have a high infectious pressure, it's so easy for the virus to
jump from one person to the other. So, if you're immune response is just mounting, as we see
right now with a number of people who get their first dose – they get their first dose,
the antibodies are not fully mature, [inaudible] are not very high, so their immune response
is sub-optimal. But they are in the midst of this war. While they are mounting an immune
response they are fully attacked by the virus. And every single time – I mean, this is
textbook knowledge – every time you have an immune response that is sub-optimal in the
presence of an infection, in the presence of a virus that infects that person, you are at
risk for immune escape. So that means that the virus can escape from the immune response.
"So I'm saying that these vaccines – I mean, in their own right of course, are
excellent – but to use them in the midst of a pandemic and do mass vaccinations,
because then you provide within a very short period of time with high antibody [types ?]
[inaudible] I mean, that wouldn't matter if you could eradicate if you could prevent
infection. But these vaccines don't prevent infection – they protect against
disease.
"Because unfortunately, we look no further than the end of our nose, in the sense that
hospitalization, that's all that counts – you know, getting people away from the
hospital. But in the meantime, you're not realizing that we give, all the time during this
pandemic, by our interventions the opportunity to escape the immune system. And that is of
course a very, very dangerous thing, especially when we realize that these guys they only
need 10 hours to replicate.
"So we think that by making new vaccines – new vaccines against the new infectious
strains – we think we're going to catch up. It's impossible to catch up. The virus is
not going to wait until we have those vaccines ready. I mean, this thing continues. As I was
saying, the thing is, I mean, if you do this in the midst of a pandemic, that is an enormous
problem. These vaccines are excellent, but they are not made for administration to millions
of people in the midst, in the heat of a pandemic. So that is my point."
Mass vaccination apparently is accelerating the mutation of more dangerous variants. Do
the experts not understand that the antigen-specific antibodies the vaccinations are
eliciting, actually compromise people's innate broadly-based immune resistance to
variants?
@ defaultcitizen | Mar 30 2021 16:55 utc | 24 who wrote
"
.....Yet some persist in shouting "The King is NAKED!" in the land of the blind and deaf and
naked – their words quickly washed away by the next wave of crashing yaddayadda.
Inspiring. Admirable. I need a double shot, now and then, to keep my courage and anger up.
Graffiti on the cyber time-tunnel hearkens the occasional weary voyager.
"
Thanks for that and the sentiments about what b has to go through to keep churning out the
truth he finds within his bias like we all have.
We are an interesting species struggling to evolve or perish it seems and yet adding my
textual white noise to yours feels positive in some way and so I do it. I think it is a small
percentage that don't feel the impotent rage of our social system and that rage is causing it
to lose trust.
I have been waiting over 50 years for the failure tipping point in the private finance
based social system and I feel it is close. But I have to admit I felt more positive in the
middle of the Occupy movement because their were people in the streets and it was focused on
Wall Street....and it sure as heck isn't now.....sigh
AstraZeneca has been plagued with problems that get lots of media attention (production
problems, suspected health problems, etc.)
And the J&J vaccine is still hard to find. There are now dozens of places to get a
vaccine in NYC but I could only find 4 or 5 that give the J&J vaccine (along with one of
the mRNA shots) - at least two of which note that they are not giving "first dose" shots and
another says (in a FAQ on their site) that they are only receiving Moderna vaccines "at this
time".
IMO we are being herded into the mRNA vaccines.
But if you complain to others about that (as I have) you are treated as though you are
"anti-vaxx / anti-science.
karlof1 – The "anti-vaxxer – anti-science" smear is analogous to
"anti-American" if one criticizes U.S. foreign policy. Simplistic demonization is encouraged
by the mainstream media with news delivered in sound bites in order to dumb down the populace
and manufacture consent (or paranoia).
That's why I see getting vaccinated now as a waste of time and medicine. My lifestyle
hasn't changed much at all with the pandemic, although my employment of precautions has
soared. That will change with our cross-country road trip during the month of April as we
interact with many more people and visit their homes. Yes, aside from lodgings, they'll be
kin--but--unprotected interactions with kin are often the source of infection. As we see
cases soar once again, it's clear that the vaccine was seen as some sort of panacea when it's
not that at all. People ought to wonder why they're prompted to get a new flu shot annually;
it's because it mutates and a different formula's required. I've never had a flu shot and
don't get the flu, mainly because of my lifestyle. What's most important for me is my
preferred vaccine--Sputnik V--isn't available in my nation and may never be approved for use
here. For me, the AIDS experience is my reference--Sex wasn't deadly until it suddenly was
(All STDs were never considered in the same league) which prompted a change in behavior. Same
with COVID, although flu is clearly a deadly virus for many.
A: Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is authorized to prevent coronavirus disease 2019
(COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in
individuals 16 years of age and older.
FDA evaluated and analyzed the safety and effectiveness data from clinical trials conducted
in tens of thousands of study participants and manufacturing information submitted by
Pfizer-BioNTech. FDA has determined that the totality of the available data provides clear
evidence that Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine may be effective in preventing COVID-19 and
support that the known and potential benefits outweigh the known and potential risks of the
vaccine's use in millions of people 16 years of age and older, including healthy individuals.
Q: What data is available to the public to review?
A: FDA posted data and analysis in a briefing document made available in connection with the
December 10, 2020, meeting of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.
Following issuance of the
emergency use authorization , the Letter of Authorization, Fact Sheets and Full EUA
Prescribing Information are
posted on FDA's web site. FDA has also posted the review memo for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19
Vaccine, which summarizes FDA's review of the safety and effectiveness data, including clinical
data, submitted in support of the request for emergency use authorization.
Q: How well does Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine prevent COVID-19?
A: The data to support the EUA include an analysis of 36,523 participants in the ongoing
randomized, placebo-controlled international study, the majority of whom are U.S. participants,
who completed the 2-dose vaccination regimen and did not have evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection
through 7 days after the second dose. Among these participants, 18,198 received the vaccine and
18,325 received saline placebo.
A: The available safety data to support the EUA include 37,586 of the participants enrolled
in an ongoing randomized, placebo-controlled international study, the majority of whom are U.S.
participants. These participants, 18,801 of whom received the vaccine and 18,785 of whom
received saline placebo, were followed for a median of 2 months after receiving the 2nd dose.
This is consistent with the recommendations set forth in FDA's October 2020
Guidance on Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines to Prevent COVID-19 .
The most commonly reported side effects were pain at the injection site, tiredness,
headache, muscle pain, chills, joint pain, and fever. Side effects typically started within two
days of vaccination and resolved 1-2 day later. Of note, more people experienced these side
effects after the second dose than after the first dose, so it is important for vaccination
providers and recipients to expect that that there may be some side effects after either dose,
but even more so after the second dose.
FDA also evaluated additional safety data from the larger database that included
participants enrolled later during the study who had shorter follow-up (the total database
included 43,448 participants, 21,720 of whom received vaccine and 21,728 of whom received
saline placebo) . FDA determined that the findings were similar to those in the population of
participants with a median follow-up of 2 months after the 2nd dose.
Q: Is information available about serious adverse events?
A: Serious adverse events, while uncommon (<1.0%), were observed at slightly higher
numerical rates in the vaccine study group compared to the saline placebo study group, both
overall and for certain specific adverse events occurring in very small numbers. These
represented common medical events that occur in the general population at similar frequency.
Upon further review by FDA, these imbalances do not raise a safety concern, nor do they suggest
a causal relationship to vaccination for the vast majority of reported serious adverse
events.
Serious adverse events considered by FDA to be plausibly related to the vaccine or
vaccination procedure were one case of shoulder injury at the vaccination site and one case of
swollen lymph node in the armpit opposite the vaccination arm.
No safety concerns were identified in subgroup analyses by age, race, ethnicity, medical
comorbidities, or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, have been reported following
administration of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine during mass vaccination outside of the
clinical trial setting. Information pertaining to severe allergic reaction is included in
the Fact Sheet for Vaccine Providers, Fact Sheet for Vaccine Recipients and the EUA Prescribing
Information.
Additional adverse reactions, some of which may be serious, may become apparent with more
widespread use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.
Table 4. Systemic reactions in persons aged >55 years, Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19
vaccine and placebo
Table 4. Systemic reactions in persons aged >55 years, Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine
and Placebo
Dose 1
Dose 2
Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine
N=1802
Placebo
N=1792
Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine
N=1660
Placebo
N=1646
Fever
≥38.0°C
26 (1.4)
7 (0.4)
181 (10.9)
4 (0.2)
≥38.0°C to 38.4°C
23 (1.3)
2 (0.1)
131 (7.9)
2 (0.1)
>38.4°C to 38.9°C
1 (0.1)
3 (0.2)
45 (2.7)
1 (0.1)
>38.9°C to 40.0°C
1 (0.1)
2 (0.1)
5 (0.3)
1 (0.1)
>40.0°C
1 (0.1)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
Fatigue a , n (%)
Any
615 (34.1)
405 (22.6)
839 (50.5)
277 (16.8)
Mild
373 (20.7)
252 (14.1)
351 (21.1)
161 (9.8)
Moderate
240 (13.3)
150 (8.4)
442 (26.6)
114 (6.9)
Severe
2 (0.1)
3 (0.2)
46 (2.8)
2 (0.1)
Grade 4
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
Headache a , n (%)
Any
454 (25.2)
325 (18.1)
647 (39.0)
229 (13.9)
Mild
348 (19.3)
242 (13.5)
422 (25.4)
165 (10.0)
Moderate
104 (5.8)
80 (4.5)
216 (13.0)
60 (3.6)
Severe
2 (0.1)
3 (0.2)
9 (0.5)
4 (0.2)
Grade 4
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
Chills a , n (%)
Any
113 (6.3)
57 (3.2)
377 (22.7)
46 (2.8)
Mild
87 (4.8)
40 (2.2)
199 (12.0)
35 (2.1)
Moderate
26 (1.4)
16 (0.9)
161 (9.7)
11 (0.7)
Severe
0 (0)
1 (0.1)
17 (1.0)
0 (0)
Grade 4
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
Vomiting b , n (%)
Any
9 (0.5)
9 (0.5)
11 (0.7)
5 (0.3)
Mild
8 (0.4)
9 (0.5)
9 (0.5)
5 (0.3)
Moderate
1 (0.1)
0 (0)
1 (0.1)
0 (0)
Severe
3 (0.2)
0 (0)
1 (0.1)
0 (0)
Grade 4
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
Diarrhea c , n (%)
Any
147 (8.2)
118 (6.6)
137 (8.3)
99 (6.0)
Mild
118 (6.5)
100 (5.6)
114 (6.9)
73 (4.4)
Moderate
26 (1.4)
17 (0.9)
21 (1.3)
22 (1.3)
Severe
3 (0.2)
1 (0.1)
2 (0.1)
4 (0.2)
Grade 4
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
New or worsening muscle pain a , n (%)
Any
251 (13.9)
149 (8.3)
477 (28.7)
87 (5.3)
Mild
168 (9.3)
100 (5.6)
202 (12.2)
57 (3.5)
Moderate
82 (4.6)
46 (2.6)
259 (15.6)
29 (1.8)
Severe
1 (0.1)
3 (0.2)
16 (1.0)
1 (0.1)
Grade 4
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
New or worsening joint pain a , n (%)
Any
155 (8.6)
109 (6.1)
313 (18.9)
61 (3.7)
Mild
101 (5.6)
68 (3.8)
161 (9.7)
35 (2.1)
Moderate
52 (2.9)
40 (2.2)
145 (8.7)
25 (1.5)
Severe
2 (0.1)
1 (0.1)
7 (0.4)
1 (0.1)
Grade 4
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
Use of antipyretic or pain medication
358 (19.9)
213 (11.9)
625 (37.7)
161 (9.8)
a Mild: does not interfere with activity; moderate: some interference with
activity; severe: prevents daily activity; Grade 4: emergency room visit or hospitalization for
severe fatigue, severe headache, severe muscle pain, or severe joint pain.
b Mild: 1 to 2 times in 24 hours; moderate: >2 times in 24 hours; severe:
requires intravenous hydration; Grade 4: emergency room visit or hospitalization for severe
vomiting.
c Mild: 2 to 3 loose stools in 24 hours; moderate: 4 to 5 loose stools in 24
hours; severe: 6 or more loose stools in 24 hours; Grade 4: emergency room visit or
hospitalization for severe diarrhea. Unsolicited Adverse Events
Reports of lymphadenopathy were imbalanced with 58 more cases in the vaccine group (64) than
the placebo group (6); lymphadenopathy is plausibly related to the vaccine. Lymphadenopathy
occurred in the arm and neck region and was reported within 2 to 4 days after vaccination. The
average duration of lymphadenopathy was approximately 10 days. Bell's palsy was reported by
four vaccine recipients and none of the placebo recipients. The observed frequency of reported
Bell's palsy in the vaccine group is consistent with the background rate in the general
population, and there is no basis upon which to conclude a causal relationship.
Serious
Adverse Events
Serious adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in
death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing
hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability/incapacity. The proportions of
participants who reported at least 1 serious adverse event were 0.6% in the vaccine group and
0.5% in the placebo group. The most common serious adverse events in the vaccine group which
were numerically higher than in the placebo group were appendicitis (7 in vaccine vs 2 in
placebo), acute myocardial infarction (3 vs 0), and cerebrovascular accident (3 vs 1).
Cardiovascular serious adverse events were balanced between vaccine and placebo groups. Two
serious adverse events were considered by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as possibly
related to vaccine: shoulder injury possibly related to vaccine administration or to the
vaccine itself, and lymphadenopathy involving the axilla contralateral to the vaccine injection
site. Otherwise, occurrence of severe adverse events involving system organ classes and
specific preferred terms were balanced between vaccine and placebo groups.
There were mentions of treatments, just not in the US. I don't know about whether the same
has been in Europe, but in China very early on during the pandemic, various treatments were
tried and discussed. China drew on its experience of fighting SARS, and their findings were
actually published, such as in Lancet. I believe Italy consequently made routine use of one
of the method, that of serum from recovered patients (and later in the US too) on patients in
critical care units, which was first tried and endorsed in China. Serum wasn't a panacea but
in most cases found helpful. However, in China itself the popular treatment was a combination
of traditional western medicine for pneumonia and traditional Chinese herbal medicine for
respiratory ailments. The findings were conveyed to countries that China assisted early on,
such as Italy and Serbia. Chinese herbal medicine was also included in aid packages that were
sent oversea to stranded Chinese expats. China also discussed at length the use of
remdesivir, and dismissed it as being ineffective.
Actually there were discussions of treatments in the US too, if you recall Ole Pres Trump
urged the drinking of Dittol, Lysol, and other germ killers. I didn't recall him urging the
use of injection method, but like always there are daredevils in the US that went that far
:)
Just one quote: "COVID - 19 has always been a treatable sickness"
Well said and thank you. My government posts a pathetic thing entitled "Covid 19
Vaccination and treatment" and there is ZERO information on early stage treatment. It is all
vaccine, vaccine, vaccine.
When I next visit my GP I will ask her for details of her treatment regime should I ever
receive a +ve test but I suspect what the answer will be.
Every disease is treatable to some extent. I have the Chinese Covid treatment manual of
considerable volume, fully translated to english.
Here is version 7 March 2020 and it is no doubt thoroughly revised since that date.
The almost total surrender of professionals in medical practice to self censorship and
the brutal insistence on toeing the line to the official mantra is religious obscurantism of
the worst order. It is the totalitarian stuff that led to the witch hunts and fatwas and the
excommunications and now the cancel culture.
The advocates of this oppression of clinical practice are the enemies of humanity and
the saboteurs of science.
That brief video is well worth considering as it demands an answer as to why this path
of death causing ignorance was ever advocated let alone accepted. Let a thousand flowers
bloom and a thousand ideas be considered.
It looks like the vaccinated will be the petri dishes from which the variants arise, but
the unvaccinated who will be vilified...sadistically genius...that's how hegemon rolls
I'm opting out of this sick game myself as long as possible.
"In the document the CP (Civilian Probe) points at a government attempt to conceal its
dealing with Pfizer. The document states that "the Pfizer-Israel agreement is suffocated with
redacted segments, consequently, it is not possible to analyze it legally and/or fully grasp
Its implications as far as public health is concerned This concealment casts a heavy shadow
over anyone who took part in the (Israeli/Pfizer) negotiations ".
...
"On the one hand, the state did not inform the citizens that Pfizer's vaccine is in
experimental stages that have not yet been completed, and that at this stage they are
actually taking part in the experiment. On the other hand, the state did not maintain
transparent and open control and monitoring systems for the public. As a result, there is a
serious concern that this critical and negligent omission stems from: (a) the fear that such
disclosure could interfere with the fulfilment of the objectives that may be implied by the
Israel-Pfizer agreement or (b) the fear of diminishing demand for the exceptional number of
vaccines that were purchased by Israel in advance, and/or (c) the fear of revealing
unflattering results of the 'experiment' being carried out in Israel."
...
every world citizen who is concerned about the future of humanity should be alarmed by the
CP's findings and particularly by the desperate and relentless attempts to suppress free
academic, scientific and ethical discussion about Covid, the so-called 'vaccines' or anything
else."
The industry needs some good PR right now. After all, its refusal to share its vaccine
technology could end up costing millions of lives in the developing world. In addition, it
could mean trillions of dollars of lost output as countries need to shut down large segments
of their economy. But the NYT is there to help. It ran a lengthy article about the issue,
which contains much useful information, but it maintains a framing favorable to the
pharmaceutical industry. At the end of the piece, after giving the argument for broader
sharing of technology and over-riding the industry's government-granted patent monopolies,
the piece tells readers: "But governments cannot afford to sabotage companies that need
profit to survive."
If the reporters/editors had read their piece, they would know that the companies in
question had already made large profits, through being paid directly for their research and
building manufacturing facilities, as was the case with Moderna and BioNtech (Pfizer's German
partner), or with advance purchase agreements. No one is suggesting that these companies
should not make a profit, so it is not clear on what planet this assertion originated.
It is possible to make profits directly on government contracts, as major military
contractors like Lockheed and Boeing could explain to the New York Times. The advantage of
having direct contracts for biomedical research is that a requirement of the contract could
be that all findings are fully open-source so that researchers all over the world can benefit
from them. (I discuss a mechanism for direct funding in chapter 5 of Rigged [it's free].)
... ... ...
It is probably worth mentioning inequality in this piece. The NYT, like most intellectual
types, has done considerable hand-wringing over inequality in recent years, both overall and
racial inequality. It is a safe bet that giving more money to pharmaceutical companies will
mean more inequality and certainly benefit whites far more than Blacks. It might be useful if
the paper paid a little attention to the policies that create
inequality instead of just bemoaning it as an unfortunate feature of the economy.
Yes, the NYT is really good at covering the impact of policies that increase inequality
and perpetuate structural racism but avoids drawing any lines to the policies themselves --
and the politics that create these policies -- by treating the status quo as a kind of
state of nature.
Innovation in vaccine design comes from advances in fundamental science, which is funded
not by companies, but by NIH and NSF (predominantly). Pharma employs scientists trained
using federal funds, freely uses federally funded resources, open access publications and
open source software paid for through federal funds, buys up commercializable technologies
in form of startups that grow out of federal science and funded by SBIR and STTR grants,
kills most of them and overcharges taxpayers for the product. That's rarely mentioned. As
is the fact that pharma actually sucks at the only thing that they are supposed to be good
at - manufacturing. Quality problems have been plaguing AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Moderna -
something that is discussed in trade publications and FDA meetings but doesn't make it to
the NYT or TV news.
@Anonymous etting where lots of people are taking, you do come out as anti-vaxxer
sentiment. That's where social pressure builds in and some weak mind cave in or Some took it
because their career is on the line.
There's only 32% of healthcare workers getting the vaccine here in the States. It's
like the MSM and some people from higher up are pushing the idea that vaccination is a must
and suggesting the vaccine passport.
What in the world, the United States of America, the beacon of Truth, the land of the
Free, pioneers of Science caved into this idea of vaccine must be administered to
everyone? The same can be said for all other social phenomena as well...
Excessive zeal might hurt. I would understand vaccination of faculty, especially older one.
But students are young and young people do not have the same level of risk from COVID-19as older
people. If vaccine has side effects Rutgers University will be liable for damages.
Rutgers University is requiring students to get the COVID-19 vaccine before they come back
for the fall semester, and one expert thinks that other colleges will do the same.
"Rutgers is on fairly solid ground and we're likely to see a good number of universities,
both public and private, start to mandate the vaccine," Eric Feldman, professor of medical
ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, told Yahoo Finance
Live (video above).
Rutgers, a public university in New Jersey, is the first prominent U.S. higher education
institution to
mandate COVID vaccines for the fall semester. Students will be required to show proof of
vaccination -- or receive an exemption -- before coming to campus to attend classes or live in
university housing.
Students who are under the age of 17 will only be eligible for the Pfizer vaccine, while
older students will be able to receive a Moderna, Pfizer, or Johnson & Johnson
inoculation.
The trio of linked articles in top post concerning covid are all excellent. Each
highlights how very little is known, still, concerning viral transmission.
> [W]e do express our concern at the UK's decision to increase its nuclear weapons
arsenal, which is contrary to its obligations under Article VI of the NPT. It could have
a damaging impact on global stability and efforts to pursue a world free of nuclear
weapons.
At a time when nuclear weapon risks are higher than they have been since the Cold War,
investments in disarmament and arms control is the best way to strengthen the stability
and reduce nuclear danger. <
Yves Smith makes the suggestion that for starters we should just open some windows. Get
some ventilation. Get some fresh air. When I was still employed I was a house painter.
Way back in sixties and seventies painters learned drills for how to paint every surface of a
window. This is no longer required. Most windows are never opened. In newer homes it is
quite unusual to find windows that have ever been opened . Simplifies painting
enormously.
Poor people live in small dank dwellings and open the window. The rich still believe in
fresh air, have trouble finding painters who know what to do with double hung sash. Everyone
else believes in the miasma.
Windows are sealed shut. Sealed shut to keep out the unknown. Heating or air
conditioning is on 100% of the time. Opening windows is something very old people or very
rich people do, otherwise Americans do not.
The flip side of that is performative masking. When out of doors, even in the most
uncrowded spaces, the maskies are never seen without the mask. Not science, fear.
Drug companies are lobbying the Biden administration to block a push at the WTO by India,
South Africa and about 80 other countries for a temporary waiver on patent protections for the
new vaccines. The pharmaceutical industry argues that innovation as well as vaccine quality and
safety depend on maintaining exclusive intellectual property rights.
"Eliminating those protections would undermine the global response to the pandemic,"
industry executives and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, their
powerful lobbying group, warned President Biden in a letter this month. Biden has sided with
the drug companies so far. The United States on March 10 joined Britain, the E.U. and
Switzerland in blocking the push for waivers.
In an exclusive interview with Lester Holt, Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla discusses
the company's Covid-19 vaccine -- including the potential for a booster shot, vaccine trials
for children and more.
Do you really trust this guy? Research The World Economic Forum, read who they are tied to
and the goals the have (in their own words) you will be shocked
Welcome to technocracy! Oh your Antivirus definitions aren't up to date, we need to plug
you into Windows update before we can let you onto the Internet of Idiots.
How good is this vaccine if, and I quote "the weakling that who are affect the whole
society" (great English but that's just a side note) So his product does not provide immunity
longer than 6 months essentially, requires a yearly dose (profit) and requires 100% to take
it in order to work. What a joke!
As CEO, much of Bourla's compensation is in stock. He's a very well-paid drug salesman. He
won't tell us the objective truth about his company's vaccine. It would hurt stock price and
his own wealth. C'mon, NBC ... Interview an objective scientist. This is just an ad in
disguise.
pfizer need get advices from expert financial, how to improve spinoff and improve
shareholder interest to make a better company. dividend, number of shareholder, debt ,
variant of products.
So the data suggests 52% immunity after 1st dose and 6 months protection with current
data, but possible a 3rd dose at 6 months or a year to cover variants and unknown protection
after 2nd dosage after 6 months, but 95% in the first 3 months. OKAAAAYYY.. ahhh.. hummm.. i
think i'll keep the mask on after the 3rd dose! oops, wait 2nd dose, but maybe no 3rd.
nevermind. "Doctor Bourla, are you optimistic"? .....Ahhhhh, well Lester, yes, no and maybe
but we'll have to wait and see...
I'd like to know why you haven't asked the CEO why his company gets blanket immunity???
Why did you not ask this man how many people have died so far after getting your second
dose?? And can you please tell us what some of the really serious adverse effects that some
people have been experiencing after the second dose??
What are the long-term effects of this vaccine on people's brain?, is there any indication
that this gene therapy which is being called a vaccine will cause early-onset dementia
because of Spike protein will start attacking the brain?
How many pregnant women have had a miscarriage after getting a second dose or even first
dose for that matter,??
What are the long-term effects of this gene therapy on women that are in childbearing
ages??
What will the gene therapy that's being called a vaccine do to the fetus when it comes to
full term are there any indications that there's going to be some long-term effects like
birth defects or genetic effects problems with the ability of this fetus to develop to full
term in reference to their sexual organs?? The reason I mention these things is because these
people that are associated with this vaccine believe in Eugenics and believe in depopulation
because of not only their psychosis but because of climate change we absolutely have to
reduce the population!!! Is this gene therapy vaccine being used to sterilize many human
beings so that we don't get into this overpopulation and then we will not be able to deal
with climate change???
And why haven't we asked this man has his company ever worked on an mRNA vaccine before
and ever tested on any animals whatsoever prior to this covid-19 planned pandemic??
If the answer is yes and these animals were Gravely injured there for this mRNA couldn't
come to full fruition and now it's being used on human beings because we're in this plan
pandemic is this just another way to experiment on the population with this mRNA gene
therapy? Another question if there was no plan pandemic would Pfizer have rolled out an mRNA
vaccine for the cold which is caused by a Coronavirus?
Does anybody think that Pfizer Maderna or anybody else would be getting approval to
experiment on the masses if there wasn't a covid-19 planned pandemic??
How come nobody is asking the CEO where is he getting the biological material to make this
mRNA?? I am just really really really curious white nobody wants to ask that question and why
people are allowing these people to inject them and they had no idea where these companies
are getting the MRNA from is it from aborted fetuses is it from jellyfish is it from where
what biological stores are they getting this mRNA
from.?????????????????????????????????????????????
Before you decide to take this vaccine why don't you see if you can get the answers to any
of these questions and my challenge to you is that you will not I repeat you will not be
getting the answer to any of these question. And the story you just will not get the answer.
The person that sticking you with this gene therapy won't tell you your doctor won't tell you
the media won't tell you dr. Fauci won't tell you and I bet you anything that CEO will not
tell you... WAKE UPPPP
Older adults who received a single dose, the proportion testing positive for antibodies
was just 34.7 per cent in those aged 80 and over for the Pfizer vaccine.
I am frustrated to read the raft of cynical comments on Pfizer's achievement in takIng the
vaccine from a lab success to a huge mass immunisation program. Before mindlessly bashing
pharmaceutical companies find out the answer to the question "Why are you not terrified of
polio". I am old enough to remember the last of the polio epidemics, the terror and the
social disruption. Stopped dead by Dr Salk and big pharma. If you lack the scientific
knowledge to criticize intelligently and propose improvements, say nothing
Covid deaths US 523,082 UK 122,415 Mexico 184,474 Canada 21,915 China 4,636 Australia 909
NZ 26 Taiwan 9. Two thirds of the Covid variants originate from the US making Covid the US
virus. There are 15 Covid variants, 10 from the US, 2 from the UK and 1 each from South
Africa, Brazil and China. Traitor Trump's "Do nothing" pandemic strategy will be written into
the history books as America's biggest-ever failure.
Why are you not reporting the side effects and death happening to many post vaccine? Why
are you not reporting that people in Israel are being coerced into taking this experimental
product and without proper knowledge and informed consent?
The twice repeated 52% number is purposeful lie, not a slip-up or confusion. Why did
Lester not call him out on this? 52% includes cases before the vaccine even had a chance to
take effect. Lester was totally hoodwinked. Moderna was much more upfront on their data.
WION
2.16M subscribers
SUBSCRIBE
Pfizer has become a terror. The US pharma company is reportedly asking for military bases and sovereign assets as guarantee
for vaccines. WION's Palki Sharma has the details.
World renown vaccine specialist, Geert Vanden Bossche, gave a groundbreaking interview this
week risking his reputation and his career by bravely speaking out against administration of
#Covid19 vaccines.
In what may be one of the most important stories ever covered by The Highwire, the vaccine
developer shared his extreme concerns about these vaccines in particular and why we may be on
track to creating a global immunity catastrophe.
Anthony Fauci, DDS 2 hours ago
Could someone clarify one thing: is Dr. Bossche referring to all the COV2 vaccines or just
the mRNA ones (i.e. Pfizer and Moderna)? Chris Moyler 5 hours ago
Polite question
Does Bossche's CV qualify him to be described as "a world renowned vaccine specialist? 0
Nancy Woolf 6 hours ago
The vaccine companies admit there will be adverse effects, including death, but claim that
the benefits out-weigh these risks (millions of lives saved without proof, etc.). The companies
and the CDC does claim, however, that the spike protein mRNA will never get into the cell
nucleus and alter cellular DNA. This is a provable lie. Stem cells divide to replace cells
damaged by SARS viruses. When the stem cell is dividing, the nuclear membrane dissolves. Hence
the spike mRNA can alter the DNA by reverse transcription. Another possibility is the
nanocapsule will penetrate the nuclear membrane. If the spike protein contributes to
antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of disease, then permanently encoding the spike protein in
stem cell DNA will likely cause long-term chronic or recurring disease. Auto-immune attacks
will damage organs, and the repair and replacement cells will elicit a new round of auto-immune
attacks. Many scientists on the boards of these vaccine companies have research programs on
stem cells and must know these are viable risks. Vaccinated persons who develop disease or die
should have organ tissues assayed for spike protein DNA. That would prove one way or the other
if intentional lies are being delivered to the public. LM BENZ 8 hours ago
Excellent and practical information. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people that have been
made to believe that the only solution is the current vaccine. But if you watch the interview
in its entirety, Geert does NOT denounce vaccines. He denounces THIS ONE.
All any of us can do, before blindly rolling up our sleeves, is be INFORMED. And not be so
arrogant that we refuse to listen and heed warnings and advice. And unless you are anywhere as
educated and knowledgeable as Geert, I trust you will leave your "karening " to yourselves
lives depend on it.
He has posted his letter to governments etc., on his LinkedIn account. Its worth a read.
Phil 9 hours ago
Has it been even proven medically/scientifically that this virus actually exists? There are
many professionals coming out now saying it has not been medically proven that this is an
actual (non-flu) virus. And additionally, whatever happened to the flu? Has Covid replaced it
or defeated it or ? Correct me if I am wrong but seasonally the flu kills 50k-60k people. And
then how many people have actually died as a DIRECT result of this alleged COVID-19 virus?
Jack Heginbotham 10 hours ago
I suggest most Virologists are over educated thespians with silver tongues.
Of all the illness causing pathogens out there, viruses are the most innocuous because almost
all are susceptible to a healthy immune system.
Bacteria have always been the deadliest because they can infect, thrive & kill in humans
with healthy immune systems. I suspect bacterial pneumonia was one of the leading causes of
death until antibiotics became available. Plasmodium Protozoa [Malaria pathogen] continue to
kill 500,000/year. The number would likely be in the millions had we not discovered effective
treatments.
However, PRIONS are the most deadly pathogen known to man. All prion diseases have longer
incubation periods than most other pathogens and they are always lethal. They are incredibly
small so extremely difficult to detect and even harder to kill. Many suspect that Alzheimer's
syndrome is caused by some type of prion.
If I were a Godless, Crazy Megalomaniac with an agenda of ruling the World and eliminating
several billion useless humans using up my global resourses:
I would find a way to distill and then distribute prions [which remain dormant for several
years] in the annual flu shot. To make certain all those undesirables targeted with the tainted
vaccines get injected: make the vaccine mandatory. Spike it for the next 3 years. In 5-10 years
people start acting like non-flesh eating zombies then die. Each successive year, the number of
deaths continue to climb. By the time the stupid sheep realize what transpired, it will be too
late. 26 Jill 10 hours ago
The highly inaccurate pcr test was the cause of this so called pandemic of a virus that has
not been isolated. I urge everyone to go to some of Reiner Fuellmich interviews where he
explains. He has international EXPERTS. Also has a WHO whistleblower interview.
9 Sharles 12 hours ago
The reason for decline in cases is because the northern hemisphere is coming out of their
flu season, nothing to do with the vax. 24 Anna 12 hours ago
What would the implications be for, say, blood transfusions, in the future? Tara Fairweather 15 hours ago
Go back in history & look at the 1918 Spanish flu, masks mandates, vaccines, the war
& the Global monetary change system that occurred all at the same time. Coincidence, I
think not. Discernment & common Sense should have prevailed by now. I pray for the ones who
are not woke🙏🏻 31 Tom Camilleri 15 hours ago
If Geert is correct, it seems that the pandemic was used to justify the development of a new
technology that is not necessarily the most applicable to the current situation but would be a
versatile tool with many questionable potential applications going forward; an enticing toy, if
you will, for those who might think that the world is their laboratory. We need to be informed
by this without succumbing to alarmism or panic. Shelley 15 hours ago
What is unclear to me is why this scientist (Geert) claims that he has no problem with the
vaccines being developed to fight covid-19, yet also says they permanently disable or
ineffectuate one's own natural immunity. That is a crazy, catastrophic outcome of a vaccine by
itself. Totally unacceptable
So there are 2 issues really – a) how the covid-19 vaccines actually operate within
the human body, causing harm (by permanently knocking out a person's natural immunity); and b)
the effect of mass vaccination of sub-effective vaccines during a pandemic, driving increasing
viral lethality that society or science will not be able to counter. Two completely separate
issues, but they are not treated here as separate concerns.
I would really like to see more examination, analysis and explanation of the first concern.
If the general population understood how harmful the vaccine actually is to themselves
personally, it would demotivate a large percentage of the population to accept the vaccine, and
possible dramatically reduce the risk of the 2nd concern. Procopio 19 hours ago
He has post doctoral training in Animal virology and he is spreading misinformation. He has
not been on any significant academic site. He probably did work on animal diseases with the
companies you cite.
The new strains were starting independently in multiple countries before the vaccinations
started. That is what successful viruses do, they mutate. How does he expect to not vaccinate
globally and prophylactically. That is the essence of vaccination to reduce the spread of
deadly diseases. You treat people who can get the disease and spread it. Not every child that
got german measles became deaf, but it was enough of a risk that mass vaccination was deemed
necessary. A normal influenza death number is between 20-60K per year, we had 500000+ with
shutting our whole country down. we still don't know the long term ramifications of neurologic
or respiratory compromise will be. The vet seems to think that asymptomatic individuals should
be studied for why the clear the virus from their systems, he doesn't even acknowledge that
many of them pulmonary changes on xray indicating that they may in fact be compromised in the
future. 0 Gavin Wyatt 22 hours ago
The biggest over reaction in all of human history which is becoming something more because
of human over reaction – do not take this vaccination. I know I will not willingly take
it. June B 1 day ago
I trust my natural immune system against any and all man-made interferences! I have reached
76 years of age with no interference from the "scientists". I care for my God-given protection
and it works! In England the NK cells are called T-cells and they give orders for the bone
marrow to make Killer T-cells to destroy pathogens. Those in power are on a culling of humans
and these genetic engineering injections will do what they are supposed to do!!
The answer is to stop all injections and boost natural immune systems. It is time "scientists"
stopped messing with natural protections against disease and looked to enhance them naturally!
This "medicine " is 100 years old but we and other living creatures have existed for millenia.
Hsaive 1 day ago
If Dr. Bossche is so talented and worked for Gates a GAVI, (He calls not-for-profit) why was
he not involved in the development of the mRNA injections? His name never comes up. Hsaive 1
day ago
Variants Do Not Exist Because SARS-CoV-2 does not exist -- - Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche Says
"Halt All Covid-19 Mass Vaccinations Immediately" – BUT BEWARE! .Bossche then claims the
global population must undergo another round of mass vaccinations! https://tinyurl.com/azyfa8fs rod densmore 1 day ago
I read Dr Vanden Bossche's letter he seems to be advocating we don't mess with herd immunity
vaccines interfere with natural immunity, etc. Sweden chose this option initially in the
pandemic and that approach has been reversed lately because too many people died. He is
experienced enough to propose concrete steps to be taken that could mitigate against the
dangers of the possibilities he brings up i wish he'd done that. As a 60 something year old
person with some co-morbidities i do not have a low risk if i got COVID i can't wait to get my
second shot. As for new variants they are caused by mutations of the virus and if there is less
virus there will be less mutations trying to link vaccines to somehow be a cause of variants is
very fuzzy logic. Jill 1 day ago
What baffles me; they have been giving flu shots for years due to new varients. Question we
need to ask is have we seen a more virulent strain due to this
US worrying about vaccine competition is so stupid when only a handful of countries have
got their hands on enough vaccines right now, and when US and UK are hoarding them like
crazy. It's not a 0-sum game for now, every bit helps. Gee, EU is in a bad state due to all
pharmas failing to deliver.
Besides, it's funny to see US complaining about Russia badmouthing MRNA (so Pfizer and
Moderna) when it's Astra-Zeneca which is gets gloomy headlines on a daily basis.
That said, I'd have no issue with Western countries relying on MRNA vaccines and taking
the bulk of them, as long as it means the easier to produce and distribute, Sputnik, AZ, J/J,
the Chinese ones, are reserved for the rest of the world; it's probably the best way to
ensure most countries will vaccinate their most vulnerable citizens in a realistic timeframe
- at least before the year is over, if not earlier.
As for Latin America, Chile is doing great, and is relying mostly on Sinovax for now if I
remember correctly - like many others, it probably ordered a ton of other vaccines, but won't
need them, so hopefully they'll be sent to neighbouring countries instead.
"The West does not see vaccines from a professional and scientific perspective and now
wants to use its technological advantages to squeeze China. While the West accuses China of
engaging in vaccine diplomacy, the very one that wants to engage in vaccine diplomacy is
the West," said Zuo.
--//--
@ Posted by: suzan | Mar 15 2021 21:33 utc | 69
Human adenovirus is a completely different technology than chimpanzee adenovirus, and both
are completely different technologies from mRNA. Just three completely different things.
All viruses interact with their hosts' DNA and can potentially alter them forever. Indeed,
we can restore fragments from very old viruses on the basis of DNA of third species. That is
a natural and unavoidable aspect of life, and cannot and will never change.
Either way, the debate you bring up is moot point, because DNA mutation is not the issue
with mRNA and chimpanzee adenovirus. The crux of the debate is this: human adenoviral
vaccines are an already existing technology, tried and tested. We know they work and we know
they're safe. That's not the case with the other two, which are completely untried and
untested until last year.
Right now it is difficult to ascertain whether the euro -scare over the A-Z jab causing
blood clots is tosh or not. The Pfizer jab also had a recipient suffer a blood clot, in
amerika, early in the vaccine rollout so it is not inconceivable that all covid vaccines may
have a propensity for inducing thrombosis in a small percentage of recipients.
On the other hand about one in one thousand humans die from thrombosis, so it may well be
that these were just unlucky humans whose number came up coincidentally with their covid
jab.
There is a little evidence however which indicates that at least some of the thrombosis
deaths occured outside the range of 'normal' for thrombosis. Norway and Denmark two countries
with well established public health systems and far more comprehensive than most other
countries medical databases of their patients, were the first to blow the whistle. There were
allegedly features of these post jab thromboses which took them outside the range of
normal.
The deaths occurred in citizens at a younger age than is normal for thrombosis death and
the blood clots occurred in lungs which had a lower than usual number of platelets in the
blood, which is the opposite of what one would expect since platelets are an important part
of clotting, how is that people with lower than usual platelets in their blood developed
clots.
So in the last 18 hours more and more Euro states are suspending use of the AZ vaccine while
this data is researched.
The Irish health mob are delaying by saying there is no evidence at all to show a link
between vaccination and thrombosis, which is correct, but all that means is no one has
demonstrated a physiological, biochemical process that explains how this could occur. Of
course not - the vaccine is only 3 months into a massive rollout, the research required to
find then prove such a link, if there is one, is likely years off.
On the other hand the entire yarn may be just another story put out by the puppets of
competitors in an extremely lucrative immature market.
Every embassy in every nation on this old rock of ours, spends a large chunk of time and
energy pushing products and services which the nation the particular embassy represents, will
profit from.
That includes involvement by 'intelligence' services located in embassies.
It is probable that a great deal of the industrial espionage to uncover the trade secrets
which countries such as england & amerika are forever trying to steal from others,
friends & alleged enemies alike, are in fact undertaken by their national foreign
intelligence agencies, MI6 and CIA.
We should be surprised if the CIA etc weren't attempting to blackmail and browbeat the puppet
leaders of nations (Bolsonaro is most definitely a puppet) to buy products from their
country.
I agree it is wrong and publicising it is essential, but as I said there should be no
surprise. Aotearoa has recently (about two weeks ago), announced that the population will all
be vaccinated with the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. The jabs will be free or extremely low cost for
most (certainly much less than the USD $60 Pfizer demands) and I had been wondering how
Pharmac, the national agency which makes decisions on all drug purchases managed to beat
Pfizer down. Pharmac has a reputation for favouring generics ahead of hi-cost originals.
Perhaps they didn't, although I reckon Pharmac being Pharmac they would have got a pretty
good deal but maybe not as good as usual since Aotearoa governments, particularly ersatz left
administrations have a habit of doing easy deals with five eyes partners as a way of avoiding
agreeing to actions that will alienate voters, even worse lose trade or even sometimes tho
rarely, because the inhumanity is too great.
eg Australia is in
big trouble with China over PM Morrison's stupid claims about covid and Uyghur chinese,
whereas Aotearoa is not. Despite pressure from USuk, Aotearoa hasn't jumped aboard the "let's
all sledge China" ship. If that was achieved by kowtowing to amerikan bullies over less
vital, less public and less divisive issues, good on them. That is a major from me who has
little other than contempt for the neolib twats in control of Aotearoa.
Or it could be that it is like the AZ thrombosis thing could be, no connection at all.
Blind Freddie can see the last G7 was about creating a chimera of mass vaccination as a way
to 'open up' and have the rich getting even richer, in that fantasy it is naive to expect
that there won't be many slips twixt cup and lip. All we can do is try to discern fact from
fantasy and protect as many other as possible by getting them to do the same.
K @ 84 – I agree 100%, and would add there are other ulterior motives besides profit
and gaining public consent, namely attempting to exert political and economic control of
competing/dissenting countries. The fact that some of the world's elite have organized such
contemptuous mafia-like organizations that demonstrate total disregard for human life and
dignity is enough to seriously question their motives in this case as well.
U.S. And Its Five Eye Partners Use 'Persuasion', Sabotage And Disinformation To Gain
Vaccine Supremacy
The U.S. and some of its allies are engaged in efforts to malign the Russian Sputink V
vaccine and to promote the more expensive mRNA vaccines produced by 'western' companies.
The mRNA vaccines hyped in the U.S. media are simply too expensive to be used around the
world. If we want to limit the global effects of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic we will have to use
the cheaper vector based vaccines.
That the AstraZeneka vaccine was immediately attacked in U.S. media by an unqualified
writer quoting an investment bank and the U.S. pharma promoting (Remdesivir!) Antony Fauci is
quite suspicious. Pfizer and Moderna expect to make billions of dollars with their vaccines.
They will use all possible ways and means to defeat any potential competition.
Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia,
recently noted how unfair competition practices are used to keep some vaccines away from
nations who urgently need it:
Producers are struggling for the global vaccine market worth $100 billion, Russian President
Vladimir Putin said on Thursday.
Some producers compete unfairly, sell a small batch of vaccines at a lower price on the
condition to be an exclusive supplier, Putin said, speaking at a video meeting on measures to
boost investment activity in Moscow.
"We see how competitors behave in the global vaccine market worth $100 billion. They come,
sell a small batch of their vaccine at a discount, on the condition that everything else will
be purchased only from this producer," he said.
To no one's astonishment the U.S. government is directly involved in manipulations of
vaccine accessibility. As Brazil Wire
found :
The US Department of Health and Human Services recently published its Annual Report for 2020.
"2020 was one of the most challenging years in the history of our country and in the
history of the Department of Health and Human Services", former US Secretary of Health and
Human Services Alex Azar introduces the report.
"There is an end to the pandemic in sight", he continues, "with the delivery of safe and
effective vaccines through Operation Warp Speed".
Tucked away on page 48, the report shockingly reveals how the US pressured Brazil to
reject Russia's Sputnik V vaccine.
The HHS Annual Report is here . On page 5 it
says:
Developing a strategy for supporting global vaccine access : HHS's Office of Global Affairs
(OGA) led the development of an interagency strategy, coordinated through the National
Security Council, to provide international access to COVID-19 vaccines once domestic needs
are met .
"Once domestic needs are met" is certainly not an altruistic or even reasonably prioritizing
strategy one should be proud of. A sensible effort to save lives and to end the pandemic would
prioritize risk groups in every country of this planet before inoculating people at home who
have little risk of serious Covid-19 complications.
On page 47 the HHS report notes that the U.S. is coordinating with its Five Eyes spy
partners on vaccine 'messaging':
Combating vaccine hesitancy globally : OGA leads a group of the Five Eyes countries (U.K.,
Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States) on vaccine confidence, aligning our
nations' efforts and sharing best practices to enhance vaccine confidence messaging globally.
One page on we learn what such communication entails:
Combatting [sic!] malign influences in the Americas : OGA used diplomatic relations in the
Americas region to mitigate efforts by states, including Cuba, Venezuela, and Russia, who are
working to increase their influence in the region to the detriment of US safety and security.
OGA coordinated with other U.S. government agencies to strengthen diplomatic ties and offer
technical and humanitarian assistance to dissuade countries in the region from accepting aid
from these ill-intentioned states. Examples include using OGA's Health Attaché office
to persuade Brazil to reject the Russian COVID-19 vaccine, and offering CDC technical
assistance in lieu of Panama accepting an offer of Cuban doctors.
"To persuade Brazil to reject the Russian COVID-19 vaccine" is, simply said, criminal
behavior that has near genocidal consequences. Brazil is currently getting swamped with a
more
infectious variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its medical institutions are
near a breakdown :
"It feels like we're putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound," said Eduarda Santa Rosa Barata, a
31-year-old infectologist who works in three ICUs in the north-eastern capital of Pernambuco
state, all now stretched to the limit. "We're engaged in damage reduction You open new beds
and they fill up immediately."
A few days earlier, Barata had admitted a 37-year-old man who had no underlying medical
conditions but whose lungs were so badly damaged he needed intubation. "It seems so random,"
she said. "It's a bizarre disease. It's frightening."
...
"Before the end of 2020, you'd get a family and one member would be infected but not the
other three or four members, even though they lived in the same environment. You don't see
this any more. If there's one confirmed case, everyone ends up getting infected by the
virus," he said. "It's obvious that this new variant is now circulating among us."
Panama, which under U.S. pressure rejected an offer from Cuba for medical support, has one
of the highest death rates from Covid-19. That is one reason why its economy shrank by 18% .
Opening Bolivia to health diplomacy : After decades of silence between the U.S. and Bolivia,
OGA re-established health diplomatic relations with the Ministry of Health of Bolivia
following national elections. Re-engaging allows the U.S. to strengthen ties in the region,
which is important for influence in regional and multilateral fora , including the Pan
American Health Organization.
What was "following national elections" in Bolivia was
a fascist coup which produced repression and tyranny. The U.S. used its cooperation with
the coup plotters to influence other organizations.
Meanwhile the U.S. is also falsely stating that Russia is spreading vaccine disinformation.
Following a Wall Street Journal piece planted by U.S. officials these
claimed , without evidence, that Russia was sowing fear about the mRNA vaccines:
On Sunday, the Wall Street Journal reported that four publications, all serving as fronts for
Russian intelligence, have targeted Western-produced COVID-19 vaccines with misleading
coverage that exaggerates the risk of side effects and raises questions about their efficacy.
The State Department confirmed that report on Monday, saying U.S. officials had identified
four Russian online platforms that were spreading disinformation about the COVID-19
vaccines.
In each case, the Russian outlets were repeating actual news reports ,,,
The 'Russian outlets' repeated the news 'western' news agencies were distributing. It is
nice though to see acknowledged that such is often disinformation.
There are some signs that the U.S. is coordinating with its spy partners to malign the
very
efficient Sputnik V vaccine . The British Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) recently
put up a comment that warns of Russia's soft power gain
through vaccine diplomacy especially in South America:
Sputnik V's rapid foray into new markets in Latin America may indeed have longer-term
implications in an area that has traditionally been the US's backyard. Argentina gratefully
received more than half a million doses in January. It served as an embassy of sorts for
Sputnik V; reportedly, Argentinian delegations to Moscow in late 2020 translated reams of
details into Spanish and shared these with Bolivia, Peru, Mexico, Uruguay and Chile to speed
up their ability to decide. Bolivia's first batch arrived at the end of January. By
mid-February, Mexico received its first 200,000 doses. By mid-March, Brazil and Peru appeared
close to sealing respective deals.
This is followed by musings about potential sabotage targets:
There are several factors that could make Sputnik V's current bounce shortlived. The
inability to deliver supplies quickly is an immediate one. Russia has acknowledged its
production squeeze, raising doubts about its ability to honour its vaccine pledges. It is
dependent on plants in the likes of Brazil, India and South Korea upholding good
manufacturing practice and delivering at speed and scale on Moscow's promise to provide
hundreds of millions of quality vials quickly.
The piece closes with an ominous call to action:
The biomedical science of Sputnik V may well be genuinely welcome worldwide, once full data
is available and has been appropriately interrogated. But the corresponding political
ramifications of deeper and wider Russian influence globally may not be so beneficial. The UK
and the US must not be blindsided to the full extent of Russian vaccine diplomacy already
underway.
The U.S. efforts to prevent Russian vaccine distribution failed in Argentina where President
Alberto Fernández has led an early
and successful effort to introduce the Russian vaccine:
Amid plenty of public skepticism, Buenos Aires sent missions to Moscow in October and
December 2020 to inspect data from the vaccine's phase 3 trial.
An Argentine presidential aide said the delegation had translated hundreds of pages of
information about the vaccine into Spanish -- necessary for approval -- which it later shared
with other governments in the region, including Bolivia, Peru, Mexico, Uruguay, and
Chile.
This is how, a day before the phase 3 results were published, trucks of Sputnik V shots
were already trundling through Bolivia's countryside. A photo of a delivery in a
poultry truck draped in a Bolivian flag -- a creative (and health department-
approved ) solution for cold storage requirements -- went viral. Argentina began
vaccinating with Sputnik this past December, meanwhile, and Mexico announced the purchase of
24 million Sputnik doses on Jan. 25.
U.S. efforts to dissuade countries from acquiring Sputnik V have not be fully successful.
That again requires to launch a propaganda campaign to malign Sputnik V wherever it is
distributed:
1. #Putin: "Global market for #COVID19 vaccines is worth $100 billion. We see how
competitors of our producers behave: they enter a country [that is in need for vaccines],
sell a small batch of vaccines on a discounted price but condition the sale with that...
2. "...the country will only purchase that vaccine from that producer in the future. So,
there's a real fight for the markets".
3. $100 billion is a big market. #Russia makes over $15 bln on arms sales (unofficial
stats have it as high as $55 bln), about $25 bln for agricultural sales; around the same
amount on gas sales (thou it depends on supplies), oil and oil products a little over than
$100 bln.
4. So all of a sudden there's this huge market and there's heavy fight over it.
@dimsmirnov175 cites an anonymous "source in the #Kremlin" who said that Russian intel
services are aware that their foreign counterparts seek to launch a massive infowar against
#Russia/n vaccines
5.The source reportedly said that soon there'll be many reports over #Russia/n vaccines
inefficiency & that they even health dangerous. Allegedly, even "staged cases of massive
losses of human life after using Sputnik V will be propagated via @USAID, @georgesoros
@thomsonreuters
6. The target audience for this campaign will be European countries who registered
#SputnikV for their emergency use – #Hungary, #Slovakia, #Montenegro, #SanMarino and
N.#Macedonia.
7. On a parallel track,#US & allies, according to the "Kremlin source" 'd release
"investigations" about "incompetence of #Russia/n specialists in vaccination & immunology
to halt their certification by @WHO, other relevant agencies , lower demand for RU vaccines
from other countries
8. "The #Kremlin source" adds #US "aggressively promotes @pfizer, eyes to make sure US
free of not only from the payment of possible compensation to citizens in lawsuits in the
event of side effects, but also from liability for negligence of the direct manufacturer"
9.#SputnikV now world's 2nd in terms of demand with 50+ countries having provided permit
for its use. Struggle for markets in #Europe,#LatinAmerica,#Africa #Asia will get even bigger
when we'll [most likely] learn that vaccination is not a one time deal but a seasonal routine
/END
PS.This chart is telling in the kinda tricks one may pull: #Russia's #SputnikV completed
all the stages, but designers of the chart (1) put it at the bottom (2) don't use its product
name (3) mark it with (*) caveating its effectiveness as if ABC "independently fact-checked"
others
Graphics like the above are only one example of media manipulations in support of 'western'
vaccine 'diplomacy'.
This is more than just arrogance:
The West's reaction was not exactly objective in August 2020 when Russia presented the
world's first corona vaccine. Words like "vaccine muck from Moscow", "nasty vaccine
propaganda", and accusations of "clumsy manipulations" of a "high-risk experiment on humans".
Distrust, malice and suspicion were easier to find. One newspaper quipped that Sputnik V was
effective not only against the virus, but also against "homosexuality as well as epilspsy and
hives."
That these efforts will keep people away from other good and available vaccines and that
this will inevitably cost a number of them their lives, is seen as a reasonable price for
gaining vaccine supremacy.
Posted by b on March 15, 2021 at 12:16 UTC |
Permalink
Nice compilation B on what basically is another big sign of western decadence and immorality.
As you very well state what is needed is a global vaccination of groups at risk to avoid
mutations and new variants of the virus, and not vaccination within borders while others
wait.
One more jewel in the arrogant statements denigrating SputnikV, the clown -literally-
Zelensky stating that Ukraine won't approve SputnikV because Ukrainians are not "rabbits" to
be subjected to experiments. He should know, he has pulled more than one rabbit from his top
hat.
Reminds me of the government's efforts against Rearden metal in the novel Atlas Shrugged. One
must appreciate the irony that the US, the epicenter of Randian ideology, is trying this.
"Strengthening Health Cooperation and U.S. Humanitarian Leadership
Combatting malign influences in the Americas: OGA used diplomatic relations in the Americas
region to mitigate efforts by states, including Cuba, Venezuela, and Russia, who are working
to increase their influence in the region to the detriment of US safety and
security.
Examples include using OGA's Health Attaché office to persuade Brazil to reject
the Russian COVID-19 vaccine, and offering CDC technical assistance in lieu of Panama
accepting an offer of Cuban doctors."
The Russia-USA vaccine battle obscures another, possibly more important one: mRNA
vaccines vs. all the rest.
Moderna got much of its early funding from the US Military. The Military is interested in
mRNSA as a bio-weapons defense - the tech allows quick formulations to protect soldiers. But
the ability to better defend against bio-weapons also makes USA use of bio-weapons more
likely. Just the side that has an effective defense against ballistic missiles is more likely
to use them.
Given such knowledge, one can question the many problems of the OxfordAstroZeneca (OAZ)
vaccine (latest: Norway is looking into the possibility that the OAZ vaccine causes blood
clots) and the late entry of the J&J vaccine (a full three months behind Sputnik V and
Sinopharm).
But wait, there's more: By not fighting SARS-COV-2 effectively (like some countries did),
mutations were virtually certain to happen. That makes the mRNA technology incredibly
valuable for ability to quickly adjust to new strains. And who knows what other viruses will
unexpectedly /sarc pop up in the near future?
Will American sheeple ever be allowed to question the Trump Administration many failures
in fighting the pandemic - starting with Trump's bogus air travel ban and his lying about the
severity of the virus? Not likely. New York State Governor Cuomo is now being hounded out of
office with flimsy sex allegations to (IMO) prevent a review of the policy of sending people
home to "self-isolate". "Self-isolate" and the "bend the curve" goal (instead of defeat the
virus) virtually guaranteed that the pandemic would continue to spread.
librul@3
My wife and I received the J & J jab last week, I'll keep you all updated on us. We're
70, she has #2 diabetes but healthy and not overweight. I'm healthy, skinny. We live rural,
raise and forage mushrooms, herbs, forbes, 90% of our meat is deer we harvest and process but
we're almost vegetarian. So, no extra health issues beyond her #2d. She had a little bit of a
sore arm for 24 hours. Neither of us had other symptoms after the jab. covid is happening
here, friends, neighbors, relatives have had it, hospitals are struggling to keep up.
what this summary of the vaccine shows me is that the nation states are marketing agents
and mafia like defenders of the makers of the products of those private parties who have
control over the nation states (government).
What a marketing tool, the rule of law and the use of nation state force to market privately
produced products.
clearly the nation state system and its agencies have by their actions proven themselves
to be a problem in need of fixing for the 8 billion people who occupy the planet.
Early on, there was reporting that the novel (as in recently created) corona virus was
mutating rapidly - approximately every 4th transmission was claimed.
I believe it was noted that this behavior was typical for virus, novel on in particular.
The term mutate is both appropriate and used to frighten.
It seems this is a largely political beast.
When you live in a social system that has global private finance at its core, what do you
expect?
The West is proud of its barbarism and flaunts its lie/cheat/steal mentality. We are
standing by hopeful as that meme drives itself into the ground taking many with it. We just
hope it isn't all of us in a pique of self loathing when the bottom is near.
What a shit show to live in the middle of. It is almost like folk think its weird to do
things for the right reasons instead of profit....and they call themselves Christians as they
blindly follow their devilish leadership.
Hypothetically, genetic research gives us the means of widespread, genetically targeted,
destruction and new tools for pharmaceutical development. Dangerous situation in a
neo-liberal world order.
Of course Russia has no need to spread fear about US mRNA vaccines, because these are the
most expensive and difficult to distribute, and the US has conspired to prevent any
humanitarian distribution, an historic disgrace. Many will long remember that Russia offered
vaccines at cost while the US maximized profits, and Bill Gates obliged Astrazeneca to seek
profit rather than humanitarian distribution.
But Russian vaccine production has underperformed. I cannot even find a number for
it but if I look at deaths per million, 6 day rolling average, Russia is not in a sustained
downtrend yet. When a country reaches heard immunity, this will go into a sustained
downtrend. Russia has not even been able to vaccinate their own population...
"Johnson & Johnson's vaccine is the third coronavirus vaccine to receive FDA approval,
but the first vaccine requiring just one shot for vaccination. The drug showed a 67
percent effectiveness against moderate to severe COVID-19 infections and about an 85
percent effectiveness against the most serious illnesses . While two other FDA-approved
vaccines have efficacy rates in the 90s, Johnson & Johnson's drug was shown to
prevent 100 percent of hospitalizations in a clinical study of around 44,000 participants
in the United States. "
If the jab has a 67% efficacy against moderate to severe infections, how can it have an 85
percent effectiveness against the most severe infections? How can it prevent 100% of
haspitalizations in 44,000 subjects? Unless perhaps the figure of 67% represents people who
took the shot after contracting the disease? But that doesn't make sense either.
Statistical illiteracy on the part of the writer? How much of all that is true?
I don't know yet. My preference is non-mRNA but I'll wait as long as I can.
mRNA vaccines may be the only game in town if the virus keeps mutating quickly and/or new
viruses are introduced.
What I object to is the near complete lack of cynicism. Many moa readers will recall the
phrase: "Question Authority" from the 1960's. We need that same spirit today.
The 'woke' generation isn't quite 'there' yet.
That's the number according to international standards and rhe number which allows
comparison to other vaccines. All the other quoted numbers are just there in order to
obfuscate the fact that it is significantly less efficient than the mRNA vaccines.
The 'woke' are currently focused on race and sex with some concern for inequality and a
living wage. 'Anti-war' isn't yet on the radar screen for most of them, though it should
be.
jackrabbit @ 12, thanks SO much for that excellent video link! As the two participants
were discussing, I had the thought that the vaccine situation they are analyzing is very much
like the GMO experimentation we have all been subjected to around the world when those seeds
were presented to us, and the virus being a part of our life system, is like the weeds which
were enabled by the practise of using GMO seeds and then spraying the crops with virulent
herbicides those seeds were now inoculated to resist --- it all meant that the situation in
farmer's fields, while the crops themselves survive (much as do inoculated with the vaccine
persons) the situation at large gets worse!
It is an excellent conversation also on the side issue of whether science benefits from
shutting down dissent. We should all think about that!!
Vaccines in the strict sense of the term use weakened or inactive forms of the virus they
target to stimulate the immune response. MRNA vaccines don't: they insert a protein
resembling a protein on the coronavirus's outer coat into the RNA of your cells so your body
makes these proteins itself to prime the immune response. That's my understanding and I stand
to be corrected by others.
That first link in your post is to Geert van den Bossche and is an excellent interview.
Worth the time. Somewhat annoying music at start, in all ways the best take I have
encountered on how mRNA works. Much more accessible than some of what that author has been
putting in print.
The Adenovirus vector vaccines are DNA vaccines. The primary difference between them
(Sputnik V, Astrozenica, J & J and some more) is the type of Adenovirus vector used, for
example human or chimp, how they are cultured, and the specifics of production and
processing.
All of them use a segment of DNA that codes for a Covid-2 Spike protein which is
genetically inserted into the adenovirus delivery system.
The mRNA vaccines use nanolipids to stabilize the mRNA segments and similarly code for
Covid-2 spike protein.
The adenovirus DNA vaccines enter the cell nucleus where they begin the process
transcribing DNA code to mRNA, the desired antigen trigger of the immune process. The mRNA to
protein production factories are the ribosomes, housed in the (non nuclear) cytoplasm.
These DNA and mRNA vaccines all differ from traditional first-order vaccines which culture
the virus being targeted, kill it so it can not reproduce, and injected it into the patient,
a process called innoculation (dead virus jab which stimulates wide variety of anitbodies),
vs vaccination (nucleic acid code traveling on a vector or in nano lipid packet which
stimulates production of a specific antigen "spike" protein in this instance.
One problem I haven't heard any assessment about is what happens in the cell when degraded
forms of genetic code, either mRNA or DNA, resulting from perhaps shoddy manufacture or
sloppy handling? Would there still be biological activity? Producing what proteins?
Quality control across the process and delivery system is probably of extreme importance
in ensuring vaccine safety.
That is an excellent question. Also there is no certainty what is happening when all
apparently goes to plan. Extensive tissue sampling and analysis needs doing. Best way to do
all of that is on autopsy. Autopsies are not being done. It is as if no one wants to
know.
Main difference is mRNA is absolutely new. There has never before been an mRNA product
turned loose on the general population. Moderna had a rabies investigational product that did
get as far as human testing, it was shut down early. Moderna we know is funded by DARPA,
In-Q-Tel, Bill Gates, Jeffrey Epstein. In existence for thirty or forty years, depending
which story you desire to believe. Never had a saleable product until now. Trust us.
The Pfizer mRNA product is entirely acquired from BioNTech. Try to find out anything about
them. Next try to find out anything about them that passes the laugh test.
If you want to know something about how mRNA gene therapy is alleged to work would suggest
reading or watching what Geert van den Bossche has been saying since he started to talk. He
is a vaccine developer. A man who has spent his career in the lab creating vaccines. He
believes in vaccines. Formerly worked with GAVI and Gates Foundation. Not an anti-Vaxxer.
It's Profit over People yet again, and such shouldn't be any surprise. The
geopolitical aspects show an extremely desperate Outlaw US Empire that has lost all its soft
power through its inhumane behavior. That it thinks it can recoup some of what it lost by
continuing to act inhumanely proves the absolute sordid quality of the minds at work. And
then there's the lies and deceit, and to think that the people managing this campaign are
allowed to raise children!
Having discovered that Mexico has Sputnik V, I'll be going South as soon as I get my
renewed passport.
So the end result is a world with uneven levels of vaccination. Seems like this will
simply keep covid around for a very long time for the sake of anti-Russia geopolitics and big
Western pharma profits. The world will end up becoming a medical dystopia for years to
come.
Erelis @ 53; "So the end result is a world with uneven levels of vaccination. Seems like
this will simply keep covid around for a very long time for the sake of anti-Russia
geopolitics and big Western pharma profits. The world will end up becoming a medical dystopia
for years to come."
Yep, afraid you're right.....But then hey, profits uber alles....
@ 29 jackrabbit... thanks... i see this much the same way as you....
@ 37 b... thanks for this additional article.. i quote from it below..
"There are lots of players in the vaccine version of the great game. Both China and Russia
are aggressively practicing vaccine diplomacy. As is the EU. The primary goal of U.S. vaccine
diplomacy seems to be to ensure the profits of Big Pharma, rather than on maximizing the
number of people vaccinated, in the shortest possible time. Could these priorities shift?
Perhaps. Time will tell. India has stepped forward to represent the perspective of developing
countries, drawing on its role as a major vaccine manufacturer – and perhaps sometime
soon – developer."
Sputnik V is being distributed in Russia. My daughter and her boyfriend, as nursing
students were required to be vaccinated, or show antibodies from a recovered case of
COVID-19. My daughter has had COVID-19 and fully recovered, and her boyfriend had his first
vaccination. Unlike most western countries, there is no panic, and lockdowns are on an as
needed basis.
Russia reacted very quickly to the virus and closed its borders early.
As S commented here several weeks ago, Russian travel agencies and Aeroflot were arranging
special vaccine charters I might also take advantage of, and Mexico has a long history of
welcoming medical patients from El Norte seeking treatments unavailable here.
If you go to the US CDC website you will see that all current vaccines for Covid are only
under "emergency" approval.
It is also clearly stated that they will not work in all cases and that the Pharma Industry
is not liable when they cause harm.
I don't want a jab that is messing with my DNA in the first palce but I absoliutely don't
want one that is not yet fully tested.
In addition what does "fully tested" even mean in a corrupt system where you can hardly
find a single truth on any topic in 24 hours of news broadcasting?
How is it that people are ultra critical of political corruption yet as happy as lambs to
trust BIg Pharma in spite of endless lies, corruption and human damage in the last 100 years.
Why isn't it obvious that Big Pharma is part of the problem. You can't be part of the problem
and the solution at the same time.
There is a place for vaccines but for vaccines to fit into the category of preventative
medicine, like good food, exercise, vitamins etc or modalities like acupuncture or herbalism
etc , they also need to prove they are as harmless as good food, intelligent exercise or
vitamins. In my opinion they should be part of any national health system, subject to the
most rigorous and independent testing, and they should be free.
Preventative medicine should have an almost zero chance of killing or maiming anyone.
Otherwise it's just the product of the same philosophy of "collateral damage" than Empires
use to control the human world.
I question vaccine logic when it denies the human capacity to evolve to protect itself and
I especially question Vaccines for profit. I'm not an anti vaxxer, but I am also not going to
happily inject a cocktail of chemicals and animal/human DNA proteins directly into my
bloodstream. I am well aware that vaccines have used dead or active animal proteins for a
very long time, part of the reason why i try to avoid them at all costs.
Where is the research that proves that injecting foreign DNA into our blood is safe long
term for the overall health of human beings , not just for immunity to one disease? Obviously
the current vaccines are not killing people in great numbers, but they
are killing some. And anyway, not killing a patient isn't the criteria for "safe"! What other
effects will be long term?
Saying that we just don't know is naive. Obviously bio tech labs have been experimenting
for decades on the effect of genetic mutation on animals and humans. Just as they knew the
long terms outcomes of GMO crops but kept is secret, they will also be well aware of the long
terms effects of GMO vaccines and also keeping it very secret.
There doesn't need to be a micro chip in a vaccine to make it a bio weapon.
Will the gene activating vaccines become a biological weapon just as GMO seeds have?
I've watched presentations explaining the science of the current vaccines, and I do not
feel at all re-assured that the genetic response will behave as predicted in every case, or
even in any case. Gaining immunity from Covid is pointless if it renders people more
succeptable to potentially worse health conditions down the track.
I have no expertise in this field, I'm just a concerned human being trying to make sense
of very complicated science that also happens to have no legal liability. What could possibly
go wrong? Einstein would be sympathetic given what happened with his science.
We should be questioning the argument for vaccines over antibody testing and preventative
medicine at the very least. But that is not even a mainstream conversation at this point.
Somebody mentioned in the comments that in Russia you can get antibody testing and not
need the vaccine. This sounds more like a balanced approach to me. That isn't an option in
most places that I am aware of.
Manufacturing of consent for genetic intervention in humans is now happening very
successfully all over the world due to covid. The created hysteria that vaccines are the only
way to save the planet is so reminiscent of WMD's in Iraq and GMO seeds in the developing
countries . Anyone notice that millions of Indian farmers are now rejecting the Bio-Tech
because GMO seeds and their accompanying poisons are destroying lives and the planet?
These are not separate issues.
Suddenly there is a $100 Billion covid Vaccine market. And strangely Pharma seems to be
the only class that is a-political and borderless. Even making profits in our favourite anti
western countries. What a coup! And how is this possible?
I never really understood the intense media campaign against anti-vaxxers until now. I
mean why would a relatively few traumatised parents really be a bother to Big Pharma? The
answer is that they aren't.
Creating a public enemy and gaining consent was the goal and boy has it worked a
treat!
Just in time for the biggest Vaccine $$$$ jackpot of all time.
It couldn't have worked out better if they had planned it.
I'm not an epidemiologist nor medically trained on trial procedures and norms but i have
the following questions:
1. Efficacy figures:
Is it determined by looking for antibodies in the test subjects? If so how much is good
enough and who sets the bar? If not...
2. Viral exposure post inoculation:
I don't believe they lock the test subjects up in a room pumped full of covid19 goodness to
get the absolute efficacy figures so whatever efficacy would be highly dependant on the test
cohort and their environmental exposure.
e.g. A cohort that are made up of front line workers in a hotpot/basket case like Brazil
will necessarily be more prone to be exposed to the virus than say a cohort that fairly
represents the population. Conversely a vaccine tested on a less exposed cohort will also
more likely to get a better efficacy figure.
So is this why we're seeing lower and sometimes inconsistent figures on particular
vaccines. The sinovac coronavac comes to mind. Figures in Brazil was wildly different to
others in turkey and Indonesia.
... Actually i smell political meddling with the Brazil trial, similar to what b pointed
out in his piece, but i digress.
3. Endpoint
Isn't the whole idea of the vaccine to avoid deaths and suffering? If so even the 'lowly'
coronavac with its low efficacy was able to prevent 100% of severe cases that requires
hospitalization. Of the 30 or 40% that it 'wasn't' effective for, it was just mild symptoms
and did not require any intervention. Pretty good for a Chinese /3rd World vaccine that
doesn't even need -70c logistics.
What I'm saying is there's a lot of cherry picking, manipulations, stacked decks and
absolute bullshit because of vaccine politics. Sadly the sheeple are buying it all.
For me, because of my need to travel to both the 'free world' and the totalitarian regime
that is China, i will probably need to get jabbed by 2 vaccines due to the vaccine politics
that is taking shape right in front of your eyes. It pains me to think that in doing so I'll
make another 2 doses unavailable to someone else.
What can you do: i do believe all the vaccines are effective and if you're otherwise
healthy you should go and take the jab, whichever one (may be pass on the AZ for now). Your
govt have already blown your money on it, and they don't have a long use-by date.
The world is acutely supply-limited and your support to vaccinate will ironically slow
down the empire in trying to corner the vaccine market politically. Why? Because they will
not be able to spin up production as quickly as RUS+CHN+other countries who are working with
RUS+CHN to spin up their own production.
At the end MRNA is a mil tech and i can't see the 'free world' giving that up to anyone
else until its common knowledge. So the longer it is supplied-limited, the better for the
uptake of the other vaccines to put a nip on the brewing vaccine-racism where you can only
travel to certain places depending on which jab you took.
I am absolutely appalled by the blinkered focus on vaccines to the detriment of
therapeutic treatment. Of course, no one should be surprised by this, considering, as Putin
puts it, there is now a sudden and lucrative $100 billion c19 vaccine market (what
incentive!). So the entire medical world (minus a few) discovered that c19 was amenable to
vaccine production and completely buried efforts to discover/develop successful
treatments.
Ask anybody (in the global north) that has had c19 what they were told to do. Just about
all of them will probably say that they were told to go home and self-care/quarantine until
they have symptoms that are bad enough for them to be hospitalized. Doctors don't want to
treat c19 because they've been told by government guidance that there is no treatment
(a complete lie!). Meanwhile, those few brave doctors have actually tried to treat patients
before they get worse and there have been a few discoveries (IVM is the best example) of
various treatments that are highly effective.
So now we find even the least vulnerable, such as 20/30 year olds, all clamoring to
get a vaccine, any supposed vaccine, when all they really need is some vit D and to take
varied prophylaxis proven to work and they'd be perfectly fine. A responsible gov response
would be to vaccinate the most vulnerable and treat the least vulnerable. Instead, we have
mass hysteria to vaccine all human beings alive and still force 3 year olds to mask and take
two tests a week, all for the sake of protecting pharma profits. Absurd.
Gosh, there's so much enthusiasm for inoculation around here one almost forgets that there
are many of us, even
inside the industry, who don't want ANY of these injections.
And as a kind of aside, the extreme harvesting of their blue blood is apparently wreaking
havoc on the horseshoe crab
community , an extremely important link in the old ecological chain.
The Adenovirus vector vaccines are DNA vaccines. The primary difference between them
(Sputnik V, Astrozenica, J & J and some more) is the type of Adenovirus vector used, for
example human or chimp, how they are cultured, and the specifics of production and
processing.
All of them use a segment of DNA that codes for a Covid-2 Spike protein which is
genetically inserted into the adenovirus delivery system.
The mRNA vaccines use nanolipids to stabilize the mRNA segments and similarly code for
Covid-2 spike protein.
The adenovirus DNA vaccines enter the cell nucleus where they begin the process
transcribing DNA code to mRNA, the desired antigen trigger of the immune process. The mRNA to
protein production factories are the ribosomes, housed in the (non nuclear) cytoplasm.
These DNA and mRNA vaccines all differ from traditional first-order vaccines which culture
the virus being targeted, kill it so it can not reproduce, and injected it into the patient,
a process called innoculation (dead virus jab which stimulates wide variety of anitbodies),
vs vaccination (nucleic acid code traveling on a vector or in nano lipid packet which
stimulates production of a specific antigen "spike" protein in this instance.
One problem I haven't heard any assessment about is what happens in the cell when degraded
forms of genetic code, either mRNA or DNA, resulting from perhaps shoddy manufacture or
sloppy handling? Would there still be biological activity? Producing what proteins?
Quality control across the process and delivery system is probably of extreme importance
in ensuring vaccine safety.
I would hope others will look at the video @ 12 - lots of meat in that for a discussion
and very important information from the Israeli vaccinations for the covid virus! I look
forward to further consideration of the thesis. The important part is that the findings don't
disagree with the efficacy of the vaccine, they simply point to a change in the virus itself
being somehow linked to the vaccinations. I would like to know if this is also the case when
vaccinations of the more traditional type are being used, or whether this is only true of
certain ones.
And again, if this is a false correlation, I would like to know that as well. I've sent
the video to my daughter who is a hospital worker.
mina @ 52, thanks for your link. The headline to the article reads: "SARS-CoV-2 evolution
during treatment of chronic infection." I was only able to read a line at a time, due to the
set up on my computer, but it looks as though it is a more clinical study of patients being
treated with remisidivir (sp? sorry) on the virus as they were being treated, and that those
mutations were occurring rapidly during course of treatment. One wonders, then, is that a
corroboration of the study linked @ 12 but not specifically related to any vaccine per se,
and does it mean that the mutations are occurring within the hospitalization process in
general (and possibly also out in the environment) as well as in conjunction with vaccine
jabs, so that while some get treated, others are more likely to suffer from those mutations?
Or as seems to be the claim at the video, are the virulent mutations occurring in conjunction
with the vaccinations only?
The video supposes that more vaccinations may be necessary as the virus mutates and other
dangerous ones come on scene. The question being can the human body suffer these annually or
more often as well as, say,they have had less potent 'flu vaccinations every year? (That's
assuming the 'flu jabs are harmless, but I won't go there.)
I'm not a clinical expert, but it seemed the mutations were occurring in Mina's link in a
petri dish, not just out in the general atmosphere, and that those mutations seem to be less
virulent, not more. Whereas in the video @ 12, the deaths had doubled in conjunction with the
vaccinations.
I'm not anti vax per se. But this is a different situation from other cases. It really
does need to be studied without the economic factor entering in, so that the best solution
can be taken, or the world is going to be very badly off just following what powerful nations
tell them to do.
PHE found a 48% increase in infection risk among over 80s in the week after the first
jab. The FDA found 40%. Now a study from Denmark finds 40%. Will the Government publish the
data to set our minds at ease?
In the last 24 hours, a number of national governments including Denmark, Norway, Thailand,
and Iceland, announced that they will temporarily halt the use of the COVID-19 vaccine that was
developed by AstraZeneca and Oxford University.
The Danish Health Ministry stated that the suspension was a precautionary measure following
dozens of reports of blood-clotting by patients who had been vaccinated. There has been at
least one fatality.
As I've written many times before, I'm not anti-vaccine. But I am pro-data and
pro-reason.
And it seems sensible to pause and assess the data when a brand new and comparatively
untested vaccine may be linked to serious side effects.
The problem, of course, is that this story doesn't conform to the narrative that the media
wants you to believe. So they're either NOT reporting on it, or they're running counter-stories
to reinforce their agenda.
Newsweek already came to the rescue with an article stating unequivocally that there is "no
evidence to show COVID vaccines have caused deaths or serious illnesses. . ." including blood
clots.
Another article entitled "What to Know About Serious Covid Vaccine Reactions" dismissed any
potential reaction, including death, by declaring "no connection to vaccines has been
established."
The Associated Press wrote, "The vast majority of people being vaccinated at the moment are
elderly or have got underlying diseases", and that "it would be difficult to determine whether
a vaccine shot is responsible" for blood clots.
(Nevermind that you could apply that same argument to COVID deaths, i.e. the vast majority
of COVID deaths are elderly or people with underlying diseases, so we should simply ignore that
data when making policy decisions )
Certainly most vaccinations worldwide have shown, at least in the short term, few side
effects. And it's obviously possible that the blood clot issues may not be related to the
vaccine.
But it's extraordinary that the media is willing to deliberately ignore any signs or data
that might undermine what they want you to believe.
First, a couple of quotes from this article, with my comments following each. And then an
article that ties the two together, and MUST BE READ.
"Professor of Government Ethics Played Key Role in Nursing Home Death Coverup
Last spring, the New York Governor Andrew Cuomo ordered nursing homes to admit patients
who had recently been treated for Covid-19. This led to a spike in Covid deaths inside
nursing homes, which are filled with elderly people in the highest risk category for serious
Covid-19 cases."
The exact same thing happened in the UK, elderly and in some cases DYING elderly patients
were sent back to their care home from the hospitals they were being treated in, AGAINST the
wishes of the care homes and medical ethics, even though it was known they were infected with
the virus, the care homes were ORDERED to take them back. So, guesss what happened ?, that`s
right, THOUSANDS OF DEATHS , of both the sent back and those in the care home that then
became infected. THAT WAS ALL OFFICIALLY SANCTIONED.
Several nations halt distribution of AstraZeneca Covid vaccine
"The problem, of course, is that this story doesn't conform to the narrative that the
media wants you to believe. So they're either NOT reporting on it, or they're running
counter-stories to reinforce their agenda. Newsweek already came to the rescue with an
article stating unequivocally that there is "no evidence to show COVID vaccines have caused
deaths or serious illnesses. . ." including blood clots. Another article entitled "What to
Know About Serious Covid Vaccine Reactions" dismissed any potential reaction, including
death, by declaring "no connection to vaccines has been established."
When investigating a series of crimes, the police look for any possible connections, the
common denominator that ties the crimes together and thereby highlights possible
suspects.
So what`s the common denominator in ALL of these blood clot deaths ?, they ALL HAD HAD THE
VACCINE !!!!. Now if that`s not a smoking gun, a starting point of investigation, WTF IS
????.
The articles bullet points.
The AstraZeneca vaccine is being promoted for developing countries, in part because it
doesn't require the deep-freeze cold storage that mRNA vaccines do, so the logistics
surrounding distribution are less complex
Patents and royalties for the AstraZeneca vaccine are held by a private company called
Vaccitech, investors of which include Google Ventures, the Wellcome Trust, the Chinese
branch of Sequoia Capital, the Chinese drug company Fosun Pharma and the British
government
While AstraZeneca has promised it will not make any profit from its vaccine, there's a
time limit on this pledge. The not-for-profit vow expires once the pandemic is over, and
AstraZeneca itself appears to have a say when it comes to declaring the end date
The AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was co-developed by Adrian Hill, who has long-term
ties to the British eugenics movement through his work with the Wellcome Trust's Centre for
Human Genetics and affiliation with the Galton Institute, formerly the U.K. Eugenics
Society
Members of the Galton Institute have called for population reduction in Latin America,
South and Southeast Asia and Africa, the very areas where the AstraZeneca vaccine is being
promoted
Amazing isn`t it that Gates and his Welcome Trust keep on coming up in connection with the
virus, coincidence ?. Probably not. It`s also very deeply concerning and ALARMING to find the
BRITISH GOVERNMENT itself implicated !!!, VERY CONCERNING AND ALARMIN INDEED !!!.
Norway Investigates Whether AstraZeneca Vaccine Caused Deadly Blood Clots
BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, MAR 12, 2021 - 10:34
Update (1124ET):
As the first AstraZeneca shots arrive in South America via
the WHO's Covax program, the international public-health agency has promised to investigate reports that the vaccine may be
linked to dangerous blood clots.
Yesterday, Europe's
already
struggling
COVID vaccine rollout took another hit when
more
than half a dozen nations
stopped doling out COVID vaccines created by AstraZeneca following reports that some patients
who received the vaccine developed life-threatening lung clots, with at least one person having subsequently died as a
result.
While health authorities in Denmark, one of the first countries to halt the AstraZeneca-Oxford jab, said it was impossible
to tell if there was any connection, the spate of suspicious cases is apparently enough to prompt health authorities to
take a closer look. On Friday morning, Thailand became the first non-European country to halt the AstraZeneca vaccine,
while several other nations, including Canada, Australia, the Philippines and South Korea, have all said they would move
forward.
Bulgaria became the latest European nation to suspend the vaccine on Friday. According to
Reuters
,
the Bulgarian government wants the EMA to send over a written statement outlining its argument about why it should allow
vaccinations to go forward.
The World Health Organization on Friday said there is no reason to stop using the
Oxford-AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine, as a growing number of countries in Europe and
elsewhere have moved to halt its use over blood clot concerns.
Italy, Romania and Thailand joined at least eight
European nations this week in suspending the injections either from specific batches or as
part of a total freeze, citing the potential adverse events despite a
lack of formal evidence that the shot is unsafe.
A WHO spokeswoman, Margaret Harris,
said at a briefing that an advisory committee was investigating reports of individuals
falling ill or dying after developing blood clots in the post-vaccination period, but that no
causal link had been established.
Christian Daily, a Los Angeles-based media outlet, reported on Friday that according to a
whistleblower, COVID-19 vaccinations from the Pfizer shots have resulted in a significant
number of deaths and serious injuries in a German nursing home. The report said, "A
conscientious whistleblower, who is also a caregiver at the nursing facility where the
incident happened, stepped forward to expose what transpired behind the scenes of the
COVID-19 vaccine rollout, a report says."
[...]
The coverage reported, "Seven out of 31 people living in the nursing home died after
getting injected with their first dose of Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine. The whistleblower
added that after the second dose was administered, one died and eleven more got seriously
sick." Christian Daily analyzed that, "This means that out of the 31 elderly people that
got vaccinated in that nursing home, 25 percent of them died shortly after while the lives
of 36 percent were jeopardized."
[...]
The article also looked back to prior deaths from other European countries of elderly
people after receiving the COVID-19 vaccines produced by Western companies including
Pfizer. For example, 46 elderly people in a Spanish nursing home died following their
vaccinations, and 16 senior citizens died after getting vaccine shots in Switzerland.
Our problem is not so much bad will (and here I disagree with my esteemed colleague
Mike
Whitney ) but the noble and quixotic desire to save mankind from some perceived peril. P.G.
Wodehouse tells us of four scouts who, in their quest for a good deed, helped an old lady to
cross the street, and reported to their guide. All four of you were needed for that, asked an
amazed guide. Well, she put up quite a strong resistance, they replied. Until recently, only
governments played God and that was bad enough. But now every Tom, Dick and Harry with an extra
billion dollars in his pocket wants to save mankind.
Very interesting week.. what I saw was a lot of people are beginning to understand how
dysfunctional the USA government has become.. The oligarchs who own the International Nation
State Franchising operation. .you know, the franchises that govern the local nation states
are being discovered one by one, as part of the dysfunction that has been used to manipulate
all of hamanity . .
Most people have begun to under the meaning of having a President that is not elected by
the people and that it does not matter if the people go to the poles and vote, because their
vote does not count, the electoral college appoints both President and VP.
Most people are beginning to understand their concerns are not explainable because the
government is conducted in secret and the media, 92% owned by just 6 people world wide. has
complete control over the information environments <=in each separate nation state. The
MSM is where, until recently, most people got their information from <= so most people's
information until recently has been completely shaped by the private owners of the media that
controls each franchised nation state separately.
The meaning to democracy <=actually to lack of it, of a six person owned, private
monopoly in media is starting to become understood by everyone, even the guy that cleans the
commodes: those who must cover up their sins and those seeking to discover the sins of those
seeking to hide their sins <=everyone is beginning to understand. Private control, by
monopoly ownership of media, has protected the nation state franchisees from being discovered
for too long. The nation state system has not only allowed, but fostered and promoted global
unrest. Media is independent of top down nation state control, its an alternative way that
the owners of the Franchise system enforce their intentions and control the narrative.. The
USA has not been shy about acting on behalf of desperate private media to prevent out of the
box disclosures about global corruption < intent clearly shown in the trial going on in
Britain designed to bring Julian Assange into prosecution range. Documents Mr. Assange
disclosured revealed how those who govern and those who benefit by Useing government
accomplish their corruptions. Devil forbid! The Assange extradition trial reports that
disclosing crimes of those in government is light years more terrible than holding up a
corner grocery store.
Discussion should center not on finding a vaccine, which probably will often not work, but on
finding and implementing a way to prevent corona virus of any vintage or flavor from
infecting a single cell in a single person..(virus carried by mosquitoes is controlled by
eradicating the mosquito)<=why not infection prevention instead of infection by vaccine?
<=Because all vintages and flavors of the corona viri use essentially the same process to
infect human cells <=preventing infection, which would eliminate the risk posed by the
virus, seems primal to waiting for victims of infection to get sick so the vaccine can work
its claimed magic. Many are working on prevention <= government will stop work on
prevention, if it could find those working on prevention. Infection stopped <=would upset
their feudal lords in the pharmaceutical industry and <=your great protectors at the FDA
and NIH and HS would use the powers vested in their crimes by the government to stop the
governed humanity from being able to protect itself by method of prevention. Government
power depends on citizen dependence.
So much freedom from those who govern <=its difficult to move about.
... no one can deny the astonishing fact that in just 8 weeks of mass vaccination
the total number of Covid-19 deaths in the Jewish State almost doubled from the number
accumulated in the prior ten months...
At the time Israel vaccinated itself, it was witnessing a sharp exponential rise in
morbidity and death. Palestine, literally the same land, saw its number of cases and deaths
plummeting.
Bourla [Pfizer CEO] and PM Netanyahu should make an intellectual effort and explain to
us how it's possible that in Gaza, an open-air prison and one of the most densely populated
pieces of land on this planet, the numbers of Covid-19 cases are minimal and without a
'vaccine.'
But Palestine is not alone, as the situation in Jordan is similar. While Israel saw its
Covid-19 death figures breaking through the roof, Jordan's Covid-19 deaths from
mid-November onwards look like a slippery slope. [down that is]
And then there is another ghastly issue revealed in this closed experiment:
Since Israel morphed into a nation of Guinea pigs, a virus that used to prey on the elderly
and those with severe health issues has now changed its nature completely. After just 2
months of a 'successful' mass vaccination campaign, 76% of new Covid-19 cases are under 39.
Only 5.5% are over 60. 40% of critical patients are under 60. The country has also detected
a sharp rise in Covid-19 cases amongst pregnant women, with m ore than a few in critical
condition. In the last few weeks, new-born Covid-19 cases saw a large 1300% spike (from 400
cases in under two-year-olds on November 20 to 5,800 in February 2021).
The evidence collected in Israel points at a close correlation between mass vaccination,
cases and deaths. This correlation points at the possibility that it is the vaccinated who
actually spread the virus or even a range of mutants that are responsible for the radical
shift in symptoms above.
Atzmon closes with black humor:
I am obviously not the only one who sees that something went dramatically wrong in Israel.
A group of dissenting researchers who looked into the numbers involved with the current
Pfizer Israeli experiment
published a detailed study two week ago. "We conclude" they wrote, "that the Pfizer
vaccines, for the elderly, killed during the 5-week vaccination period about 40 times more
people than the disease itself would have killed, and about 260 times more people than the
disease among the younger age class."
Based on the Pfizer/Israeli 'laboratory' experiment, I drew the following sarcastic
conclusion: If you catch coronavirus you may die, but if you follow the Pfizer path, not
only do you have a 95% chance to survive on top of the 99.98% provided by Covid-19, you may
also kill some other people on the way.
The upside is that we can watch it in real time (until someone turns the lights off). Only
the Pfizer jab (I hesitate to use 'vaccine') is available and mandatory in Israel. Nothing
for the Palestinians as - blockaded.
Swissmedic said the average age of the deaths was 86 and most of them had pre-existing
diseases, adding there was no evidence to suggest that the vaccines were the cause of
death.
However:
A Chinese immunologist who requested anonymity told the Global Times that the large-scale
use of mRNA vaccines carries the risk of causing abnormal immune dysfunction, allergy or
even death, especially among the elderly and people with underlying diseases.
So we have a situation where a vaccine against a disease that mainly kills the elderly
can't be used on the elderly. Awesome design.
Sometimes I'm in awe with grandiosity of the Western intellect.
"Then you have the testing of the antibiotic Trovan in Kano, Nigeria, to assess its
effectiveness against meningitis. Eleven children died in the trial – five after taking
Trovan, six after taking an older antibiotic used as a comparison drug.
Others suffered blindness, deafness, and brain damage, which may or may not have been due
to the trials. We'll never know, because the Big Pharma company responsible settled out of
court when sued by the Nigerian government (denying us the whole truth but giving off very
guilty vibes), having been accused of conducting an illegal study with no permission from the
children or their parents.
The name of the company? Pfizer. And you wonder why black Africans (or any other sane
person) might be wary of a vaccine with that name on it. "
There was also a tetanus shot drive in Kenya many years ago that targeted women and girls
in the main: odd when you think that men and boys tend to spend more time outdoors doing
things that put them at higher risk of getting puncture wounds or wounds infected with
tetanus bacteria. Some people associated with the Roman Catholic Church in Kenya decided to
do some investigation and discovered that the tetanus shots contained sterility agents.
jen@40 speaks of a "sterilizing agent" in anti-tetanus vaccines in Kenya. I did not know
there was any chemical agent capable of sterilizing women with a single shot. What was this
stuff?
blue dotterel@39 tells a fairly plausible horror story about Pfizer and Trovan, except for
the part about how more children dead *from another antibiotic* is somehow evidence against
Pfizer and Trovan.
@ jen and others - tetanus shots... aside from agreeing with @ Piotr Berman | Feb 27 2021
16:18 utc | 48, i would just like to point out it is typically the women who are planting and
gardening... working with the soil increases the risk posed which the tetanus shot is
supposed to lessen... i wonder if this ought to be factored into all this??
Steven Johnson @ 45, M @ 46, Piotr Berman @ 48 and others:
As GM @ 47 has referenced, the agent found in the tetanus vaccines is HCG which is
produced naturally by a woman's body during pregnancy. When combined with a weakened tetanus
toxin and introduced into the human body, the combination induces the immunity system to
react against both tetanus and HCG. The Kenyan Catholic bishops' group had the vaccines
tested in 4 laboratories in Kenya and the labs found HCG in the shots.
The WHO tetanus vaccination program, begun in the 1990s, targeted women and teenage girls
in Kenya as a high proportion of newborn babies die from tetanus as a result of the umbilical
cord being cut with unsanitised instruments. I must admit I was not aware of this when I
posted my earlier comment and did some more reading after posting. The mothers themselves are
also often at the risk of contracting tetanus from giving birth, often through tears that
occur naturally in the vaginal region. The custom of female genital mutilation that may still
occur in parts of Africa despite govt bans in many countries adds to the tetanus risk. In
addition many girls are married off at a young age.
Abby Ohlheiser wrote a November 2014 article for The Washington Post on the tetanus
vaccination program in Kenya. Barflies should be able to find it on Google or other search
engines.
What is the relevance of this discussion besides being an addition to Bluedotterel's
mention of the RT.com article stating that people of colour were wary of COVID-19 vaccines
because of past history in which they were guinea pigs for medical experiments? The relevance
is that there are fears and rumours that the Pfizer/Biontech mRNA treatment for the COVID-19
virus contains instructions for cells to replicate a spike protein on the coronavirus's coat
that is the same as or similar to a protein that helps the placenta attach to the uterine
wall. There is concern that the treatment will induce the immunity system to react against
the protein in a pregnant woman's body leading to miscarriage. Whether the effects of the
treatment might be long-term or not, long after the initial inoculation, is another
issue.
The linked article seems to be about the vaccine developed in India that matches what Jen
described as used in Kenya.
30-40 years ago, Indian government was interested in improved methods of birth control,
and Indian labs developed and tested such vaccine. It seems like a legitimate birth control
method, the described tests were on women with at least two children, presumably with proper
consent, although later the issues of consent etc. were a hot political subject in India.
BTW, hGC is present in men too, and in animals, anti-hGC antibodies were affecting
(eliminating) male fertility as well.
On one hand, the anti-fertility vaccination described there requires three shots, and
perhaps the fourth one if the achieved level of anti-hGC antibodies is too low, so if used as
one-shot tetanus vaccine, it may be ineffective. On the other hand, surreptitious use of such
vaccine, without the consent for their designed effect, is not ethical.
Speaking of 'under-the-table'/underhanded stealth vaccines...
EXCLUSIVE: Dr. [Ralph (gain of function virus researcher)] Baric Was Reviewing
Moderna's and Dr. Fauci's Nih-NIAD Coronavirus Vaccine in December 2019! What's Going
On?
On DECEMBER 12, 2019 an agreement was signed (pg 105) that Dr. Ralph Baric of the
University of North Carolina would receive "mRNA corona virus vaccine candidates developed
and jointly-owned by NIAID and Moderna"
Section applying to material transfer of experimental mRNA CV therapy vaccine candidate(s)
to Baric labs/UNC: Pgs 105-107.
Ralph Baric's signature: 12/12/2019; pg 107.
[For those whose memory is fuzzy, 12/12/2019 was ~1.5 months *before* Wuhan Covid
pandemic outbreak was publically acknowledged by US.gov/CDC/NIH/WHO or China !?]
One-Third of Deaths Reported to CDC After COVID Vaccines Occurred within 48 Hours of
Vaccination
According to new data released today, as of Feb. 12, 15,923 adverse reactions to COVID
vaccines, including 929 deaths, have been reported to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention's (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) since Dec. 14, 2020.
VAERS is the primary mechanism in the U.S. for reporting adverse vaccine reactions.
Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a determination can be made
as to whether the reported adverse event was directly or indirectly caused by the
vaccine.
[...]
The latest VAERS data show that 799 of the deaths were reported in the U.S., and that
about one-third of those deaths occurred within 48 hours of the individual receiving the
vaccination.
As is consistent with previous VAERS data reports, 192 of the reported deaths -- or 21%
-- were cardiac-related. As The Defender reported earlier this month, Dr. J. Patrick
Whelan, a pediatric rheumatologist, warned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in
December that mRNA vaccines like those developed by Pfizer and Moderna could cause heart
attacks and other injuries in ways not assessed in safety trials.
Of the 929 deaths reported since Dec. 14, 2020, the average age of the deceased was
77.8 and the youngest was 23. Fifty-two percent of the reported deaths were among men,
45% were women and 3% are unknown. Fifty-eight percent of the deaths were reported in
people who received the Pfizer vaccine, and 41% were related to the Moderna vaccine.
States with the highest reported number of deaths were: California (71); Florida (50);
Ohio (38); New York (31); Kentucky (41); Michigan (31); and Texas (31).
Ever since the novel coronavirus,
SARS-CoV-2, began jumping from human to human, it's been mutating. The molecular machinery the virus uses to read and
make copies of its genetic code isn't great at proofreading; minor typos made in the copying process can go uncorrected.
Each time the virus lands in a new human victim, it infects a cell and makes an army of clones, some carrying genetic
errors. Those error-bearing clones then continue on, infecting more cells, more people. Each cycle, each infection
offers more opportunity for errors. And, over time, those errors, those mutations, accumulate.
Some of these changes are meaningless. Some are lost in the frenetic
viral manufacturing. But some become permanent fixtures, passed on from virus to virus, human to human. Maybe it happens
by chance; maybe it's because the change helps the virus survive in some small way. But in aggregate, viral strains
carrying one notable mutation can start carrying others. Collections of notable mutations start popping up in viral
lineages, and sometimes they seem to have an edge over their relatives. That's when these distinct viruses -- these
variants -- get concerning.
Scientists around the world have been closely tracking mutations and
variants since the pandemic began, watching some rise and fall without much ado. But in recent months, they have become
disquieted by at least three variants. These variants of concern, or VOCs, have raised critical questions -- and alarm -- over
whether they can spread more easily than previous viral varieties, whether they can evade therapies and vaccines, or
even whether they're deadlier.
Here, we'll run down what we know and what we don't know about these
variants. With much research yet to be done, there's a lot of unanswered questions. But researchers are working quickly
to address the most important unknowns. High on the list is whether the vaccines we already have will be effective
against the variants. So far, it seems likely that they will be. Still, the virus is sending a clear message: with
rampant transmission accelerating viral evolution, more variants will arise and we need to be prepared.
With more data becoming available by the day, we'll update this story
with significant findings as they come along. Before we get to the data we have, a quick note on names: it's problematic
to identify diseases or infectious agents -- in this case, virus variants -- based on where they were identified. Such
geographic associations risk creating stigma and may discourage reporting, so there is an
active
discussion
in the scientific community about how best to name the current variants. In the interim, it has become
all too common to refer to these by their country of origin. We'll try to avoid that as much as possible while making
clear which variants we're talking about.
B.1.1.7
Alternate names
:
501Y.V1 and VOC 202012/01
Geographic association
: United Kingdom
Number of countries reporting cases
:
70
Increased transmissibility
: Yes
Increased disease severity/mortality
: A "realistic
possibility"
Vaccine efficacy
: Still effective
In early December 2020, researchers and officials in the UK began
warning of a new variant that seemed to be spreading abnormally fast while carrying an unusually large number of
mutations -- 23. The first record of the variant in the UK stretched back to two samples taken from infected people on
September 20 and September 21. In a matter of weeks, the variant began making up a larger and larger proportion of total
cases there. Researchers quickly suspected the variant had evolved to become more transmissible -- that is, it's able to
spread more easily from person to person.
Data analyses since December have supported that hypothesis, but
researchers are still working out exactly how much more transmissible it is compared to earlier versions. In early
January, UK researchers released preliminary results from a series of models that estimated the variant tacks on
an
additional 0.36 to 0.68 onto SARS-CoV-2's observed reproduction number
. That means, on average, people infected with
B.1.1.7 will go on to infect an
additional
0.36 to 0.68 people on top of how many
they would have infected if they were carrying an earlier version of the virus. More recent estimates have been roughly
in this range, suggesting B.1.1.7 has around a
47
percent
or
56
percent increase
in transmission.
B.1.1.7 has now been detected in more than 60 countries beyond the UK,
including the United States, where it has been found in
at
least two dozen states
. A
modeling
study
published by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on January 15 estimated that it will become the
predominant strain in the US in March.
Mutations
Some of the mutations B.1.1.7 carries seem to help explain the virus's
newfound ability. The variant carries
23
mutations
in all: 13 mutations that change the virus's protein sequences (non-synonymous), four deletions, and six
synonymous mutations. Of B.1.1.7's mutations, eight occur in the virus's spike protein, the now notorious club-like
protein that juts out from the virus's spherical particle. That spike is what the virus uses to latch onto and infect
cells, which the protein accomplishes by binding a receptor on the outside of human cells called ACE2.
So far, we know that
at
least three
of B.1.1.7's eight spike mutations may be relevant to the variant's boosted transmission. Chief among
them is a mutation that changes one of the spike proteins' critical amino acids -- the amino acid at position 501 of
spike's protein sequence. Specifically, the mutation changes the amino acid at 501 from an asparagine (N) to a tyrosine
(Y), so the mutation is written as N501Y. The 501 amino acid is critical because it lies within the area of spike that
directly binds to ACE2 -- called the receptor binding domain (RBD) -- and it is one of just six key contact residues in the
RBD.
Lab
experiments
have suggested that changing from an N to a Y at 501 increases spike's ability to bind ACE2, and
experiments
in mice
linked the mutation to increased infectiousness and disease.
After N501Y, there's P681H. The mutation at position 681 -- changing the
amino acid from a proline (P) to a histidine (H) -- falls near a unique furin cleavage site on SARS-CoV-2's spike protein.
For SARS-CoV-2 to successfully get into a cell after binding ACE2, the spike protein needs to be cleaved into its two
subunits by enzymes. The split changes spike's conformation and activates it, allowing it to fuse itself to the cell
membrane and dump its contents into the now-infected cell. In
animal
studies
, the furin cleavage site seemed to boost the virus's ability to enter cells. Researchers suspect the new
mutation may boost entry further.
Enlarge
/
A patient prepares to receive an injection of the
Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine by Royal Navy medics at a vaccination center set up at Bath racecourse in Bath,
southwest England.
Adrian DENNIS / AFP / Getty Images
The third spike mutation known to be significant is a deletion of six nucleotides in its genetic
code, which leads to the loss of two amino acids at positions 69 and 70 in the spike protein. It's unclear what this
deletion does for the virus exactly, but it has arisen a number of times in different lineages, suggesting it
offers
an advantage
. For now, there is one clear consequence for researchers: the deletion messes up a diagnostic test for
SARS-CoV-2. The test is a three-target RT-PCR test, meaning it works by detecting three snippets of the SARS-CoV-2
genome, including one in the gene that codes for spike. When this 69-70 deletion is present, the test will show up
negative for the spike gene but positive for the other two SARS-CoV-2 genetic sequences. This result is referred to as "
S
gene dropout
" and is now used to help identify infections caused by B.1.1.7.
Advertisement
These three mutations are the most notable in B.1.1.7 for now. There's
scant data on the other 20, but researchers are working swiftly to assess what each might do on its own or in
combination with the others.
Disease
severity/mortality
When researchers first raised concerns about B.1.1.7, all of those
issues related to increased transmissibility. Preliminary evidence looking at infection outcomes did not suggest that
B.1.1.7 was causing more severe disease or more deaths than other virus strains. Still, some saw little comfort in this,
given that any increase in the total number of infections still leads to more severe cases and deaths in absolute
numbers.
The situation took a darker turn January 21, when a UK government
advisory group -- NERVTAG -- found
preliminary
evidence
that "there is a realistic possibility that infection with VOC B.1.1.7 is associated with an increased risk
of death compared to infection with non-VOC viruses."
So far, some experts are not yet convinced by the preliminary evidence
presented, and they're calling for much more data before any conclusions are drawn. For one thing, the full data sets
behind some of the analyses done so far have not been published, and some of them relied on comparing small numbers of
deaths in people infected with B.1.1.7 with larger numbers of deaths in people infected with other strains. Some experts
also wonder whether the calculated increase in deaths could simply be explained by overburdened hospitals rather than a
deadlier variant.
Vaccine
efficacy
With increased infectiousness and the possibility of being deadlier, a
critical question raised by B.1.1.7 is whether or not the current vaccines we have -- mRNA vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech
and Moderna -- will work against the variant. So far, the answer appears to be yes.
On January 19, researchers at Pfizer and BioNTech released
a
non-peer reviewed study
where they pitted antibody-laden blood from 16 people given their mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2)
against a pseudovirus that carried B.1.1.7's mutated spike protein. The researchers found that the vaccines' antibodies
were just as good at neutralizing the pseudovirus with B.1.1.7's mutated spike protein as they were at neutralizing a
pseudovirus with the spike protein from a reference SARS-CoV-2 virus.
"These data make it unlikely that the B.1.1.7 lineage will escape
BNT162b2-mediated protection," the researchers concluded.
Likewise, on January 25, Moderna released its own
non-peer
reviewed study
, which was similar in design. They tested the antibodies from eight people given their mRNA vaccine
against a pseudovirus bearing B.1.1.7's mutated spike protein. Again, the antibodies neutralized the pseudovirus at
levels comparable to those seen with a pseudovirus carrying a reference spike protein.
Yet
another
similar study
, led by researchers at Columbia University and released January 26, found the same results. Antibodies
from 12 people who received Moderna's vaccine and 10 people who received Pfizer's vaccine were able to neutralize a
pseudovirus containing B.1.1.7's mutated spike protein, with only a modest drop in potency compared with neutralization
of a pseudovirus carrying a reference spike protein.
Vaccine manufacturer Merck has abandoned development of two coronavirus vaccines, saying
that after extensive research it was concluded that the shots offered less protection than
just contracting the virus itself and developing antibodies.
The company announced that the shots V590 and V591 were 'well tolerated' by test
patients, however they generated an 'inferior' immune system response in comparison with
natural infection.
The chart below, first shared as part of Pfizer's Phase 3 trial data, suggested that there
might be a short delay before immunity begins in patients who received the vaccne.
However, in Israel, health experts revealed yesterday that the immunity provided by the
vaccine, especially during the initial weeks between the first and second dose, might be even
lower than all that.
Because on Wednesday, Dr. Nachman Ash, better known to some as "Israel's Dr. Fauci", said
the first batch of COVID jabs didn't increase immunity as much as they had hoped.
He told local media Army Radio that "many people have been infected between the first and
second injections of the vaccine," adding that It can take 10 days or more for the immunity to
kick in.
Of course, none of this is particularly unexpected. As
we first reported three weeks ago , local media in Israel reported that hundreds of
patients had been infected after receiving their first dose.
Meanwhile, in the US, Joe Biden and his administration are invoking wartime powers to secure
supplies of critical raw materials needed for vaccine production, as a recent logistical
slip-up ruined 21 shipments of the Moderna vaccine, forcing NYC to delay more than 20K jab
appointments.
iambrambles 3 hours ago (Edited)
I must be the only one who read the Pfizer BioNTech docs.
Out of around 30,000 people, half were given vaccines and half placebos.
In the placebo population of 15,000, something like 130 got COVID
In the vaccination population of 15,000, something like 20 got COVID
The 95% is a complete and utter fabrication, made by comparing that 20 to the 130.....out
of 30,000. We all know how Big PHarma cheats the system: they tailor the sample population.
For example, if the placebo population was 90% >50yo/10% <50yo, and the vaccination
population was 89% >50yo/11% <50yo, you would find that indeed, that 1% (150 people)
could easily swing the result, when the result is:
99.3% placebo didnt get covid
99.93% vaccinated didnt get covid
Pandelis 3 hours ago
if that was true, dr. faucistein would have noticed it ...
iambrambles 2 hours ago (Edited)
Re-read the study. It was 44,000, and in total, out of 44,000, 180 got COVID (150 placebo
to 30 vaccinated).
The first round of Pfizer vaccine was wholly ineffective, at 52%. They cherrypicked 94
individuals out of ths study to share the results, and after the second dose, the effectivity
rate was 92%.
So in all, I dont think anyone noticed how ridiculous this vaccine is in the first place:
if youre 99% likely to not even GET covid, why would you get a vaccine?
The second question is, why didnt Pfizer share results of specifically at danger groups,
like those 55+ or with pre-existing conditions?
And it was 44,000 people across 152 countries....so the results are simply too prone to
error to even be relevant. 44,000 and only 180 in total contracted COVID, how could you make
heads or tails of the data?
According to a recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll, 29 percent of those who work in a
health care delivery setting said they would probably not, or definitely would not, take
the vaccine, even if it were free and deemed safe by scientists.
Experts say the reasons for vaccine hesitancy among health workers are similar to
concerns held by the general population, including worries about potential side effects.
Some may also be taking a wait-and-see approach to find out how the vaccine affects people
who take it earlier.
"I am definitely concerned that health care workers are electing to wait to get
vaccinated," said Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization
and Respiratory Diseases.
Those healthcare workers know their system. They're not stupid.
According to Le Monde, the hacked documents primarily detail issues that the EMA had with
the Pfizer/BioNTech drug. The regulator apparently had three "major issues" with the
vaccine: certain manufacturing sites used for its production had not yet been inspected,
data on batches produced for commercial use were still missing, and, most importantly,
available data revealed qualitative differences between the commercial batches and those
used during clinical trials.
Those worries confirm my fears over those mRNA vaccines: there's an abyss that separates
theory from practice, and another abyss after that that separates practice from
manufacturing, in medical/biological sciences. The human body is not your average machine: it
is millions of times more complex.
And those worries are purely practical. Even the theory behind the mRNA therapy/vaccine is
still far from complete; the field of epigenetics is still very young, a little more than ten
years old, and there's a lot to investigate.
No proof that those deaths were solely attributed to a respiratory virus. It is suspected at
best.
Ellen77 Gaius_Marius 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 09:08 PM
The portuguese court ruled that When running PCR tests with 35 cycles or more – the
accuracy dropped to 3%, meaning up to 97% of positive results could be false positives.
AwareAussie Gaius_Marius 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 05:09 PM
But there is proof that_death_stats have been_faked, that the_alleged virus is not
as_dangerous as they promote, that_there is another_agenda behind_lockdowns, etc etc. I also
suspect that this crazy_boss_story is another bigpsyop, as it would likely be an exceedingly
rare event to take measures such as those mentioned. In any case I'd_quit on the_spot if any
employer tried that with me.
oddthinker 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 02:14 PM
Nuremburg Code provisions of informed consent are international law. Neither government
bodies and agencies, or private and public employers may coerce you into accepting the role
of a long term trial subject for an experimental drug. Agency and free will is yours to
refuse that drug.
AMstone oddthinker 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 11:32 PM
Unit 731 was never disbanded, just relocated.
V.B. 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 08:53 PM
the covid hoax is absolute madness, it must be stopped, it's rapidly spiraling into something
worse than north korea, worse than worst sharia countries, people are losing all their
freedoms, are being fined massively for noncrimes, medical experiments are done on people
without their full consent, how this madness can go on for this long is beyond me, are people
really that dumb? This isn't black death, it isn't even remotely close, some very old, very
sick people probably died a few month earlier, yes it's bad, no it's not excuse to destroy
world, kill economies, stop all other medical care - measures that will kill way more than
covid-19(84) ever will Average covid victim in UK is 82.4 year old, and that's above average
life expetency in UK, according to many studies anywhere between 96 and 99% of people who
supposedly died of covid had co-morbidities - meaning they were seriously sick even before
catching it It's absolute farce, and the biggest hoax, biggest evil joke in history. Besides
they tried it before in 2009 with the swine flu, it was very much similar to this, there was
also rushed vaccine that had bad side effects, massive corruption that enabled it got exposed
and it faded into obscurity but people never learned.
V.B. V.B. 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 09:00 PM
You should present facts to all your mоrоn friends who still support this hoax,
if they can't make a case for their support (which is not possible if you follow all facts
anyway) - and they still refuse to admit they are wrong then stop talking to them, you are
indirectly helping to support this hoax by being friends and supporting people who support
useless and harmful covid measures like lockdowns and masks, sacrafices must be made
otherways you will lose all, you are already losing all, you can't even meet thos
іdіоts anymore in much of the Western world and beyond with all the curfews
and ban on visits. I am already doing the very thing - I presented clear facts, clear logic
to one of my long term half-friends and he refused to budge even one inch, all his arguments
boiled down to calling me 'conspiracy theorist' and refusing to even admit possibility that
goverments might have gone rogue or fallen for the hoax themselves. However during the
discussion I uncovered that he is a secret leftist, he never talked about his political
views, but this discussion forced out certain facts that revealed that he has leftist
poltical views despite being reasonably wealthy bussinessman, and you would think it's the
proletariat that support socialism...
SavantMan 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 04:59 PM
We need to instill fear in the people who make these decisions. I think the time has come for
there to be actual repercussions for these pieces of you know what.
AwareAussie SavantMan 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 05:22 PM
The solution is both peaceful and lawful. Revert back to common law (the highest laws of the
lands edit: dating back to the Magna Carta), convene common law courts and juries, and hold
those traitors and criminals accountable. This is what happened in the last American civil
war, but it is well hidden. It is coming back now very fast. Research it and get on board
right now.
HappyBag 2 days ago 14 Jan, 2021 08:08 PM
I read that about the plumbing firm, well that's easily resolved, the plumbers can go self
employed. I would certainly never work for an employer that dictated my health or demanded my
records. Then the public can then make their own choice on who does their work - a barmy boss
who dictates mandatory vaccinations (what next, no smokers and nobody who has the odd beer?),
or a normal person?
------ Two things I would like information or opinion on are as follows;
In France, those that are about be vaccinated by Pfizer must sign a legal form that is 56
pages long (not a joke ! - Including by seniors with pre or declared-alzheimers), which, I
presume, covers all possible forms of immunity for Pfizer, and unwanted side effects,
expected or not. BUT does this "form" have hidden traps? One possible trap is that the French
Government have signed one of the secret "accords" that give big Pharma the "right" (ability)
to sue the French or other Governments if for any reason they do not make the profit they
"expected or wanted" to make.
The Governments concerned will have to make up any shortfall. even if due to popular
pressures on the Gov. The "settlement" was to be overseen by an ISDN (arbitration) tribunal.
Whose three members were taken from 15 US law firms specializing in Company (Corporate) law,
even if one nominally was supposed to represent the Government. No input from "other
interested parties" was to be allowed, and deliberations and names of "Lawyers" were also to
be kept secret.
This was one part of the Trade "agreement" on services. The one which was to be kept
secret for five years and those signing it to remain anonymous. Was it in fact signed?
Was it in fact signed by other Governments as well. This would go a long way to explain the
obsessions by some Ministers to force vaccinations against common sense. (on children
etc)
-----
The second is more extreme; As the "vaccinated+" human body has been modified by an injection
by either Pfizer or Modena, will these companies have any "rights" on the living result. (I'm
thinking of Monsanto/Beyer and their attempts to Patent the living.) Normally this would be a
long-shot idea, but these days I don't trust them.
This is just one individual case; but the condition is so rare that it does require
independent investigation about potential side effects of the vaccine. Is immune
thrombocytopenia one of them ?
MIAMI BEACH, Fla. – Questions remain in the death of a 56-year-old Miami Beach doctor
who died Sunday, just a little over two weeks after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, our
sister station WPLG-TV in Miami reported.
Gregory Michael, M.D., whose website states he was in private practice in obstetrics and
gynecology at Mount Sinai Medical Center, received the vaccine at the hospital where he was
affiliated on Dec. 18.
It is not clear, however, if the 56-year-old doctor's death is related to the shot, but
an investigation is underway.
A Facebook post by Michael's wife described him as "very healthy." His website said he
was an avid tournament and big game fisherman and also a rescue certified scuba diver.
His wife said that three days after getting the shot, Michael noticed severe broken
blood vessels on his feet and hands, prompting him to go the emergency room.
There, he was diagnosed with immune
thrombocytopenia *, which prevents blood from clotting. After two weeks of
treatment, she writes on the Facebook post, Michael had a hemorrhagic stroke caused by the
lack of platelets, which took his life in a matter of minutes, she said.
She said her husband was an advocate of the vaccine.
A spokesperson from Mount Sinai, who cited patient privacy restrictions, said in a
statement:
"To the extent that we are aware of an incident involving any patient, the appropriate
agencies are contacted immediately and have our full cooperation."
Florida's Department of Health confirmed that they referred the case to the Centers for
Disease Control for investigation. A CDC spokesperson told Local 10 News that "they will
evaluate the situation as more information becomes available and provide timely updates on
what is known and any necessary actions."
* When immune system attacks/destroys platelet cells in the blood
Re: "I have what I suppose to be a foolish question about the Pfizer vaccine, which in
order to remain viable has to be kept in an extreme frozen condition until being used. The
question is, what happens to the vaccine as it is brought to human body temperature, (which
is, I assume, what must be done before it can be safely injected)?"
-juliania | Jan 10 2021 18:03 utc | 21
Not a foolish question at all--and not one that I have yet heard any of the Holy Annointed
Vessels of Covid Science TRUTH (ie Dr. 'Gain of Function' Fauci, Bill Gates et al) give an
understandable explanation for.
Speaking purely from the perspective of someone with technical background in the
chemistry/medical fields and having no direct insider info about the Pfizer mRNA vaccine
specifically,
the vaccine's Spike protein coding mRNA 'payload' must be packaged inside a protective
"liposome" a synthetic lipid bi-layer vesicle.
The liposome protects the mRNA payload from being chewed up/destroyed while it is still in
the extracellular space (blood plasma, lymph etc) by plasma nucleases before the spike mRNA
is able reach and enter the body's cells where it is then replicated and translated into
(antigenic [immune system recognizing/inducing]) viral spike proteins.
The RNA-liposome vesicles have a limited stability at room temperature in aqueous saline
conditions, and an even shorter half-life in the blood stream at body temperature. They are
most stable when keptvery cold in deep freeze <~70 degree C) with some physiologically
compatible "antifreeze" (eg polyethylene glycol, polypropylene glycol, or syrupy sugar-like
mixtures) that keep liposome-disrupting ice crystals from forming during the deep freeze
storage temps.
Now to address your question, my guess is the reconstitution procedure is to bring the
antifreeze-stablized -70C vaccine vials to >0 degrees C, and then add physiological
saline, and then inject within the protocol-defined stability-safe time range.
"... A risk reduction of 0.84%. Oh! A barely perceptible "efficacy." ..."
"... An analysis of available positive RT-PCR tests and mortality results led the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine estimated a very tentative COVID 19 Case Fatality Rate (CFR) of around 1.4%. Based upon the figures reported to the FDA by Pfizer and BioNTech, this indicates a broad population based mortality risk from COVID 19 of 1.4(0.88/100) which is 0.012%. ..."
"... If we look at the "V-Safe Active Surveillance for COVID 19 Vaccines" reported by the U.S. Center For Disease Control (CDC), early indications of the recorded "Health Impact Events" (HIE) reveal a worrying level of adverse reactions from the mRNA vaccine. The CDC define an HIE as: ..."
"... On December the 18th 112,807 people were injected with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in the U.S. Of these, 3,150 were subsequently unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work, required care from doctor or health care professional . This is an HIE rate of 2.8%. ..."
"... This suggests that among the first 10 million people to receive the vaccine in the UK, around 280,000 may find themselves unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work and require medical care as a result. As it is the most vulnerable who are the first to receive this vaccine, given the tiny risk of mortality from the COVID 19 disease, it is by no means clear that this is a risk worth taking. ..."
"... The obvious problem with these vaccines, is that no reliable fit for purpose diagnostic test exists as of this moment. As far I know, no one in power is even talking about any need for an effective test. How are they able to prove that a vaccine is effective without a reliable, valid test? ..."
"... Rahm Emmanuel said "never let a crisis go to waste". Crisis do not need to be real motivate the necessary panic for a change. ..."
"... What is the evidence so far on side effects and long-term effects of Covid vaccinations? Obtained in half a year on test subjects and within a week on nursing home residents? ..."
OVID 19 vaccine trials appear to have caused some confusion. Hopefully, this article might
help clear things up a bit. People genuinely appear to believe that the COVID 19 vaccines have
undergone clinical trials and have been proven to be both safe and effective. That belief is
simply wrong.
The main point is this. If you decide to have Pfizer and BioNTech's experimental mRNA-based BNT162b2 (BNT) vaccine, or any other
claimed COVID 19 vaccine for that matter, you are a test subject in a drug trial.
The mRNA in the BNT vaccine was sequenced from the 3rd iteration of the original WUHAN
published Genome SARS-CoV-2 (MN908947.3). However, the WHO protocols Pfizer used to produce the
mRNA do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences that are unique to the
SARS-CoV-2 virus. When
investigator Fran Leader questioned Pfizer they confirmed:
The DNA template does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected
person.
Nor are there any completed clinical trials for these vaccines. Trials are ongoing. If you
are jabbed with one, you are the guinea pig. This may be fine with you but it's not a leap of
faith I or my loved ones wish to take. However, everyone is different.
On December the 8th the BBC reported
a study in the Lancet and categorically stated:
The Oxford/AstraZeneca Covid vaccine is safe and effective, giving good protection,
researchers have confirmed
The BBC had no justification to make this claim. The
study in the Lancet did not confirm anything of the sort. The researchers wrote:
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious
against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials.
This was an interim analysis funded by, among others, CEPI and the Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation. The analysis was based upon trials which are years from completion and
haven't reported anything. The researchers also stated:
There were no peer-reviewed publications available on efficacy of any severe acute
respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines
There is no clear scientific evidence establishing either the safety or efficacy of proposed
COVID 19 vaccines. The BBC and other MSM reports that this evidence exists are false.
We are going to focus on Pfizer and BioNTech's BNT vaccine but all the manufacturers have
essentially exploited the same trick. The regulators and governments have worked with the
pharmaceutical corporations to conflate the limited data from the initial, or phase one, trials
with the incomplete and ongoing data collection from the substantially larger phase two and
three trials. The MSM have then falsely claimed the 1,2,3 phase trials are complete and
insinuated that the untested data demonstrates vaccine efficacy and safety.
In reality, not only has the reporting of existing data been manipulated to show efficacy
that isn't evident in the raw data itself, the most important and meaningful phases of the
trials have barely begun, let alone been completed.
Recently the UK Financial Times
reported that the UK regulators (the MHRA) are due to approve Astrazeneca/Oxfords AZD1222
[ChAdOx1] COVID 19 Vaccine. The FT revealed an anonymous statement from the UK Department of
health:
The medicines regulator is reviewing the final data from the University of
Oxford/AstraZeneca phase 3 clinical trials to determine whether the vaccine meets their
strict standards of quality, safety and effectiveness.
Thus giving the public the impression that the trials are complete and that the regulators
have strict safety standards. The 1,2,3 phase trial for AZD1222 was registered with the U.S.
Centre for Disease Control as
clinical trial NCT04516746 [Archived 29th December 2020]. It is incomplete and the
estimated end date is February 21st 2023. The CDC state:
No Study Results Posted
Astrazeneca are years away from reporting any "final data." It is impossible for the
UK Department of Health to review it, because it doesn't exist.
NCT04516746 is one of four trials of AZD1222. Another
Russian arm of the AZD1222 trial was suspended after a Suspected Unexpected Serious Adverse
Reaction (SUSAR) event occurred. The SUSAR supposedly happened in the United Kingdom after a 37 year old
women developed inflammation of the spinal chord. It appears the Russian Ministry of Health
have yet to reinstate their arm of the Astrazeneca/Oxford trial while it has resumed in the UK
and elsewhere.
On November 18th Pfizer and BioNTech announced they had
concluded their phase three trial of BNT. They had demonstrated efficacy of 95% and U.S.
Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) safety data
milestone had been met.
The only part of this claim that was true was compliance with FDA emergency safety data
milestones. They have not concluded their phase three trials. They haven't even fully
completed phase one.
Under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act ) so called
"unapproved" drugs are allowed on the market in emergencies . Similarly, in the
UK, authorisation under Regulation 174 of the Human Medicine Regulations 2012 (as amended)
permits the same.
Having also been approved in the UK, this is why the Medicines and Healthcare products
Regulatory Agency (MHRA) state:
This medicinal product does not have a UK marketing authorisation
The fact that there are no completed clinical trials for the Pfizer and BioNTech BNT vaccine
also
explains why the FDA State:
Additional adverse reactions, some of which may be serious, may become apparent with more
widespread use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.
[There is] currently insufficient data to make conclusions about the safety of the vaccine
in sub-populations such as children less than 16 years of age, pregnant and lactating
individuals, and immunocompromised individuals ..[the] risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over
time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown.
Yet the first people to receive this vaccine are the most vulnerable in society, many of
whom are immunocompromised. The precautionary principle appears to have been abandoned. The
notion that the purpose of the BNT vaccine roll out is to save life appears
untenable.
The Pfizer announcement enabled politicians to pretend to cry on national television while
others were really excited. UK Prime Minister
Boris Johnson said it was "fantastic news," and the BBC said it was "good
news" and "really encouraging." Everyone was thoroughly impressed with the 95%
effective claim.
However, this was based upon relative risk reduction . That is the
declared percentage difference between the vaccinated group's 8/18310 chance (0.044%) of
developing COVID 19 against a 162/18319 (0.88%) chance of COVID 19 symptoms without the
vaccine. As this larger group of 43,000 people have yet to be trialled, there is no basis for
this claimed outcome. But it is what it is, and we can use these reported figures here.
It should be noted this only refers to an alleged reduction of COVID 19 symptoms among those
who have the virus. The tested endpoints do
not demonstrate that the vaccine will either reduce the spread of infection or save lives.
It should also be noted that these figures suggest the threat from COVID 19 is vanishingly
small.
Using Pfizer's figures, the relative risk reduction is 100(1 – (0.044/0.88)). Which is
95%. Voila!
This sounds fantastic and is a much better marketing strategy than reporting the absolute
risk reduction. The absolute risk of developing COVID 19 symptoms without the vaccine is
supposedly 0.88% and with the vaccine 0.044%. In absolute terms, the effectiveness of the
vaccine is (0.88-0.044)%.
A risk reduction of 0.84%. Oh! A barely perceptible "efficacy."
By using the relative instead of absolute risk reduction, the mainstream media (MSM) were
free to market the mRNA vaccine for Pfizer and BioNTech (and other interested parties) with
impressive sounding claims . These
weren't remotely truthful, not only because they relied upon statistical manipulation but
because no one had a clue about BNT's safety or efficacy. To this day, there are no clinical
trial results.
THE CLINICAL TRIALS THAT DON'T EXIST
An analysis of available positive RT-PCR tests and mortality results led the Oxford Centre for
Evidence Based Medicine estimated a very tentative COVID 19 Case Fatality Rate (CFR) of
around 1.4%. Based upon the figures reported to the FDA by Pfizer and BioNTech, this indicates
a broad population based mortality risk from COVID 19 of 1.4(0.88/100) which is 0.012%.
Please bear this incredibly remote risk in mind as we discuss the early indication of the
apparent threat to public health presented by the mRNA vaccine.
It is reasonable to work in terms of population risk because, while the chance of COVID 19
mortality seemingly increases with age, with the average age of death being 82 and a mortality
distribution indistinguishable from standard mortality, the intention is to give the vaccine to everybody .
If we look at the "V-Safe Active Surveillance for COVID 19 Vaccines" reported by the
U.S. Center For Disease Control (CDC),
early indications of the recorded "Health Impact Events" (HIE) reveal a worrying level
of adverse reactions from the mRNA vaccine. The CDC define an HIE as:
Unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work, required care from doctor or
health care professional
On December the 18th 112,807 people were injected with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in the
U.S. Of these, 3,150 were subsequently unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to
work, required care from doctor or health care professional . This is an HIE rate of 2.8%.
This suggests that among the first 10 million people to receive the vaccine in the UK,
around 280,000 may find themselves unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work
and require medical care as a result. As it is the most vulnerable who are the first to receive
this vaccine, given the tiny risk of mortality from the COVID 19 disease, it is by no means
clear that this is a risk worth taking.
Not that any of the other vaccines seem any better. So far the CDC have noted
more than 5,000 HIE's for all vaccine being trialled on the population. Clearly, the
potential exists that the vaccines will contribute to more deaths than the disease they
allegedly protects vulnerable people against.
The Pfizer/BioNTech trial was registered as clinical trial number NCT04368728 with the CDC. Having recently
discussed what I am about to share with you with people who simply refused to believe the
evidence of their own eyes, I think it is important to stress that this is the Phase 3 Clinical
Trial which Pfizer claimed they had concluded in their press release. There isn't another one.
This is it .
The CDC state:
When available, study results information is included in the study record under the Study
Results tab .After study results information has been submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov, but
before it is posted, the results tab in the study record is labeled "Results Submitted.
At the time of writing (21st December 2020) as can be seen by date of the archived ClinicalTrials.gov web-page , the Study Results tab
reads "No Results Posted." That is because there are no posted or submitted results from the
Pfizer BioNTech trial of the BNT162b2 vaccine:
No Study Results Posted on ClinicalTrials.gov for this Study
Mainstream media reports , giving the
impression that these vaccines have been found to be effective and safe are not
evidence and they are not based on science. They are based on political policy and they report
dangerous pseudo-scientific babble, masquerading as science journalism.
There will of course be mindless anti-rationalists who will call
this dangerous antivaxxer nonsense. All the time insisting that it is perfectly safe to give a
vaccine with a questionable safety profile, for which there are no completed clinical trials,
to the most vulnerable people in our society.
I am running out of patience with these people.
VACCINE SAFETY?
The start date for NCT04368728 was April 29th and the estimated trial completion date is
January 27th 2023. The estimated end date of the primary or phase one of a three phase
trial is June 13th 2021.
According to the " Current Primary Outcome Measures," the minimum time frame for
Pfizer to assess serious adverse events (SAE's) is "6 months after last dose." This is the
minimum term for assessing SAE's in phase one of the trial.
Phase one is the only part of the NCT04368728 trial to have been
completed and published . It was published on the 14th October, 5 months and two weeks
after the start date. Most of that period was taken up with recruitment an allocation. The
minimum term for assessing SAE's has not been met during Phase One.
During Phase One, 195 participants were split into 13 groups of 15 people. In each group 12
received one of two potential mRNA vaccine candidates (either BNT162b1 or BNT162b2) and 3 a
placebo.
39 people aged between 18-55 and another 39 people aged between 65-85 received the BNT
vaccine, now approved for global distribution. The threat of COVID 19, though tiny overall, is
statistically zero for
those aged 18-55. Those with any measurable risk from COVID 19 were in the older age group.
Of the 39 older people who received 2 doses of BNT about half of them experienced
"fatigue," roughly 15% had "chills" and 3 of them had a fever. The
common side effects of BNT included nausea, headache (a very common BNT induced nervous
system disorder) arthralgia and myalgia (very common), fatigue, chills and fever (again very
common.) Other than fatigue, no one in the placebo group suffered these problems.
Safety and Immunogenicity of Two RNA-Based Covid-19 Vaccine Candidates: Figure 3,
'Participants 65 – 85 yr of age'
[Archived 29.10.2020] , [Original]
The study states:
Pfizer was responsible for the trial design; for the collection, analysis, and
interpretation of the data; and for the writing of the report.
Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that while Pfizer see the side effects of their
vaccine as fatigue, chills and fever, the CDC refer to them as people who can't work and
need medical care.
The UK Medical and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) approved the BNT vaccine, to
be given to vulnerable British people, based upon a study of 39 older people. This study
reported a pretty high adverse reaction rate. It was produced exclusively from the R&D of
the vaccine manufacturer. The MHRA questioned nothing.
They "approved" BNT in the certain knowledge that there were no completed clinical
trials for this vaccine. In their Public Assessment Report they state:
At the time of writing, the main clinical study is still on-going .It was concluded that
BNT162b2 has been shown to be effective in the prevention of COVID-19. Furthermore, the side
effects observed with use of this vaccine are considered to be similar to those seen with
other vaccines. Therefore, the MHRA concluded that the benefits are greater than the
risks.
This conclusion and approval not only lacks supporting evidence it is utterly at odds with
what little is known about BNT. While Pfizer and BioNTech only completed trials of the vaccine
on 39 relevant test subjects, the results, even from this practically inconsequential effort,
suggest the risk from the vaccine is greater than the risk presented by COVID 19. By a
considerable margin.
This undoubtedly explains why the MHRA ordered software from European suppliers to deal with the slew
of vaccine adverse reaction they presumably anticipate. They stated:
The MHRA urgently seeks an Artificial Intelligence (AI) software tool to process the
expected high volume of Covid-19 vaccine Adverse Drug Reaction (ADRs) .it is not possible to
retrofit the MHRA's legacy systems to handle the volume of ADRs that will be generated by a
Covid-19 vaccine.
From the way the manufacturers, politicians, regulators and the MSM have approached vaccine
safety, it is clear that they collectively have a total disregard for the welfare of vulnerable
people. We really must put aside this infantile notion that "the authorities" care about
us or our loved ones. We mean nothing to them.
COVID 19 is only an appreciable risk for the
most vulnerable in society. It is a risk to the infirm elderly and people with existing
life threatening conditions.
If we look at the exclusion criteria
for Phase One, these people were not in the cohort tested. Anyone with high blood pressure,
asthma, diabetes or a high BMI were excluded from the alleged safety trial. But the vaccine is
being given to the most vulnerable first.
Of the 39 older people at most risk in the phase one study, none of them had the serious
comorbidities which the overwhelming majority of those who die "with" COVID 19 possess.
The people actually at risk from COVID 19 nominally entered the BNT trials at phase 2 and 3.
However, it appears every effort has been made to limit, if not completely remove, their number
too. "Immunocompromised or individuals with known or suspected immunodeficiency," were
excluded.
Immunodeficiency is caused by a wide range of health conditions
. Conditions such as undernutrition, polytrauma, stress after surgery, diabetes and cancer lead
to immunodeficiency. The people with the comorbidities associated with so called COVID 19
deaths were practically ruled out from the BNT vaccine trials.
NCT04368728 was designed as a 1,2,3 trial with all phases running concurrently. With regards
to assessing safety Pfizer described systemic events as:
Fever, fatigue, headache, chills, vomiting, diarrhea, new or worsened muscle pain, and new
or worsened joint pain as self-reported on electronic diaries.
The first 360 subjects randomised into the phase 2 and 3 trials underwent monitoring for
systemic events for less than a week, following each dose:
In the first 360 participants randomized into Phase 2/3, percentage of participants
reporting systemic events [ Time Frame: For 7 days after dose 1 and dose 2 ]
The same cohort of 360 test subjects were also monitored for Serious Adverse Events (SAE's)
for up to 6 months in phase 2 and 3:
In the first 360 participants randomized into Phase 2/3, percentage of participants
reporting serious adverse events [ Time Frame: From dose 1 through 6 months after the last
dose]
Pfizer also intend to report the percentage of all test subjects who suffer SAE's:
Percentage of participants in Phase 2/3 reporting adverse events [ Time Frame: From dose 1
through 6 month after the last dose ]
But there are no reported results from either phase 2 or 3. No one has the faintest idea
what the health risks of BNT are, especially for those it is supposedly designed to protect,
and no one in authority gives a damn. Phase 2/3 clinical trials are now a moot point
anyway.
The regulatory agencies have already approved the vaccine and health services have started
injecting people with BNT. They do so after the manufacturers failed to properly test its
safety on a 39 people who were in the at risk group but did not have the comorbidity
that leads to claimed COVID 19 deaths.
The degree to which people have been misled into believing that these vaccines are known to
be either safe or effective is almost beyond imagination.
Sadly, we don't need imagination. The evidence is clear.
Paul Nicholls , Jan 4, 2021 2:23 AM
The've been practicing this scam for a while now. Everything happening now has already had
a few dry runs, perfecting all aspects of the current hoax.
that "Pfizer's Phase lll trial has been published in a peer–reviewed journal and
included over 40,000 volunteers in 152 sites worldwide".
Kalen , Jan 4, 2021 1:11 AM
Death porn continues:
from ABC
California funeral homes run out of space as pandemic rages.
We are led to believe that mountains of corpses pile up because .. of ongoing massive
COVID die out.
In order to keep up with the flood of bodies, Maldonado has rented extra 50-foot
(15-meter) refrigerators for two of the four facilities she runs in LA and surrounding
counties. Continental has also been delaying pickups at hospitals for a day or two while they
deal with residential clients.
Pure panic. Only to be informed why we have piling up bodies in hospitals and
mortuaries.
Bob Achermann, executive director of the California Funeral Directors Association, said
that the whole process of burying and cremating bodies has slowed down, including embalming
bodies and obtaining death certificates. During normal times, cremation might happen within a
day or two; now it takes at least a week or longer.
so to summarize typical for flu season increased numbers of flu, pneumonia deaths are
processed six to seven times slower than a year ago, causing obvious pile up.
Like with sex porn, COVID death porn is best left unexamined in detail not scrutinized too
much, better left to porn induced sick imagination targeting consumers, otherwise reality
will turn them off.
Igor , Jan 4, 2021 12:54 AM
The obvious problem with these vaccines, is that no reliable fit for purpose diagnostic
test exists as of this moment. As far I know, no one in power is even talking about any need for an effective test. How are they able to prove that a vaccine is effective without a reliable, valid test?
Rahm Emmanuel said "never let a crisis go to waste". Crisis do not need to be real motivate the necessary panic for a change.
I suspect they are only testing whether the persons immune system produces some tcells etc
from giving them this rubbish they cannot possible then infer one will be immune to any sort
of cold, flu or pneumonia
Schmitz Katze , Jan 3, 2021 11:57 PM
Moderna admits here that what they inject with their vaccines is an "operating
system."
"Our mRNA technology platform functions very much like an operating system on a computer. It is designed so that it can
plug and play interchangeably with different programs" I can´t find anything what a vaccinated person is supposed to do when the operating
system inside his/her body crashes -- It´s Doctor Bill´s ultimate solution to
solve climate change, I suppose.
It used to be the case that if we felt unwell we'd take time off to stay at home to
recover, or that we'd go to hospital.
This new bill makes it possible for a healthy person to be tested (with a fraudulently
used PCR test) to prove positive, followed by forced incarceration in a detention centre as
if a common or garden prisoner.
Imprisonment without trial for no crime in the land of the free.
I have the feeling the rich will not be targeted, only the poor. If this was happening in
North Korea people would be horrified. Any politician enabling this act is enabling fascism
and tyranny.
Call me clueless, but this doesn't have a chance of actually passing does it?? Will they put everyone on trains at Grand Central and ship you off? For your own good?
taking a shit on the floor and pissing on the curtains, then tearing off the roof .
October , Jan 3, 2021 10:27 PM
Wow. Britain is going to mix vaccines according to this . In France meanwhile, after getting off to a very slow start, they're thinking of
appointing an advisory committee of randomly selected citizens (?) to define their
immunisation strategy.
Said committee will submit its report in the summer .
moneycircus , Jan 3, 2021 11:12 PM Reply to October
I call them Britain's Scient-icians. They make it up as they go along. From the NYT article "There are no data on this idea whatsoever," said John Moore, a vaccine expert at Cornell
University. Officials in Britain "seem to have abandoned science completely now and are just
trying to guess their way out of a mess."
Kalen , Jan 3, 2021 9:59 PM
As author pointed out no SC2 viral genetic material is used in Pfizer, Moderna and AZN
bioagents wrongly called vaccines .. because they do not have them available (or they do not
exist). In fact even Chinese making so called traditional attenuated vaccines or Russians
making adenovirus vector bioagents do not have them either. Instead of entire virus they use
only spike protein only for achieving immunogenicity. But where the spike proteins come
from.
ABC explained in September on AZN example.
Britain's Oxford University and AstraZeneca are making what scientists call a "viral
vector" vaccine but a good analogy is the Trojan horse.The shots are made witha harmless virus –a cold virusthat normally infects chimpanzees
– that carries the spike protein's genetic material into the body. [infecting human
cells]Two possible competitors to AZN are made with different human [common] cold
viruses.
Yes. What is being tried on people by Moderna Pfizer, AZN and others are experimental
bioagents that solicit antibodies that alledgedly block common cold's subclass of
coronaviruses' spikes, not particularly SC2 virus spikes because they do not have them
isolated.
No supposed experimental "vaccines" make any attempt to eradicate, neutralize SC2 virus
itself if it exists, (if COVID exists) as so far there is no proof of either.
Those phantom pseudo-vaccines supposedly to protect us from phantom disease have nothing
to do with published SC2 virus RNA or with COVID clinical disease they are bio-technological
experiments with drug delivery systems aimed as harvesting human cell to production of
certain proteins altering cell functions and metabolism.
In this particular case Moderna and Pfizer bioagents make regular human cells grow non
human protein spikes fooling immune system into increasing antibody production, marking human
cells for eradication and attacking human cells by killer TCells (Lymphocytes).
Those are human cells, not infected by active reproducible virus that are being destroyed
according to the mRNA vaccine model and that is why unprecedented in comparison with other
vaccines prevalence of severe disease like, incapacitating symptoms of infection with
artificial bioagents themselves. Anything beyond little redness and swollen tissue around
injection site not to mention loss of consciousness is cause of serious concern.
if this is the case those experimental "vaccinations" developed with no animal studies to
establish safety and toxicity set up perfect conditions for cytokines shocks, pathogen
priming and ADE all longer term deadly complications of coronavirus vaccinations encountered
in the past coronaviruses vaccine research.
In Quebec City (Canada), the first doses of Pfizer/Biotech vaccine were for the folks and
employees of an old age pensioners residence. They got their shot on Dec. 14. On Dec. 30, 66
vaccinated residents and 20 employees got COVID. Explanation from health authorities: the
vaccines needs 14 days to be efficient. But positive tests were announced after 14 days.
Here's the article in French:
https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1760058/eclosion-covid-chsld-saint-antoine-quebec-vaccin
And yesterday, I fell on this Sputnik article: 240 Israelis Test Positive for Coronavirus
After Getting
Vaccinated
This sums it up quite nicely. There are other who say essentially the same thing, perhaps
from a different angle.
Money might be a secondary, short-term benefit, but money as understood today won't
probably matter for very long anymore.
It's about total control solidified by technologies. Eventually, eradicating people deemed
non-essential. The psychopaths probably think that they can manage with robots.
Well, if that happens, the solace for us, who fall by the wayside, will be that the world
created by the TFIC will eventually atrophy, implode. These fuckers have no culture, no vital
creativity. They thrive on technocratic dullness, control. They can live on what's creative
spirits have created thus far, but that will only take them so far.
As other commenters have eluded too the introduction of health passports are coming,
digital IDS, the Chinese social credit system.
It's a fascist global coup from the WEF, IMF, Gates, Big Tech etc.
Unfortunately too many people and even those who know something isn't right are thinking
it's just hysteria or the governments don't know what they're doing.
Schmitz Katze , Jan 3, 2021 8:09 PM
What is the evidence so far on side effects and long-term effects of Covid vaccinations?
Obtained in half a year on test subjects and within a week on nursing home residents?
Questions like this and common sense will be banned in the near future. Sheep will bleat
ten times a day: Vaccination is good because the government is only ever concerned with our
welfare and health. Apart from that, vaccinating with an untested vaccine is Kismet.
For sane people, if one follows the Pfizer/Biontech package insert, the vaccination is a
dareDevil act. With some probability, the vaccinated person will only become slightly ill
– even that is not certain – but he/she can still become infected and infect
his/her fellow men.
What´s the big selling point about Covid vaccinations again? Something along the lines
of „ to save your fellow men(sch) from infection, right?
People in Germany are inundated with magazine covers the likes of Der Stern with
headlines:"Vaccination is charity" with Christmas nativity scene. This is the most malicious
manipulation I have seen about experimental m RNA-based vaccinations so far. The opposite is
the case. Pharmaceutical corporations use people who are vaccinated now as guinea pigs for
their studies which are laid out on the two following test years.
What can be more selfish than this ice-cold profit motivation?
Have they no shame, one might ask?
As for Der Stern, this magazine has sold the big hoax with the Hitler diaries as a scoop.
It all follows. https://shop.stern.de/de_DE/einzelhefte/einzelausgaben/stern-epaper-53-2020/1990689.html
Steve , Jan 3, 2021 7:29 PM
The background to the mRNA tech in this opinion piece is interesting
" Scientific breakthroughs like this don't come from nowhere. Messenger RNA was first
discovered in the early 1960s but it wasn't until the late 1980s that scientists learned how
to make it from scratch. Then a new hurdle emerged. When scientists injected mRNA into
animals, it induced such a severe immune response that the animals died. It was Dr Katalin
Kariko, working with immunologist Dr Drew Weissman, who figured out how to stop
that severe immune response from happening. And that was crucial for mRNA vaccines to be
trialled in humans."
Major Covid Vaccine Glitch Emerges: Most Europeans, Including Hospital Staff, Refuse To
Take It BY TYLER DURDEN SUNDAY, DEC 27, 2020 - 21:50
All is not going according to plan in the biggest global rollout of what is arguably the
most important vaccine in a century, and it is not just growing US mistrust in the covid
injection effort that was rolled out in record time: an unexpected spike in allergic reactions
to the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (and now, Moderna
too ) may prove catastrophic to widespread acceptance unless scientists can figure out what
is causing it after the FDA's rushed approval, and is also why as we
reported yesterday , scientists are scrambling to identify the potential culprit causing
the allergic reactions.
Making matters worse, Europe rolled out a huge COVID-19 vaccination drive on Sunday to try
to rein in the coronavirus pandemic but even more Europeans than American are sceptical about
the speed at which the vaccines have been tested and approved and reluctant to have the
shot.
While the European Union has secured contracts drugmakers including Pfizer, Moderna and
AstraZeneca, for a total of more than two billion doses and has set a goal for all adults to be
inoculated next year, this is looking increasingly like a pipe dream: according to recent
surveys, the local population has expressed "high levels of hesitancy" towards inoculation in
countries from France to Poland, with many used to vaccines taking decades to develop, not just
months.
"I don't think there's a vaccine in history that has been tested so quickly," Ireneusz
Sikorski, 41, said as he stepped out of a church in central Warsaw with his two children.
"I am not saying vaccination shouldn't be taking place. But I am not going to test an
unverified vaccine on my children, or on myself."
Smart: why take the risk of getting vaccinated when others will do it, resulting in the same
outcome.
Surveys in Poland, where distrust in public institutions runs deep, show that fewer than 40%
of people planning to get vaccinated. Worse,
according to Reuters on Sunday, only half the medical staff in a Warsaw hospital where the
country's first shot was administered had signed up. And if the doctors don't trust the
vaccine, one can be certain that the broader population will refuse to take it.
The situation is similar in Spain, one of Europe's hardest-hit countries, where 28-year-old
singer and music composer German summarizes the skepticism of a broad range of the population,
and plans to wait for now.
"No one close to me has had it (COVID-19). I'm obviously not saying it doesn't exist
because lots of people have died of it, but for now I wouldn't have it (the vaccine)."
A Christian Orthodox bishop in Bulgaria, where 45% of people have said they would not get a
shot and 40% plan to wait to see if any negative side effects appear - meaning only 15% of the
population will actually volunteer for a vaccine in the near future - is in the tiny minority
when it comes to taking the vaccine.
"Myself, I am vaccinated against everything I can be," Bishop Tihon told reporters after
getting his shot, standing alongside the health minister in Sofia. He spoke about anxiety over
polio before vaccination became available in the 1950s and 1960s.
To be sure, the establishment is pounding the table on why the vaccines are safe despite the
record short time in development (even though not even the "scientists" can explain what is
behind the spike in vaccine allergic reactions), and claiming that the new technology behind
the mRNA vaccine is all one needs to know... when it is precisely this new technology that is
sparking the skepticism.
"We'll look back on the advances made in 2020 and say: 'That was a moment when science
really did make a leap forward'," said Jeremy Farrar, director of the Oxford University
Clinical Research Unit, which is backed by the Wellcome Trust. Oxford also received $750MM from
Bill Gates in June in the billionaire's quest to vaccinate the world against Covid.
Only problem: nobody in Europe seems to care about these "scientific" justifications.
Independent pollster Alpha Research said its recent survey suggested that fewer than one in
five Bulgarians from the first groups to be offered the vaccine - frontline medics,
pharmacists, teachers and nursing home staff - planned to volunteer to get a shot.
An IPSOS survey of 15 countries published on Nov. 5 showed then that 54% of French would
have a COVID vaccine if one were available. The figure was 64% in Italy and Spain, 79% in
Britain and 87% in China.
Since then things have gone far worse, and a more recent IFOP poll showed that only 41%
people in France would take the shot . This means that a vast majority will not .
Not even in Sweden, where public trust in authorities is absurdly and inexplicably high, is
there a universal trust in the vaccine, with at least one in three saying they won't get the
shot: "If someone gave me 10 million euro, I wouldn't take it," Lisa Renberg, 32, told Reuters
on Wednesday.
Meanwhile, in a paradoxical attempt to force more to sign up - not realizing that it will
only have the precisely opposite effect - Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki urged Poles
on Sunday to sign up for vaccination, saying the herd immunity effect depended on them. Critics
have accused Warsaw's "nationalist leaders" of being too accepting of anti-vaccination
attitudes in the past in an effort to garner conservative support. Well... let's check back on
said attitude in 10 years and see if perhaps it was the right one.
For now, however, the more European governments pressure their populations to get immunized,
the fewer the people who will actually sign up and the worse the vaccine rollout will be, that
much we can be 100% sure of.
OT: but related, vaccines distributed the U.S. breathlessly announced the success
of operation warp speed and claimed that 20M doses would be distributed (shots in arm) by the
end of this year, now we know the number is 2M .
Does anyone know how many doses of Sputnik V have been distributed year to date?
Yesterday in a especial program at private TV, it was stated by several representatives of
the medical profession all very snobishly dressed, that there have not been other adverse
effects so far except headhache, and joints pain..whic his not true, there have been also
transverse mielitys, several anaphilactic shocks, and even deaths...
Telated, and with respect Brexit, one wonders how it is that after Brexit comes into effect,
and after the EU populations are submitted to harsh restrictions of movements and meeting,
especially travelling since March, several whole families of Britons managed to get into our
countries carrying the new strain of the virus which is 70% more virulent...How is that UK
citizens are more free than nationals, and what the Brexit serves for...
One would say that this new strain came so opportune to be blamed in case of a possible
failure of the few experimented vaccines, or, if not, the population will be blamed for no
vaccinating themselves enough. This way the governments wash their responsability in the
previous misshandling of this pandemic,ingtroduce curtails of freedoms and rights which
previously would have been impossible to do without fierce contestations in the streets, and
avoid answering why they did not forced the laboratories instead into investigating on drugs
that cure the Covid-19 infection, as the one administered to Trump is being investigated right
now in the UK...Of course, drugs that cure an infection which anyway could dissapear in a year
automathically ends profitting from vaccines.
One watch at all this data and gets the impression that he is being taken for a ride...
All of the above are legitimate questions the cintizenry are making to themselves, in lack
of public comparecence of officials and heads of laboratiories implied to public and open
questioning. The secrecy of all this highly controbutes to the distrust of the people. the
people is being treated as herd, and never better said, illiterates who can not see further
their own extende arm, and used a guinea pigs while morevoer left to pay the bill, as the
ammount to be spent in these vaccines is an astronomic price which, of course, will never be
taken out from the oligarchs.
Posted by: H.Schmatz | Dec 27 2020 15:55 utc |
6 Conflict of interests between major Big Pharma corporations and official drug
organisms:
Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine Efficacy? Where is the evidence to prove it? What's behind all that
"fanciful" and encouraging news? And what about the links between state vaccine regulatory
agencies and the pharmaceutical industry?Thread.
That should have been in the first paragraph. There were so far less than ten severe allergic
reactions,no death, with more than 1 million vaccinated. That is 1 in 100,000 cases. About
the same rate that allergic reactions to penicillin are reported. Meanwhile the U.S. has seen
100 deaths per 100,000 from Covid-19.
Do you think 1 in 100,000 is acceptable? I don't think it is, at least for a vaccine that's
intended (I know it won't, but it would if it could) to for more than 7 billion people, against
a disease that has a mortality rate of circa 1.5%.
Notice that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, so far, have only been inoculated on VIPs or
healthcare professionals. Those who had grave anaphylactic episodes did so in a secure
environment, inside fully equipped hospitals, ready to be saved if needed.
Now imagine a Third World environment, where billions of people would received the vaccine
and be ready to go a few minutes later.
Luckily, the Third World will mainly receive the Chinese and Russian vaccines, which cause,
as far as we know, no allergic reactions. Now imagine a world where China and Russia didn't
exist, a world where capitalism reigned supreme, and 7 billion had to receive the Pfizer and
Moderna vaccines. This would make the Holocaust look like a book for children - and I mean that
in the literal sense, not invoking Goodwin's Law (just make the calculations).
Penicillin is a completely different case: it was the only game in town when it came out,
and the flu killed a lot more than the antibiotic did. Flu was basically a death sentence to a
child before penicillin was discovered, and was a serious threat even to an adult. Besides,
Penicillin is a cure, not a vaccine - completely different scenarios, as the person with a flu
lives in a different risk-reward system than a person who may or may not ever get COVID-19.
Vaccines that kill one in 100,000 patients do exist (e.g. yellow fever, which is a live
virus vaccine) - but they are for exotic and much deadlier diseases, so a much lower number of
people are inoculated with it and the risk is well worth it. To release such an expensive and
risky vaccine when there are cheaper and safer options is irresponsible on the part of the
laboratories, in my opinion.
Vk - 1 in 100,000 is incredibly good. Be assured that any vaccine that would potentially be
effective against this virus would have at least this level of issue. That we don't know the
complications rate of the Russian or Chinese vaccines does not mean that the rates are
zero!
As to your argument, you don't see the benefit of vaccinating where potentially millions of
people could die and the economies be completely wrecked? What the hell?
(1) In this interview with ZDF, Prof. Wolf-Dieter Ludwig, who is the head of the drug
commission of physician in Germany, considers the development of Covid vaccines as a positive
thing but finds faults with politicians, especially German health minister Spahn, for putting
political pressure on the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to accelerate the approval of
vaccines, especially the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. Prof. Ludwig also belongs to EMA management
board. Most importantly, when asked whether he'd take the vaccine, his response was NO.
That's because he feels that we hardly know anything about its long term adverse effects
. https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/corona-impfstoff-zulassung-kritik-ludwig-100.html
(2) Toxicologist Prof. Hockertz unequivocally states that for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine
there exist hardly any preclinical toxicological and pharmacological data (phases 1 and
2) . He points out that even in cases of orphan drugs, the regulation allows a telescoping
of the Phase 3 clinical study, but NEVER of the preclinical studies. In his words, the way
Phases 1 and 2 have been skipped is criminal in nature. At the very end of the interview
(which is in German), he quotes the response from Pfizer as "No data available" on his
request for toxicological and pharmaceutical data from preclinical studies!!
He also notes that recently Swissmedic (national authorization and supervisory authority for
drugs and medical products in Switzerland) has concluded that the Pfizer vaccine submission
lacks evidence of safety, efficacy and quality! Swissmedic is independent of EMA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=iiTrttV7Q8A&feature=youtu.be
Prof. Hockertz is a past director of institute for experimental toxicology and clinical
toxicology at University of Hamburg Eppendorf. And before that he was a member of the
directorate of Fraunhofer Institutes for Toxicology and Environmental Medicine in Hannover.
I am not saying that the vaccine is dangerous - I have no data to support that conclusion.
But there is no data to support that the vaccine is safe either.
Posted by: Nathan Mulcahy | Dec 27 2020 19:44 utc |
26
@vk
You, as usually, in your apparently well informed kinda Marxist narrative, insert always
some of disinfo which makes me suspect about your real golas here.
You are stating that the Pfizer vaccine was admnistered only to a few VIPs...
Which VIPS are those? Do not be you referring to Pence? He could well have been inoculated
with phisiologic solution as he is reincident, like that time when he transported empty aid
boxes in the past for another photo op. Another example, please?
They are inoculating first super elders, in their last 80s and 90s in the nursing homes,
mainly private, young nurses and nursing home employees working there...which points at that
thosve employees probably would be fired if they do not agree on being vaccinated
They have taken the caution to not inoculate first the people between 50 and 60 which are
those who most could suffer a serious adverse effect, by the possible presence of
preconditions, in fact the most prejudiced by Covid-19 infection....
In fact, not even in Russia there are officials vaccinated yet, and that even with the less
harmful Russian vaccine....
In the press some are displaying a huge effort naming this event a "estelar moment for
humanity"...
The people, over whom all the sticks fall, have not but producing memes due the current
histeria displayed on TV and MSM...
I have just seen a report from `ACIP Covid-19 Vaccine Work Group at CDC' in the US. (ACIP
stands for Advisory Committee on Immunisation Practices.)
This is a report on anaphylaxis following m-RNA covid-19 vaccine receipt, and the report
includes a table headed: 'V-Safe Active Surveillance for Covid-19 Vaccine'.
The table lists the number of registrants with a recorded first dose by December 18th as
112,807 and the number of Health Impact Events as 3,150.
Health Impact Events are defined as individuals, `unable to perform normal daily
activities, unable to work, required care from doctor or health professional'.
That is 2.79%, and it is within days of receiving the vaccine.
If 60 million people in the UK have the vaccine we can, therefore, expect 1.67 million
people to be unable to work, perform normal daily activities and to require care from a
doctor or health professional.
If six billion people worldwide have the vaccine, we can expect 167 million people to be
`unable to work, perform normal daily activities, require care from doctor or heath
professional'.
And that is just the short-term effect of the vaccine. We obviously don't know what will
happen in the months and years ahead.
Thank you. I'm not sure we're seeing what we think we're seeing here.
In the CDC report, page 4 says 6 cases of anaphylaxis were discovered by 2300 hours, EST on
December 18.
Page 6 cites the number of Health Impact Events as 3,150, and this at an earlier time, 1730
hours, EST on December 18.
After studying this, I conclude that they are not claiming 3,150 cases of anaphylaxis in the
data tabulated from earlier that night.
I currently assume that page 6 is referring to surveillance measures taken rather than cases
found - the slide is titled "V-safe Active Surveillance for COVID-19 Vaccines". So, this would
mean that they had monitored those patients for anaphylaxis as of 1730 hours, but in the data
finalized as of 5.5 hours later they were only reporting 6 cases.
I actually hope this is the case, although I'm not a fan of the Pfizer vaccine. If I'm
wrong, and Dr. Coleman's take is correct, then the world just blew up - but I would think we'd
hear more about this. Anaphylaxis is serious and mandates medical attention. This is the UK, at
the very start of a rapid rollout, so I have to think that a major occurrence would spill into
broad alarm that we'd hear.
The statement that the new strain of Covid-19 is 70 percent more contagious is nothing, but
a claim made by politicians so far, Christian Drosten, the head of the virology department at
the Berlin's Charite center -- one of Europe's largest university hospitals -- told the German
radio broadcaster Deutschlandfunk.
"Suddenly, there is this figure out there, 70 percent, and no one even knows what is
meant by that," he said. The virologist believes there is just not enough data to really
say that the new strain is any more dangerous than the other existing ones.
The data provided by the British scientists on the new strain is still incomplete, Drosten
said, adding that even preliminary analysis results would arrive within a week. The fact that
discovery of a new strain coincided with a sharp rise of new infection cases in southeast
England also does not necessarily mean that the new virus is to blame, the virologist
believes.
"The question is whether the virus is to blame or whether it was just a local epidemic
outbreak, or the lockdown was not so strict and transmission mechanisms were in place in an
area where this particular strain happened to be," he said.
It was also too early to say whether this virus actually transmits faster. To do so, one
needs to "look at who infected whom and how long it took," Drosten explained, adding
that "one would be surprised" if such a parameter as the virus infectiousness would
significantly change all of a sudden now.
What is known so far is that a mutation present in the new strain lets it form a stronger
binding with human cells. Still, according to Drosten, that does not automatically mean quicker
reproduction since the virus stays with one cell for a longer period of time than it could and
probably should to successfully replicate.
The scientist also said that similar coronavirus mutations already repeatedly appeared
during the pandemic only to disappear at some point. He also said that the new strain is
unlikely to affect any coronavirus vaccine's effectiveness since an immune response formed
through vaccination is a complex process that would hardly be affected by a minor change in the
virus structure.
Still, Drosten admitted that the officials were right to be cautious and temporarily ban all
travel to and from the UK now that the whole situation is still unclear. "Of course, as a
politician, one has to act out of caution here," he said, adding that the current policy
approaches could be "corrected" once more information is available.
The discovery of a new coronavirus strain prompted many nations to suspend all travel to and
from the UK. The list of countries that joined the international quarantine of the UK includes
the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, France, Germany and Poland, as well as Russia. Some nations
outside Europe, like Iran, Argentina, Chile and El Salvador also cut transportation links with
the UK.
Turkey and Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, suspended travel not just to the UK but to other nations
as well. The moves came as British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said that the new Covid-19
strain is supposedly 70 percent more contagious and announced a strict Tier 4 lockdown in part
of the country, including London.
Certain countries try to portray this Covid as the plaque. If we remember even the WHO
confirmed that the Covid is way milder than the common flu. So if we are not obliged to get a
flu shot, we certainly don't need the Covid "God knows what's in it" vaccine. In the winter
months, especially December every year millions of people get the flu, and in some cases its
unfortunately deadly. But the authorities are trying to say that every case of the flu is
Corona virus which is basically a big lie. It is something new, but way milder and in most of
the cases our body can fight it off. Vaccination is being rushed, the FDA had no real
solution to resolve the ifs and buts, and now out of a sudden they have approved it, and we
have a deadly virus that's going to vipe our civilisation of the planet?That's a lot of
disinformation and rubbish. But the big question is liability? These farmaceutical giants
clearly say that in case of any trouble they won't be liable? So why would anyone want it if
there's no guarantee for a human life? If someone thinks that the vaccine is going to save
us, they are just delusional. Get a flu shot if you badly want to stop the panic and you will
be OK. The Covid 19 vaccine in my opinion is a rushed experiment, and needs time to prove
itself worthy...
Guest 11 hours ago 21 Dec, 2020 03:31 PM
It's a single amino acid change in the spike protein associated with the ACE receptor
mechanism that gives the virus access to a cell. There are many such changes going on and it
came via Europe and did not original in the UK. Talk about talked up, hyperboli and general
incompetence. And I'm not talking about this article!
In a press conference on Saturday, Chief Science Adviser Patrick Vallance said B.1.1.7,
which first appeared in a virus isolated on 20 September, accounted for about 26% of
cases in mid-November. "By the week commencing the ninth of December, these figures were much
higher," he said. "So, in London, over 60% of all the cases were the new variant."
Johnson added that the slew of mutations may have increased the virus' transmissibility by
70%.
...
Not being an ??-ologist, that paragraph indicates to me that a virus with greater
transmissibiliy will REPLACE/DISPLACE the original Covid19 strain. Since the emerging
consensus among virologists is that the B.1.1.7 variant is no more deadly than the original,
then the only reason it matters is that more people will catch the mutated version than would
have caught COVID19 - thus putting more pressure on an already over-stressed healthcare
system.
Since it looks as though a vaccine isn't going to be a Silver Bullet for many months, if
not many, many months, I find it peculiar that more effort wasn't expended on pursuing a
TREATMENT to reduce the severity of COVID symptoms.
I caught CGTN News this morning and China has officially abandoned a 'promising' TREATMENT
it was working on because the stats indicate that it doesn't work...
I do not think the B.1.1.7 strain is any more infectious than over SARS-COV-2 strains. It
prevails because UK has reached a level of herd immunity against the other strains.
It is falsely claimed that a 70% infection rate is required for herd immunity. The 70%
applies to vaccines, which are distributed evenly throughout the population. For the epidemic
to calm down only a very small portion of the population needs to become immune. This same
population is most likely to spread the infection but also most likely to be infected. For
any vaccination campaign it would be difficult to find this vector population, but the virus
will find it all by itself. It now seems that this vector population is young people who
frequent bars and nightclubs. A bartender in
ski resorts can infect hundreds, but he is also most likely to be first infected.
"British medical journal The Lancet published research on Phase I and Phase II clinical
trials of the vaccine, revealing no adverse effects in patients and triggering an effective
immune response. More than 50 countries have requested roughly 2.4 billion doses across India,
Brazil, China, Argentina, South Korea and numerous others."
As of Dec. 18, 3,150 out of 272,001 recipients reported what the agency terms "Health
Impact Events" after getting vaccinated. The definition of the term is: "unable to perform
normal daily activities, unable to work, required care from doctor or health care
professional."
"Can you clarify what you find questionable about the corona virus vaccines?"
Disclaimer: I am not an epidemiologist or medical professional. I get information from
various sources especially OTHER THAN mainstream media. Some of those credible sources, such
as Dr. Mike Yeadon ,
subsequently have been censored because they don't purvey the medical establishment's
requisite narrative. This is what I have learned:
These COVID-19 vaccines can be characterized as 'experimental.' Some past vaccines have a
spotty record. They typically require many years of clinical trials to determine safety and
efficacy. A vaccine for Coronavirus has never been developed before, in spite of having been
researched to combat previous epidemics of SARS and MERS. This one was completed in a very
short time, and the handling and delivery requirements are stringent.
True efficacy and the protocol used for testing the presence of viral infection in the
relatively small clinical trials are unclear. We know the rt-PCR test to identify the
presence of "COVID-19 infection" has been misapplied on a large scale. The FDA approval of
these vaccines is based on that test, which has been proven to show a large proportion of
false positives. A Portuguese high court ruled against the legality of this test to determine
infection. Effectiveness of a vaccine is probably very short term, possibly only a few weeks.
It is unknown whether natural immunity in a healthy individual (the body's own defense) might
be equally effective.
Potential side effects are yet to be revealed, besides the few documented cases of
allergic reactions thus far. Potential long term health impacts are unknown, and due to the
Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines' 'invasion' of the body with mRNA at the cellular level,
they could be serious. Only time will tell, so one must ask, "do I want to volunteer to
become a clinical test subject?"
Social controls, so-called "immunity passes" which may not even have validity, are an
infringement on individual freedoms and rights and are already being used in some places.
That also paves the way for future vaccination requirements against a person's will, and
given the financial imperatives of the medical establishment and its collusion with
oligarchs, there may exist ulterior motives that are unacceptable.
SECOND health worker in Alaska suffers allergic reaction after getting Pfizer Covid-19 jab
The hunt for profit and power has now resulted in people being used as live test animals for
a "vaccine" that is totally unnecessary. This stuff is criminal to the extreme.
Vaccine development is a long, complex process, often lasting 10-15 years and involving a
combination of public and private involvement.
...
Exploratory Stage
This stage involves basic laboratory research and often lasts 2-4 years.
...
Pre-Clinical Stage
Many candidate vaccines never progress beyond this stage because they fail to produce
the desired immune response. The pre-clinical stages often lasts 1-2 years and usually
involves researchers in private industry.
...
Phase I Vaccine Trials
...
Phase II Vaccine Trials
...
Phase III Vaccine Trials
...
Post-Licensure Monitoring of Vaccines
...
Vaccine development is a long, complex process, often lasting 10-15 years and involving a
combination of public and private involvement.
I happen to have scheduled an appointment with my primary care doctor early in
January.
This is my first meeting with this particular doctor (my previous doctor recently moved
elsewhere).
I wonder how pushy this new doctor will be about my taking the vaccine right away.
My first question will be about *which* vaccine.
I just found this quote somewhere:
Indeed, NIH chief Francis Collins, MD, PhD, when asked during a press briefing last week
whether people will be able to choose their vaccine, said there won't be enough doses in
December for the whole country and "people who get offered one should feel quite happy
about that."
Note to self: "feel quite happy about that".
Maybe there is actually something to the good doctor's advice
as how many happy corpses have you seen?
I posted @14 an article. Here is a section from the article I didn't mention.
VAERS
The CDC and FDA established The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System in 1990. The goal
of VAERS, according to the CDC, is "to detect possible signals of adverse events associated
with vaccines." (A signal in this case is evidence of a possible adverse event that emerges
in the data collected.) About 30,000 events are reported each year to VAERS. Between 10%
and 15% of these reports describe serious medical events that result in hospitalization,
life-threatening illness, disability, or death.
VAERS is a voluntary reporting system. Anyone, such as a parent, a health care provider,
or friend of the patient, who suspects an association between a vaccination and an adverse
event may report that event and information about it to VAERS. The CDC then investigates
the event and tries to find out whether the adverse event was in fact caused by the
vaccination.
Over 4,000 adverse reactions (hospitalization, life-threatening illness, disability, or
death) to vaccines are *reported* each year.
That is in a normal year, with vaccines that have gone thru the normal vetting procedure.
I would say let's see what next year's numbers are. Except who the heck will trust their
numbers?
Vaccines were clearly rushed. Also the nature of coronaviruses makes creation of vaccine like
shooting at moving target. So each of them is more dangerous then usual and it is unclear how
useful they are. How much it is difficult to tell.
Clearly, the lockdowns and medical tyranny is not a phenomenon isolated from the power
struggle, it is obviously a weapon of the establishment, used against the people, to prevent
them from organizing independently.
I am also hearing considerable chatter that many medical professionals including doctors
and nurses are going to REFUSE to take the poorly tested and questionable Covid vaccine for
fear of damaging side effects. And why should they? Why take a vaccine for a virus that
only threatens less than 0.3% of the public outside of nursing homes?
Exactly, when applying real scientific method and rational thinking, it is clear that the
risk of covid is negligible, while the risk of the "vaccine" is huge. Once you realize that
this is a weapon used in a power struggle and not a medical crisis, you also realize the
enormity of the crime committed. It is very encouraging to hear that this is being understood
more and more.
We have to offer people a choice outside of tyranny, otherwise many will go along with the
tyranny.
7) China is doing PCRs since the dawn of time and there is not an explosion of new cases
as the anti-PCR squad is claiming. On the contrary: when they decided to re-test all the
Wuhan inhabitants with obligatory PCR tests, they found none, zero, nada positive
results.
Posted by: Down South | Dec 13 2020 17:55 utc | 16
Posted by: vk | Dec 13 2020 18:45 utc | 19
As I understand it, the false positives are a result of poorly conducting the analyses
through putting the samples through too many cycles. If you intensify the concentration of
the virus more than 25 cycles, you are likely to get false positives. This apparently has
been a problem in the US and other EU countries.
Any country that conducts the test properly significantly reduces the probability of false
positives.
None of them are arguing that COVID-19 does not exist, it is that the maximum reasonably
reliable Ct value is 30 cycles.and as you increase the cycles above that you start getting
more false positive results as only non-infectious (dead) viruses are detected.
The issue that the report raised is that the WHO and Drosden are recommending a Ct of
45 . The higher the cycles the more the "cases" the more drastic the action the
government will take to bring the number of "cases" down.
Therefore, to ensure that the government action is reasonable it is necessary to ensure
that the information the government is using to justify such action is indeed reasonable and
justifiable.
You have to be an absolute idiot to think that government diktats should simply be obeyed
and not questioned especially by people who have the necessary credentials to evaluate such
information.
Well, it is sad to note absolute lack of intellectual curiosity about something that most
likely will not pass without profoundly changing western societies. On side note it would be
good to recognise both taoist and christian way of handling the exception of sickness –
being sick of sickness is way less dangerous than people being religiously afraid of
contamination, of sick people, and organising accordingly.
Most likely this, now already mental, curse will not pass before one or all of the
following happens:
– forced vaccination using either public or private coercion or both,
– global (or regional) digital health IDs and tracking systems,
– social, health and education sectors of lesser states will be overridden and forced
open to global international providers,
– not to mention that the precendent of tiers and lockdowns is established and can be
used repeatedly for the purpose of global health imperialism. There'll be the mandate to
force people self-isolate as well.
One could say these are the markings of global sanitary dictature. Or, this could be the
way to make formal the hidden features of the system currently in use. The spooky license
will be made official. All the tracking, etc.
The Drosten testing non-protocol is faulty to the core, and – without doubt –
it is enabling corruption of both politics and science (cormandrostenreview.com).
Resulting actions are criminal in their essence – that is the reason why we are
seeing leaders of nations acting in such a bizarre way. The truth is being established by the
means of spectacle. Once harsh and overdecisive, then lacking in resoluteness – even in
the EU the countries still can not coordinate simple and relevant statistics.
China has nothing to gain from this virus, hence there it is mostly over and done with.
Seems to go for Russia as well.
vk @ 40 said "of course the scientific standards for times of emergency do fall because of
time constraints. That doesn't mean the debunk attempts aren't equally flawed".
I'm sorry but this is not the way science works and cutting corners during emergencies is
an even worse practice. The amplification issue, lack of Standard Operational Protocol, and
clear bias and hijacking of the peer review process for this paper which formed the
foundation of PCR implementation is utterly and completely outrageous. But of course not
surprising. It's clear that all UN agencies including WHO have been corrupted. Right from the
beginning there has been a consistent and widespread effort to discredit any testing method
aside from PCR. Are you not even remotely interested why?
It's easy to see how COVID testing with a flawed PCR testing procedure rolls out and I
will give you an example from a place that I am familiar with. COVID has magically
disappeared in Thailand, but large number of positive cases are appearing in Thai who are
returning and in foreign visitors. These PCR positives are occurring in spite of all
returnees having tested negative just prior to boarding their flight to Thailand. Almost all
of the positives in returning residents are also of the asymptomatic variety. I would wager
that the amplification level for a domestic PCR test is 25 while the returning resident test
level is set at 35 or higher. Lacking transparency and a Standard Operational Protocol for
the RT-PCR test, including a universally accepted amplification level, you can create any
result you want, any time, any place. These are serious issues and you can't label people who
have issues with scientific integrity as deniers or misleading.
The entire justification of PCR as a public health tool (as opposed to a diagnostic tool)
has been vaporized and I cannot for the life of me understand why you don't "get it" or the
wider implications.
In late November Debs is dead and I wrote about the ruthless
vaccine competition . The cause were the ambiguous results of the non-profit AstraZeneca
vaccine trials which led to delighted criticism from those who prefer commercial vaccine
suppliers.
The good news today is that cooperation between vaccine developers is still possible and can
lead to better results.
As Debs had opined:
In the real world that means if the AstraZeneca vaccine is more than 60% efficacious (which
is better than any flu vaccine - 95% is new big pharma BS IMO) and has no major side effects
(one case of MS tells us nothing for the reason I outlined above), then it will be that or
nothing for a sizeable slab of the world's population.
If everyone falls for big pharma's transparent attempt to stop this possible vaccine in
its tracks, prior to testing completion, then that will mean no vaccine for billions of our
fellow humans , so rather than joining in the big pharma sabotage, it makes better sense to
consider that vaccine more objectively than de Noli, that Harvard minion of corporations
seems to do.
I agreed with that and discussed the most likely reason why the AstraZeneca vaccine did not
create a higher efficacy:
The AstraZeneca vaccine uses an adenovirus as 'vector' to deliver a DNA sequence that human
cells then use to create one specific (but harmless) SARS-CoV-2 protein. The immune system
will then learn to attack that protein. Afterwards it should be able to protect against
SARS-CoV-2 infections.
...
In order to safeguard against cases where an already existing immunity to human adenoviruses
may impede inoculation AstraZeneca is using a chimpanzee-originated version of an adenovirus
as a vector. The Russian Sputnik V vaccine, hyped by Prof. de
Noli on RT , uses two doses with different human adenoviruses (Ad-26, Ad-5) as
vectors to increase the chance of inoculation. Other vaccine developers, CanSino Biologics
and Johnson & Johnson, are also using adenovirus vectors. Sinopharm's vaccine uses an
inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus.
AstraZeneca found by chance that its vaccine works best when the first dose is smaller
than the second one. Vector immunity can explain why this is the case.
A first high dose will create some immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 virus but also some
immunity against the vector virus, the chimpanzee-originated adenovirus. When a first high
dose has trained the immune system to fight the vector virus the second 'booster' vaccine
dose using the same vector will become inefficient. A lower first dose can make sure that the
second higher dose is not prematurely defeated by vector immunity but can still do its
work.
Unbeknownst to me the Russian developers of the Sputnik V vaccine had come to the same
conclusion:
"... Multiple COVID-19 vaccines are currently in phase 3 trials with efficacy assessed as prevention of virologically confirmed disease. WHO recommends that successful vaccines should show disease risk reduction of at least 50%, with 95% CI that true vaccine efficacy exceeds 30%. However, the impact of these COVID-19 vaccines on infection and thus transmission is not being assessed. Even if vaccines were able to confer protection from disease, they might not reduce transmission similarly. ..."
"... A note before I begin: This is not a recommendation not to be vaccinated against Coronavirus. It's an encouragement to decide for yourself and your family when to be vaccinated and which vaccine to choose based on the most accurate information available. That said, let's proceed. ..."
"... "Done right, vaccines end pandemics. Done wrong, pandemics end vaccines." -- Andy Slavitt here ..."
"... Based on the numbers released from phase 3 trials, the Pfizer vaccine is 95% effective, but 1% of the time . In the same way, the Moderna vaccine is 94% effective, but 2% of the time . ..."
"... For comparison, let's look at the absolute numbers from the Moderna test. In the unprotected population, 1.23% of the people who could have been exposed to the virus, got it. In the vaccinated population exposed to the same conditions, a little less than 0.07% got the virus. Subtracting the two, the absolute gain in protection was 1.16% -- that is, taking the vaccine bought you a little over 1% in absolute protection. ..."
"... any studies or testing on fertility? what about breast feeding? what about long term symptoms? [ hint ; the manufacturers have nothing] what does that tell you? ..."
"... Pharma/FDA: "We can't worry about that right now. We have a pandemic to fight. And investors to consider. And year-end bonuses are coming up. And a political class looking for a quick fix." ..."
"... Indeed we can't worry about that now say Pharma, that's why you absolutely must completely indemnify us from any financial repercussions too. ..."
"... just yesterday the Pfizer vaccine vaccine reported a number of issues with allergic reactions. It raised the question on whether they deliberately excluded people with known allergies from their test subjects (this is not uncommon in early drug testing as a safety precaution). If even 1% have a serious allergic reaction, this would throw the benefit/risk balance out. ..."
"... Is it O/Z, or the Pfizer one? NHS yesterday issued a guideline to stop vaccinating anyone with "history of allergic reactions", which was for Pfizer vaccine. ..."
"... That "1% of the time" and "2% of the time" reflects the approximate likelihood that a subject from among the test groups was exposed to a high enough dose of SARS2-CoV to cause symptoms and a positive PCR test over the course of the trial. It has absolutely zero to do with the efficacy or lack thereof of the vaccines. Let me repeat that. The overall proportion of infection among all trial participants has no bearing, in and of itself, on the actual efficacy. ..."
"... As such, this Pfizer vaccine and possibly the Moderna one too if it has the same problem, will require that patients be monitored for anaphylactic symptoms for some significant duration of time (an hour?) after the injection. Now consider this potential possibility in light of the other logistical difficulties surrounding the vaccine distribution and administration to huge numbers. It probably won't be via drive-thru service. ..."
"... Well, the anaphylaxis, regardless of state of health, indicates that there are antigens present in the formulation which are unrelated to the protein the vaccine will manufacture in cells. While it can even be a mucopolysaccharide rather than a protein, the fact remains that the carrier is not benign and we are not being provided with all the information. ..."
"... Yep, I am wondering of the consequences of rushing out the vaccines and I am convinced the pressure is 99% political. There are governments too eager to announce mass vaccination and putting too much confidence in early reports so worried they are with the socioeconomic impact of the pandemic. And this can show (will show) problematic if mass vaccination is started before a thorough examination of further trial results and problems like allergic reaction and others that might surge in the course of the trials. ..."
"... We provide people very little education and most others end up specialists. Yet at the same time everyone knows everything and needs to know everything because everyone is trying to screw you over. And worse yet, most people do not know that they are stupid or can speak about a topic knowing they are probably wrong. ..."
"... It's all so damn stressful I will just take my chances without the vaccine and be as careful as I can not to infect others. I know a lot about human biology, but not enough about vaccines and the companies and the people who own them. I do not trust the government because it is controlled by corporations and not the people. ..."
"... Can the pharma companies stand behind the claim that it's 95% effective without resorting to numerical semantics or lobbying for liability shields? If so then by all means tell the public that the vaccines are 95% effective. If they say "well we did say it's 95% but what we meant was " then we are in the territory of bait and switch. ..."
"... There's too much at stake to leave even little room for exaggerated claims from profiteers because the anti-vaxxers will have a field day exploiting any discrepancy between claimed and actual performance for these vaccines and guess what, with that will go public trust. ..."
"... people are going to alter their behaviour based on these claims once vaccinated, so 95% should mean 95% in absolute terms and contra-indications should also be clearly communicated to at-risk populations. Auditable transparency should be the name of the game, if we've learnt anything from the 737max debacle it's that companies, when left to their own devices, place profit ahead of human lives. ..."
"... Why should Vietnam show a terrible "absolute effectiveness" compared to France if the goal is to analyze the same vaccine? As the number of people exposed to the virus approaches the entirety of the population (if half were vaccinated and all members are susceptible to infection) the number would approach the vaccine efficacy as the companies define it. ..."
"... I would even ditch the '95% effective' language. They need to say 'if 10,000 people were exposed to the virus, ordinarily about n1 would get infected. With this vaccine, the number infected was n2. This is language people can grasp. ..."
"... I was born three years before doctors began giving a new drug on the market declared safe in pregnancy to mothers for morning sickness. It was called Thalidomide. ..."
"... The second surprise from these protocols is how mild the requirements for contracted Covid-19 symptoms are. A careful reading reveals that the minimum qualification for a case of Covid-19 is a positive PCR test and one or two mild symptoms. These include headache, fever, cough, or mild nausea. This is far from adequate. These vaccine trials are testing to prevent common cold symptoms. ..."
"... A temperature of 104.9 in an adult with a functional immune system (we are not talking about babies and kids – they are different) is extraordinary after a vaccination. 104.9 means that the immune system has been activated enough to take it up a few notches to DEF CON 1. This is very unusual in infectious disease – some parasites and ameba do this routinely – and things like sepsis syndrome can – but for the most part, getting a temperature up this high is definitely not normal. It is certainly not a good sign for a vaccine. A vaccine should not be stimulating the immune system to this degree – EVER. Idiosyncratic reactions in a very rare patient is one thing – if this is happening more often – this is not a good sign for that vaccine. ..."
"... This is medically important for two reasons. 1) That level of fever if sustained can damage permanently multiple organs. 2) Vaccines should simply not be activating the immune system to that degree – it is completely inappropriate. It is very normal for people to have a brief temp of 99 or 100 after a vaccine – this is a completely different level. ..."
"... The Vaccine Drumbeat in my jurisdiction is increasing and I'm sure will become deafening. Talk show radio hosts actually giving medical advice. No recommendations to consult with a doctor regarding your personal health circumstances and risks or those of your loved ones. ..."
"... This is all orchestrated by Public Health officials who apparently have never heard of personal health care. We are all just one big Herd. To me this is a desecration of the doctor patient relationship by so-called health professionals. All of which is extremely dangerous and bad medical advice. ..."
"... Re: companies mandating staff to be vaccinated to market their establishments as "safe". The tone and substance of the post is clearly meant to be a "proceed with caution" advisory on taking the vaccine, despite the author being at pains to emphasize that it's not an "encouragement to reject vaccines". ..."
"... Don't forget they are using flawed PCR tests and except for Moderna in the US all other countries and companies where studies have been conducted are using another vaccine instead of a true saline or inert placebo. ..."
"... Not to mention most of these Pharmaceutical Companies have been sued for tens of billions of dollars for harmful drugs , buried information, fraud ect. We're supposed to trust them with safety studies for medical products they have indemnity for. Thank you for pointing out how deceptive these numbers can be for the average person. ..."
"... The problem is, given the PCR is acknowledged to generate a lot of false positives, then the success rate will be overstated, because the denominator in the success rate calculations will be swollen with subjects who didn't actually have the CV19 virus to start with ..."
Yves here. It's good to see Tom Neuburger discussing a possible misperception by some of
what the "95% effective" Covid mRNA vaccine results touted by Pfizer and Moderna mean, when
they are on the verge of receiving an FDA Emergency Use Authorization to allow their
release.
While we have your attention, we'll point out another misperception, which the press is
amplifying, that having been vaccinated would prevent the recipient from transmitting Covid.
For instance, some business owners are saying they will require employees to be vaccinated, not
because they are concerned about worker safety, but because they intend to market their venue
as safe for customers by virtue of having vaccinated staff.
At this point, the effect of any of the Covid vaccines on disease transmission is a known
unknown. From
Wired in late November :
The problem is, a Covid-19 vaccine that only prevents illness -- which is to say, symptoms
-- might not prevent infection with the virus or transmission of it to other people. Worst
case, a vaccinated person could still be an asymptomatic carrier. That could be bad.
The article further points out that so far, only the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine has evidence
that it reduces transmission, as opposed to protecting recipients of the disease.
A more technical explanation from The
Lancet , in September:
Multiple COVID-19 vaccines are currently in phase 3 trials with efficacy assessed as
prevention of virologically confirmed disease. WHO recommends that successful vaccines should
show disease risk reduction of at least 50%, with 95% CI that true vaccine efficacy exceeds
30%. However, the impact of these COVID-19 vaccines on infection and thus transmission is not
being assessed. Even if vaccines were able to confer protection from disease, they might not
reduce transmission similarly.
Challenge studies in vaccinated primates showed reductions in pathology, symptoms, and
viral load in the lower respiratory tract, but failed to elicit sterilising immunity in the
upper airways. Sterilising immunity in the upper airways has been claimed for one vaccine,
but peer-reviewed publication of these data are awaited.
By Thomas Neuburger. Originally published at Substack
Excessive haste could have fatal consequences, since public trust and wide vaccination
are the only ways any vaccine, even the best ones, can work.
A note before I begin: This is not a recommendation not to be vaccinated
against Coronavirus. It's an encouragement to decide for yourself and your family when to be
vaccinated and which vaccine to choose based on the most accurate information available. That
said, let's proceed.
"Done right, vaccines end pandemics. Done wrong, pandemics end vaccines." -- Andy
Slavitt here
People in the United States, along with people in all of the rest of the world, are eager
for a vaccine that provides immunity to the Covid-19 virus. Drug manufacturers, with a market
of tens of billions of injections to sell into, are eager to roll one off the production
line. Both groups are highly incentivized to get a vaccine into distribution quickly.
Hundreds of Billions in Potential Revenue
Let's look at the revenue side first. Here, for example, is what the three leading vaccine
candidates are projected to cost in the UK according to a recent Sky
News piece :
In two years the earth is projected to hold 8 billion
people , and most leading vaccine candidates require at least two doses. Let's be
conservative: If Moderna, say, sold its Covid vaccine to 1 billion people at ₤28 (about
$37) per dose, the revenue stream from those sales would turn into real money fast -- $74
billion in revenue at retail prices in less than two years.And that's for capturing
less than a sixth of the global market. A vaccine manufacturer that captures a third of
that market would swim in wealth till the climate crisis took us all.
For comparison, consider Moderna's recent revenue profile .
For the last few years, Moderna income has run between $60 and $200 million per year. Revenue
for just the last quarter , however, jumped to $158 million. Moderna is clearly set for
a windfall.
Needless to say, something like $100 billion or more in revenue would more than cover the
cost of Covid vaccine development, so why the high price retail prices? One can only guess.
How Effective Is "Effective"?
About effectiveness, much is claimed. From the same Sky News article:
The UK has become the first country in the world to approve the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19
vaccine for use.
The government says the jab [vaccine], which has been given the green light by independent
health regulator MHRA, will be rolled out across the UK from early next week.
Studies have shown the jab is 95% effective and works in all age groups. [emphasis
added]
Moderna claims similar effectiveness -- 94% -- for its own vaccine candidate. But what does
effectiveness mean?
To a lay person, a phrase like "95% effective" means one of two things: either that she or
he, upon exposure to the virus, is protected 95% of the time, or that 95% of the people who
take the vaccine are protected 100% of the time.
And this is where the mutual eagerness of the two highly motivated groups -- the public; the
profiteers -- intersect. The public wants to hear "95% effectiveness" and think it knows what
those words means. The drug companies want the same thing as the public; it wants the public to
think it knows what those words mean.
But in the world of drug advertising, the word "effective" does not mean what you think it means . The other way to
look at effectiveness is this: Based on the numbers released from phase 3 trials, the Pfizer
vaccine is 95% effective, but 1% of the time . In the same way, the Moderna vaccine is
94% effective, but 2% of the time .
Relative Effectiveness
To sort this out, let's look at real numbers, thanks to Twitter friend David
Windt.
For the Moderna product, the phase 3 trial contained 30,000 individuals divided between
those given the vaccine and those given a placebo. Let's assume that individuals in each group
were allowed to roam freely "in the wild" -- that is, told to live their regular lives among
the general population, including going out infrequently, staying masked, and practicing social
distance -- as opposed being proactively and aggressively exposed to the virus by the
researchers, which would be highly immoral, to say the least.
In the Moderna vaccinated group, 11 people out of 15,000 got the virus (by Moderna's
definition of what "got the virus means") for an overall infection rate of 0.07% . (There's
disagreement about whether the drug company's "got the virus" measurements are well chosen; see
the Forbes article "
Covid-19 Vaccine Protocols Reveal That Trials Are Designed To Succeed ." But we'll ignore
that point for now.)
In the Moderna placebo group, 185 people of 15,000 got the virus, for an overall infection
rate of 1.23% .
Do you see where this is headed? If you divide 0.07% by 1.23%, you get a 5.7% infection rate
-- or inversely, a 94% protection rate, which is what's claimed. But that's a percentage of a
percentage, a ratio of a ratio, something called the "relative rate" in the medical profession.
What this really means is that, of the 1.23% of people who would have gotten the virus in the
vaccinated group, 94% of them didn't.
But Moderna isn't testing 30,000 people who are infected with the virus, or even 15,000
people. Only 185 people "got the virus" (by their definition) in the placebo group. That
population was reduced to 11 people with vaccination. These are very small numbers. As stated
above, the Moderna vaccine is 94% effective -- but only 1.23% of the time.
(For another way to see that using a percentage of a percentage, or a ratio of a ratio, is
confusing, consider an advertisement that claims a company's new product is "twice as
effective" as its old one. If the old product was effective only 2% of the time, and you knew
this, would you buy the new one?)
Infection rates in those clinical trials seem low, by the way, which could be just an
accident of statistics, or something off in their way of measuring who is counted as infected.
From the start of the pandemic until now, the overall disease rate for Maricopa County, a
high-infection zone, is 5034 per
100,000 people , or 5% . At the lower end, the overall disease rate for Multnomah County, a
less-infected but still urban county, is 2363 per
100,000 people , or 2.4% .
Both rates are higher than the infection rates of the Moderna and Pfizer placebo groups. As
stated, Moderna's placebo group experienced a 1.23% infection rate, and Pfizer's placebo group
was infected just 0.75% of the time. Does this
indicate a difference in how "infection" is determined, or just something else about these
studies? Hard to tell at this point.
None of this is to imply dishonesty on the part of the drug companies. Measuring
"effectiveness" using the relative rate of infection is common in that world. It's just more
meaningful when the overall infection rate of a pathogen is, say, 70% or higher, instead of 5%
or less.
Absolute Effectiveness
For comparison, let's look at the absolute numbers from the Moderna test. In the
unprotected population, 1.23% of the people who could have been exposed to the virus, got it.
In the vaccinated population exposed to the same conditions, a little less than 0.07% got the
virus. Subtracting the two, the absolute gain in protection was 1.16% -- that is, taking the
vaccine bought you a little over 1% in absolute protection.
The numbers for the Pfizer vaccine are similar. According to Windt , "the
infection rate was reduced slightly, from 0.75% to 0.04% – that's "95% efficacy" [but]
these results do NOT mean that 95% of those vaccinated are protected." In absolute terms,
taking the Pfizer vaccine reduced the risk of getting the virus by just 0.71%.
Do you trust any of these drug manufacturers and their massively under-tested vaccines
enough that you would take whatever risk is associated with their product to gain that amount
of protection? I know good doctors who won't, and others who will.
Testing and Public Trust
I want to point to two articles about testing and public trust. First from MIT in November,
consider
this caution about public trust:
Covid-19 vaccines shouldn't get emergency-use authorization
Public trust in vaccines is already in decline. The FDA should proceed with
caution.
The pace of covid-19 vaccine research has been astonishing: there are more than 200 vaccine candidates in
some stage of development, including several that are already in phase 3
clinical trials , mere months after covid-19 became a global public health emergency. In
order for the FDA to approve a vaccine, however, not only do these clinical trials need to be
completed -- a process that typically involves following tens of thousands of participants
for at least six months -- but the agency also needs to inspect production facilities, review
detailed manufacturing plans and data about the product's stability, and pore over reams of
trial data. This review can easily take a year or more.
Excessive haste could have fatal consequences, since public confidence and wide vaccination
are the only ways any vaccine, even the best ones, can work: "Public health experts caution
that vaccines don't protect people; only vaccinations do . A vaccine that hasn't gained enough
public trust will therefore have a limited ability to control the pandemic even if it's highly
effective." [emphasis mine]
One of the more immediate questions a trial needs to answer is whether a vaccine prevents
infection. If someone takes this vaccine, are they far less likely to become infected with
the virus? These trials all clearly focus on eliminating symptoms of Covid-19, and not
infections themselves. Asymptomatic infection is listed as a secondary objective in these
trials when they should be of critical importance.
It appears that all the pharmaceutical companies assume that the vaccine will never
prevent infection . Their criteria for approval is the difference in symptoms between an
infected control group and an infected vaccine group. They do not measure the difference
between infection and noninfection as a primary motivation. [emphasis added]
Is this true of the latest trials? Last September is forever in Covid years. I'll look at
this side of the issue in a follow-up piece, but my early research says that the Forbes
point is still valid. If this turns out to be the flaw Forbes thinks it is, public trust
could be even more greatly eroded as these vaccines fail to deliver what's we're led to expect
of them.
To Vaccinate or Not To Vaccinate?
As I said before, this is an not an encouragement reject the vaccines. It's an
encouragement to decide about them wisely by considering a number of factors -- your need to
feel "safe," your need to end this constant quarantine, and society's need to inoculate nearly
everyone, versus your trust in the approval process, your personal level of caution, and the
benefit of taking a relatively untested product to reduce your Covid risk by maybe 2% in
absolute terms.
There are Covid hot-spots after all, areas of the country and the world where
infections are soaring, and even low infection rates come at a heavy price. Covid has changed
for the worse both the way we live and our
economy . And people do die from it.
Maybe the first vaccines out of the gate, perhaps these three, will be everything a mother
could want for her family and nation. But even if these products are are very very good, they
have to be trusted to be effective.
If that trust is given blindly, and then betrayed, the consequences will be severe.
any studies or testing on fertility? what about breast feeding? what about long term
symptoms? [ hint ; the manufacturers have nothing] what does that tell you?
Pharma/FDA: "We can't worry about that right now. We have a pandemic to fight. And
investors to consider. And year-end bonuses are coming up. And a political class looking for
a quick fix."
Yeadon appears to be being branded as a nut in the mainstream British media (and, indeed,
Associated Press have published an article refuting the allegation that the vaccine causes
sterility, by disproving assertions that Wodarg & Yeadon did not make.) In my book, that
probably means he is not 180 degrees wrong
I don't know the answer to this, but just yesterday the Pfizer vaccine vaccine reported a
number of issues with allergic reactions. It raised the question on whether they deliberately
excluded people with known allergies from their test subjects (this is not uncommon in early
drug testing as a safety precaution). If even 1% have a serious allergic reaction, this would
throw the benefit/risk balance out.
The potential harm of getting his roll out badly wrong could be catastrophic for public
health policy for decades to come. I've a very bad feeling that there have been too many
incentives built in to cut corners and fudge data. Who wants to be the mid level scientist in
one of those companies with an awkward question to raise during a weekly meeting? We may well
be throwing a dice and hoping for the best, rather than focusing on getting the right
answer.
Is it O/Z, or the Pfizer one? NHS yesterday issued a guideline to stop vaccinating anyone
with "history of allergic reactions", which was for Pfizer vaccine.
If it's just one vaccine, it could be an oversight. If both/all, it could be a real
problem – as you say, a potential catastrophe for decades.
With all due respect, the author and his Twitter friend seem very confused about how to
interpret the efficacy numbers. The quantitative reasoning is fundamentally erroneous.
> The other way to look at effectiveness is this: Based on the numbers released from
phase 3 trials, the Pfizer vaccine is 95% effective, but 1% of the time. In the same way, the
Moderna vaccine is 94% effective, but 2% of the time.
That "1% of the time" and "2% of the time" reflects the approximate likelihood that a
subject from among the test groups was exposed to a high enough dose of SARS2-CoV to cause
symptoms and a positive PCR test over the course of the trial. It has absolutely zero to do
with the efficacy or lack thereof of the vaccines. Let me repeat that. The overall proportion
of infection among all trial participants has no bearing, in and of itself, on the actual
efficacy.
Note that these percentages are smaller than the overall "rate" of infection (proper term
would be "proportion") in e.g. Maricopa Cty, AZ because the latter proportions are with
regard to the entire pandemic whereas the proportions observed in the vaccine studies reflect
the limited duration of the study. Also keep in mind that a fair amount of data collection
likely happened over the summer before the cases started skyrocketing again.
With that said, the problem, such as it is, with the low percentage of people who got
infected is that it reduces the effective sample size, relative to the number of people who
actually enrolled in the study. However, the sample sizes are not so small as to be
inadequate to demonstrate high efficacy for the purposes of these trials.
Now, there are plenty of caveats here if you really want to pick these thing apart. The
author correctly notes that these studies demonstrate efficacy in terms of getting full-blown
symptomatic COVID-19, not in terms of preventing transmission or avoiding the disease
entirely.
Also, the results only apply to the *sampled population*, which are the people among the
test subjects who became positive. Is that population *representative* of the whole
population? Does it include children? The elderly? People of different social class and/or
living situations? People of different "colors"? People with history of severe allergies? And
are the proportions of each of these (and any others I *can't* think of) similar within the
sampled population as in the whole population?
Second, the result assumes that the study is blinded. Blinded means that subjects don't
know whether they have been given a real vaccine or a placebo. If subjects are not blinded,
they may alter their own behavior accordingly. For example, a test subject who knows (s)he is
vaccined might be more nonchalant about social interactions, which could increase their
frequency of exposure to COVID vs. subjects who knew they got placebo.
While the studies themselves have surely taken precautions to avoid accidentally
un-blinding the subjects (unless an adverse reaction occurs, which is handled separately in
the data), the media has reported repeatedly and extensively, while these trails are
on-going, that side-effects are common. This is very bad because this information gives test
subjects knowledge they can use to judge whether they are actually vaccinated or not. Even if
said subjects are wrong in their assessment, simply believing they have extra knowledge can
change their behavior, and if this phenomenon is not identical between the placebo and
experimental groups, it will throw off the results. An analogy in the legal world is how
jurors are advised not to watch or listen to news reports about the trial they are serving
in. Whether they choose to believe or disbelieve the reported information, it has the
potential to harm their impartiality.
By the way, I'm not trying to defend these vaccines or their manufacturers for their own
sake. The author is correct that these vaccines are "under-tested", and I believe pushing
them onto the market so quickly comes with substantial risks, both directly to public health
and indirectly via potential severe damage to trust and credibility. I adhere to the maxim
that Murphy was an optimist, and Murphy would say that there's a lot that can go wrong in
this scenario.
Thanks. I was concerned that the emphasis trying to undercut the 95% claim was overegged,
but I had separately been bothered by how small the effective sample was. It appears the
Pfizer sample was skewed by excluding people who were allergic and not having read their data
release, it isn't clear how up front they were about that (you'd think the NHS wouldn't have
gone about injecting their staff willy nilly and getting two severe bad reactions the first
day if they had had a clue).
You're welcome, but I'm not sure I explained as well as I could have.
The reports of serious allergic reactions from the Pfizer vaccine on its debut day
surprised me. I imagined lots of things that could go wrong, but two bad reactions on the
first day? Perhaps these incidents will be limited to people with "a history of serious
allergic reactions", but I also know that anaphylaxis is unpredictable and I know many people
anecdotally who only had such a reaction later in life.
As such, this Pfizer vaccine and possibly the Moderna one too if it has the same problem,
will require that patients be monitored for anaphylactic symptoms for some significant
duration of time (an hour?) after the injection. Now consider this potential possibility in
light of the other logistical difficulties surrounding the vaccine distribution and
administration to huge numbers. It probably won't be via drive-thru service.
As I understand it the 2 people in the UK who suffered the reaction were aware of their
allergy issues and carried epi-pens, but the allergic effects just weren't flagged in any of
the resources accompanying the rolled-out vaccine or asked of them when they got the jab.
Which rather speaks of a rushed and botched process to me.
Well, the anaphylaxis, regardless of state of health, indicates that there are antigens
present in the formulation which are unrelated to the protein the vaccine will manufacture in
cells. While it can even be a mucopolysaccharide rather than a protein, the fact remains that
the carrier is not benign and we are not being provided with all the information.
In the Adenovirus carrier vaccines the virus shell is in itself immunogenic, which makes a
booster problematic unless, as with Sputnik 5, different adenoviruses are used for the
primary and booster.
I intend to be vaccinated, but I'm witholding judgement until more data is presented about
the currently highlighted vaccines until I see data on either attenuated virus or adjuvated
purified protein vaccines.
Coming from a time before polio vaccination, what I have not lost sight of is the fact
that vaccination in general has been breathtakingly successful in improving and maintaining
our health at low cost.
AZ say that Phase III of their trials was double blind with 40k subjects. The official
title of the study is A Phase III Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Multicenter
Study in Adults to Determine the Safety, Efficacy, and Immunogenicity of AZD1222, a
Non-replicating ChAdOx1 Vector Vaccine, for the Prevention of COVID-19 whose start date was
August 2020, Primary completion date as March 2021, and Estimated study completion date as
February 2023. A lttle more data can be found at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04516746
(ClinicalTrials.gov of the NIH).
One could be forgiven for thinking that the trials are currently not finished. If so, does
that mean the vaccine was rushed out with all the consequences resulting from that?
Yep, I am wondering of the consequences of rushing out the vaccines and I am convinced the
pressure is 99% political. There are governments too eager to announce mass vaccination and
putting too much confidence in early reports so worried they are with the socioeconomic
impact of the pandemic. And this can show (will show) problematic if mass vaccination is
started before a thorough examination of further trial results and problems like allergic
reaction and others that might surge in the course of the trials.
It is absolutely unwise to throw ourselves into a rush based on early reports that account
for very little exposure time and which are biased by the nature of the vaccine. One cannot
even suppose that the placebo group and the vaccinated group behaved similarly given the high
reactogenicity reported by the vaccines (particularly the RNA vaccines). This reports were
obtained with data gathered about 12 weeks after the trial start. Imagine, given that two
shoots were provided and each shoot produces quite a nasty reaction that can last nearly a
week, nearly 20% of the time the subjects that were vaccinated were suffering symptoms
related with the vaccination and this would alter their behaviour significantly compared with
the placebo subjects.
Given the time course of antibody production after vaccination, with a peak shortly after
the second shoot, the results are biased by the peak and the real protective rate will be
different when specific immunoglobulin levels decline. One can consider this 95% efficacy as
transient efficacy and we will almost certainly see that further data reveals a sharp
reduction. Repeating 95%! 95! all the time will probably result in a sense of deception later
that could be counterproductive.
I don't think data is fudge, that would be really, really stupid, but it is being badly
misinterpreted and can conduct to cutting corners to mass deployment with unintended
consequences.
Yes, but as the post does explain, that 40K participants translates into a very small
number that contracted the disease (and in the injection group, were assumed to have gotten
it but beat it back). So the effective sample was way way smaller.
Exactly. The number of infections are so small that while one may estimate efficacy, the
power of the estimate (beta error; calling something true when it is in fact, false) is high.
The best I could really see statistically given the data is the ability to reject the null
hypothesis in a F-test (no difference between the groups) with reasonable confidence (1
– alpha; the chance of rejecting something as false when it is in fact true).
As with any sample from a larger population, it is important to understand the uncertainty
of the estimate, which at least Oxford/AZ is providing.
They published the CI, and if I recall correctly it was 95% of something like 92%-98.5%
effective. The sample size was just big enough to calculate it, but just so. But what's more
important, in my opinion, is that the method they used to calculate the effectiveness of the
vaccine are the same they use for every other vaccine. I.e.: they're not doing exception for
this one, which is important. We know it's a Phase III study with the limitations of all
Phase III studies.
Ah, thanks. I was puzzled by the argument, because it seemed a bit like saying that
routinely carrying umbrellas did not provide 95% protection against rain because it only
rained some of the time. More relevantly, though, consider vaccinations against tropical
diseases. I've had many and need to check on them before I go to certain countries. They are
generally considered highly effective – it's assumed, 100% or nearly so in some cases.
But if, say, 10000 vaccinated people visit a country in the course of a year, but only 500
come into contact with a contagious source (which would not be surprising) and none get ill,
then the efficacy of the vaccine would presumably only be 0.05% according to the logic of the
article. So what, as a layman, am I missing, (apart from the issue of sample size)?
> Ah, thanks. I was puzzled by the argument, because it seemed a bit like saying that
routinely carrying umbrellas did not provide 95% protection against rain because it only
rained some of the time.
isn't this precisely why the burden of interpreting the efficacy claims shouldn't be
offloaded to the general public? If the numbers require a level of maths proficiency not many
can lay claim to to interpret then therein lie opportunities for misrepresentation via
numerical sleight of hand, which if history is anything to go by, will be exploited to
hoodwink an unsuspecting public, especially with a pot of gold filled to the brim with
billions of dollars lying in wait. Most laymen don't have the maths chops to pick apart the
claims and will most likely throw their hands in the air and walk away with "it's 95%
effective" as the takeaway, caveats of data interpretation be damned. The efficacy should be
communicated to the public in as simple and absolute terms as possible, in a language that is
a sharp departure from that usually employed in the fine print of legal documents to make
things unintelligible while embedding opportunities for plausible deniability should things
go belly up.
I think what was said here is important. We provide people very little education and most
others end up specialists. Yet at the same time everyone knows everything and needs to know
everything because everyone is trying to screw you over. And worse yet, most people do not
know that they are stupid or can speak about a topic knowing they are probably wrong.
It's all so damn stressful I will just take my chances without the vaccine and be as
careful as I can not to infect others. I know a lot about human biology, but not enough about
vaccines and the companies and the people who own them. I do not trust the government because
it is controlled by corporations and not the people.
A nice visual would answer this question but I can't find one with DuckDuckGo.
There are two separate groups of people (each 15,000 in the Moderna case), placebo and
vaccine. We'll measure the (small) subset of each group that gets infected and compare the
numbers.
If 100 in the placebo group get infected and 100 in the vaccine group get infected, that
vaccine was 0% effective. No apparent benefit from the vaccine, outcomes look identical.
If 100 in the placebo group and 50 in the vaccine group get infected, that vaccine was
about 50% effective. Not great. Maybe the severity of disease was less in the vaccine group,
but that's a secondary goal and not what we're measuring primarily.
100 in the placebo group and 5 in the vaccine group get infected. That's called 95%
effective.
The size of our trial dictates our level of confidence in these numbers. If our original
groups of people were tiny and/or we have barely any infections in either group, we can't say
much anything with confidence because small numbers of infections in either group can swing
the numbers in either direction.
I was an engineering major so I have no issues with interpreting the data, however it's
laid out. The same can't be said for some members of the general public, hence my assertion
that the claims on efficacy should leave very little room for "depends on how you look at it,
absolute vs relative" interpretations that will serve only to confuse.
Can the pharma
companies stand behind the claim that it's 95% effective without resorting to numerical
semantics or lobbying for liability shields? If so then by all means tell the public that the
vaccines are 95% effective. If they say "well we did say it's 95% but what we meant was "
then we are in the territory of bait and switch.
There's too much at stake to leave even little room for exaggerated claims from profiteers
because the anti-vaxxers will have a field day exploiting any discrepancy between claimed and
actual performance for these vaccines and guess what, with that will go public trust.
I can get behind what you're saying, but how might you suggest this be communicated? It
seems like a failure of the press if they can't convey the essential fact that there were two
groups of people and it looks like there were significantly fewer (but not zero) infections
among the 15,000 that got the vaccine.
People (especially managers) usually want one single metric to compare even if it's
woefully inadequate. Quantifying reductions in infection or maybe severe disease seem like
reasonable single-metric comparisons to me.
The 95% efficacy claim shouldn't depend on the lens you wear to interpret the data, that's
my point. As Stephen the tech critic mentions, people are going to alter their behaviour
based on these claims once vaccinated, so 95% should mean 95% in absolute terms and
contra-indications should also be clearly communicated to at-risk populations. Auditable
transparency should be the name of the game, if we've learnt anything from the 737max debacle
it's that companies, when left to their own devices, place profit ahead of human lives.
I guess "absolute effectiveness" as a metric like the author defines it is might be a
reasonable for people assessing their individual risk or as a public health metric but it's a
moving target and totally specific to a certain population over a certain span of time, so
it's not especially useful for comparing vaccines. I don't think explaining it sounds any
easier than the other numbers.
Why should Vietnam show a terrible "absolute effectiveness" compared to France if the goal
is to analyze the same vaccine? As the number of people exposed to the virus approaches the
entirety of the population (if half were vaccinated and all members are susceptible to
infection) the number would approach the vaccine efficacy as the companies define it.
Our back-and-forth is proving my point, you and I are somewhat equipped with the
intellectual/statistical/mathematical wherewithal to do an analytical deep dive and look at
the data from different angles, some (most?) people aren't. It's this knowledgeable that the
general population lack the mathematical grasp to make sense of marketing claims, especially
those presented as numbers, that companies exploit to mislead the public. That's why I
contend that the claims should be presented as simply as possible, stripped of opportunities
for profiteers to obsfuscate anything. Freebird has a suggestion below, which I'm 100% on
board with
Exactly. I would even ditch the '95% effective' language. They need to say 'if 10,000
people were exposed to the virus, ordinarily about n1 would get infected. With this vaccine,
the number infected was n2. This is language people can grasp.
Except that even the above language can still be interpreted through different "lenses".
Certainly with the relatively sample size, it should be clarified that there's a pretty big
"bubble" of uncertainty around the 'n', just considering the basic statistics.
But suppose that for the 75 years and older population the vaccine only works at 50%
efficacy, so if I'm 81.5 years old and the TV tells me that the vaccine prevents "9500 out of
10000 infections", I might take myself out of isolation when that may be otherwise
ill-advised. Likewise, if I'm an allergy sufferer, I might want to know if said suffers have
a 1 in 100 chance of a severe allergic reaction vs. say 1 in 10000 for the general populace.
So how do we communicate all these nuances in a way that makes them understandable to the
wider public? I don't really see an easy way.
In a sense, this is what doctors and regulatory authorities are supposed to do for people,
but much of that is broken right now. Western societies have utterly failed to contain the
virus when it doing so would have been much easier, and they refuse to take the steps
required to contain it now. They have forced themselves into a situation with no
alternatives. They are grasping for a "Hollywood solution" in the form of a high-tech vaccine
"developed in a single weekend".
Where n/10000 is so small, if I wanted to be a Covid-denier I would point to that tiny
number and argue that not getting vaccinated is already 100%-1.23% = 98.77% effective.
To get it right, I have to think about the period of the trial. In X week trial period, my
chance of infection might be 1.23%.
At 4X weeks it approaches 5%.
16X weeks (caeteris paribus) we're talking about serious risk.
But 16X might be a year, and we need test results sooner than that.
I hate that fallacy, the binary of 0.X% COVID death vs 99.Y% full recovery. It ignores
Long COVID risk, potentially affecting 20% of symptomatic patients per a UK study. It ignores
the pain, medical cost (especially in no-Medicare4All Murica), & lost-wages opportunity
cost of a non-death hospitalized case.
It is shameful that Long COVID is barely discussed by public health experts, politicians,
or CorpMedia.
if 10,000 people were exposed to the virus, ordinarily about n would get infected
I don't think anyone can possibly put a number on this. It seems like the answer is likely
to be 10,000 unless some people have some innate immunity for reasons we don't understand.
Exposure isn't really binary, someone singing in a phone booth choir with a sick person is
much more likely to get infected than if they were just passing by a sick person in the
grocery store.
It's a very different statement than what the post author tries to capture with "absolute
accuracy" which scales from zero (no cases) to the vaccine efficacy for a whole
population.
Surely the only way to achieve "absolute accuracy" would be to ensure that both groups are
a) identical in age ranges from 0 – 100, sex and biology/medical history, b) subject
100% of both groups to identical exposure to the virus, and c) isolate both groups from each
other and the general population for a fortnight to prevent additional exposure from outside.
In the absence of the above there is too much scope for a) deliberate and nefarious
manipulation, and b) uncontrollable input influencing the numbers. IMHO.
I was born three years before doctors began giving a new drug on the market declared safe
in pregnancy to mothers for morning sickness. It was called Thalidomide.
Exactly! We can never know what 'n' is unless we purposely expose a population to Covid
and then measure how many of them come down with the disease – and to me, that would be
a highly unethical test to employ. So that 'n' as described is meaningless at best.
All we can know is how many people given the placebo come down with the disease v. how
many of the group that get the vaccine come down with the disease and go from there. We know
that not all of the people in either group will be exposed since most of them probably are
taking precaution they can to avoid the disease like most of us – which means that the
numbers of people who do get Covid will be small – and that is where 'statistically
significant' comes into play. If there is any criticism it would be there – did they
test enough people and long enough to get statistically significant numbers?
If you want 'absolute accuracy', then you have to be willing to throw ethics out the
window and purposely give people Covid. Then you can study the effects and get 'real numbers'
if that is what is necessary to convince the critics.
But they don't know how many were infected. This is a leap of logic in your example. They
had a number of infections identified in each group and INFERRED an infection rate, as in
assumed that the rate of contracting the disease was the same in the injected group as in the
control.
There's more cause for pause given that a top HIV expert pointed out that the bar for
designating an infection is too low:
The second surprise from these protocols is how mild the requirements for contracted
Covid-19 symptoms are. A careful reading reveals that the minimum qualification for a case
of Covid-19 is a positive PCR test and one or two mild symptoms. These include headache,
fever, cough, or mild nausea. This is far from adequate. These vaccine trials are testing
to prevent common cold symptoms.
Where is the leap in my logic? A lower threshold for diagnosing disease (risking more
false or dubious positives) is bad for the pharma companies.
False positives in the vaccine group are disproportionally worse for efficacy when the
manufacturers want to be able to claim an order of magnitude fewer infections for that
group.
Ah, thanks. I was puzzled by the argument, because it seemed a bit like saying that
routinely carrying umbrellas did not provide 95% protection against rain because it only
rained some of the time.
I'm glad it wasn't only me, although I was thinking along the lines that parachutes are
highly effective in only the 1–2% of the population that goes skydiving. (But, to
analogize to COVID-19 somewhat, you'd end up in a plane about to be pushed out without
expecting it or wanting to.) It struck me as a way not to interpret the
statistics.
But if, say, 10000 vaccinated people visit a country in the course of a year, but only
500 come into contact with a contagious source (which would not be surprising) and none get
ill, then the efficacy of the vaccine would presumably only be 0.05% according to the logic
of the article.
Actually, it would about 0% plus whatever smoothing coefficient you choose to apply for
your prior (Jeffreys would give 0.5 / 500.5 = ~0.1%). The number of vaccinated people here is
has an indirect impact, via Bayesian chaining – it will give you a confidence interval
for the number of exposed people (via a binomial with the maximum at about 500/10000 = 5%),
which is then propagated into the confidence interval of the number of infected ones.
Apparently I can't form a sentence this early in the morning.
My concern is that the vaccine creates a class of people who are asymptomatic carriers
that 1) continue to spread the disease and 2) may still have damage from the disease, because
we have seen that asymptomatic carriers can still get lung and heart damage .
How would you know someone is an asymptomatic carrier unless you tested them?
Is that population *representative* of the whole population? Does it include children?
The elderly? People of different social class and/or living situations? People of different
"colors"? People with history of severe allergies? And are the proportions of each of these
(and any others I *can't* think of) similar within the sampled population as in the whole
population?
Probably. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. Unlikely. Close. Also, no pregnant people. But the vaccine
has not been approved for children nor pregnant people.
Second, the result assumes that the study is blinded.
It was randomized and double-blinded.
the media has reported repeatedly and extensively, while these trails are on-going, that
side-effects are common
The common side effect was redness, swelling, and pain in the injection area. Mild side
effects in less than 10% (otherwise, it would have not been approved by the NHS). I don't
think that's enough to "unblind" participants, at least in significant numbers.
The author is correct that these vaccines are "under-tested"
Do we know if they've weakened the criteria in the approval process? Because I might be
wrong/misinformed, but from what I've read, any other vaccine at any other time would get a
Phase IV approval with the data provided.
I do agree with the part that we shouldn't lift all the restrictions just because we have
the vaccine. Only when and if infection rates drop down to anecdotal, we can slowly and
carefully begin to get back to normal (whatever that may be).
You are understating the side effects. Many people feel like crap for a day:
High fever, body aches, headaches and exhaustion are some of the symptoms participants
in Moderna and Pfizer's coronavirus vaccine trials say they felt after receiving the
shots.
While the symptoms were uncomfortable, and at times intense, they often went away after
a day, sometimes less.
Is feeling crap for a day a mild symptoms ? i don't know either way in terms or what
is considered mild, but it doesn't sound too severe.
The article appears to over egg the efficacy concerns. Did they want people 30, 000 to be
deliberately infected to test the exact number. I think a large number of human challenge
trials are ongoing. I think its reasonable to except the efficacy to be over 80% but the
exact number is to be determined with further studies.
If you can't take a day off from work, and many can't, it's not trivial. And Pfizer
appears to have underplayed the fever issue. Some experts took note of the fact that everyone
who took the Pfizer vaccine in the trials was encouraged to take acetaminophen afterwards.
That's not normal. IM Doc wrote this in today's Links:
Thank you for the link regarding the nurse who had the reaction to the vaccine.
A few words of clarification for your readers from a physician of 30 years.
A temperature of 104.9 in an adult with a functional immune system (we are not talking
about babies and kids – they are different) is extraordinary after a vaccination.
104.9 means that the immune system has been activated enough to take it up a few notches to
DEF CON 1. This is very unusual in infectious disease – some parasites and ameba do
this routinely – and things like sepsis syndrome can – but for the most part,
getting a temperature up this high is definitely not normal. It is certainly not a good
sign for a vaccine. A vaccine should not be stimulating the immune system to this degree
– EVER. Idiosyncratic reactions in a very rare patient is one thing – if this
is happening more often – this is not a good sign for that vaccine.
The nurse in the article is absolutely correct – a temperature of 104.9 after a
vaccine administration is a grade 4 reportable event.
This is medically important for two reasons. 1) That level of fever if sustained can
damage permanently multiple organs. 2) Vaccines should simply not be activating the immune
system to that degree – it is completely inappropriate. It is very normal for people
to have a brief temp of 99 or 100 after a vaccine – this is a completely different
level.
From what I can tell in the Pfizer documents – "fever" is not uncommon as a side
effect to their vaccine. I cannot determine in any location what their parameters are for
"fever". As stated above – it is accepted that multiple vaccines will give a patient
a slight fever as a side effect maybe up to a day. But not 104.5. How many of these
patients classified as "fever" in their information and glossies were actually 103? 104?
There is no transparency – and that is the problem.
And if you read the comments above from those who are statistically well versed, the issue
is that the effective sample is so small that there is a high degree of statistical
uncertainty around the efficacy numbers. And that's before getting to the fact that messenger
RNA technology (the one used in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines) have never before been used
(except in a Zika trial of ~100, too small to be reliable) and the long term effects are
unknown.
There are plenty of MDs who never prescribe a new med that has been out less than a year
to patients. I won't take the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine. I'll wait for a conventional vaccine
(there are plenty in trials, so several are likely to win approval).
But as I understand it, the point is precisely that the sample is unrepresentative. What
the trials did is ethical equivalent of randomly choosing 185 people, vaccinating them, then
infecting then with the virus and then observing that only 11 got sick.
I really appreciate the explanation. There is another element that has bothered me from
the beginning of the phase 2/3 trial: that any and all symptoms are self reported. I'm in the
Pfizer trial and received the doses in August and I asked repeatadly what level of
pain/discomfort/deviation from the norm would warrant reporting and was told ANY change. But
I am curious how many asked that and actually did it. Meaning, my guess is that the level of
infections in the placebo group is actually higher when combined with the truly asymptomatic.
But the same may be true in the vaccine group as well. They are trying to root out the
asymptomatic spread with challenge trials, if they get approved.
You are right about his weird choice of language but his point is accurate
in ANY medical intervention one wants to know BOTH Relative efficacy and Absolute.
This vaccine reduced the RELATIVE rate of infections dramatically.. But since the overall
incidence of infections was low, the ABSOLUTe reduction was very small. This is also true of say STATINs in low risk patients.
The Vaccine Drumbeat in my jurisdiction is increasing and I'm sure will become deafening.
Talk show radio hosts actually giving medical advice. No recommendations to consult with a
doctor regarding your personal health circumstances and risks or those of your loved
ones.
This is all orchestrated by Public Health officials who apparently have never heard of
personal health care. We are all just one big Herd. To me this is a desecration of the doctor
patient relationship by so-called health professionals. All of which is extremely dangerous
and bad medical advice.
They're trying to prevent people who *cannot* take the vaccine for whatever reason from
dying, by encouraging people who are merely worried but have no actual reason not to take the
vaccine other than paranoia and ungrounded conspiracy-mongering to take the bloody thing.
This seems like, y'know, their job, and entirely praiseworthy.
The disease *does* see us as one big herd, or rather as a pile of individual infectable
cells. It seems right to deal with the response to it on the same level.
Re: companies mandating staff to be vaccinated to market their establishments as "safe".
The tone and substance of the post is clearly meant to be a "proceed with caution" advisory
on taking the vaccine, despite the author being at pains to emphasize that it's not an
"encouragement to reject vaccines".
Some quarters of the labour market are clearly going to
render this moot for the serfs who'll be required to either sign up to be guinea pigs or lose
their jobs, wow. Swallow the tail risk of unknown medium to long-term health effects of these
rapidly developed vaccines for the short term gain of a (most likely crap) salary? So agency
over one's health is now signed over to employers as a means to eke out a meagre existence,
double wow.
Don't forget they are using flawed PCR tests and except for Moderna in the US all other
countries and companies where studies have been conducted are using another vaccine instead
of a true saline or inert placebo.
Not to mention most of these Pharmaceutical Companies have been sued for tens of billions of
dollars for harmful drugs , buried information, fraud ect. We're supposed to trust them with
safety studies for medical products they have indemnity for. Thank you for pointing out how
deceptive these numbers can be for the average person.
My understanding (and my understanding of all this is not perfect!) is that PCR tests are
flawed (a) because they iterate an amplification process until they find something, and that
something could be the remnants of another CV caused by a cold you had 3 months previously
and (b) at least in the UK, the testing labs are not necessarily as well-versed in the hygiene
procedures you need to avoid cross-contamination. So there is a high risk of false
positives.
Moreover, if I am reading the background to the clinical trials correctly, they count as
"success" situations where someone who has one positive PCR test plus some fairly common cold
symptoms does not then go on to develop full-blown CV19 symptoms. The problem is, given the PCR is acknowledged to generate a lot of false positives, then the success rate will be
overstated, because the denominator in the success rate calculations will be swollen with
subjects who didn't actually have the CV19 virus to start with
(I can't quite believe that the test can be that dumb, so perhaps I am totally wrong about
that? But I fear I am not.)
The Cycle Threshold of a sample (for PCR tests that provide it) gives some indication of
the quantity of virus in the sample. I think that for only viral fragments a very high CT
value (low amount of virus) will be an indicator that repeat testing may be necessary. I
haven't read the actual protocols to learn how they handle this.
The problem is, given the PCR is acknowledged to generate a lot of false positives, then
the success rate will be overstated
I don't follow your thinking here, if false positives are equally distributed across the
placebo and vaccine groups then it will make the vaccine look less effective.
Let's say 100 people really get infected in the placebo group and 10 in the vaccine group
(90% efficacy). If you add an equal number of false positives to both groups, it can only
push efficacy number down. If we add 10 to each group, efficacy is down to ~80%. If we add 20
to each group, efficacy is down to 75%.
A question that this raises for me is whether sterilising immunity is conferred by the
innate immune response to infection with live virus.
If not, then "herd immunity" would not be achieved by letting the virus "run" through the
population, as has been advocated by some. The commentary I have seen on this generally
assumes that people who have recovered from infection are not only protected from disease
symptoms, but cannot for some length of time become reinfected and asymptomatic spreaders.
Perhaps they can.
This is a very bad prospect for vulnerable populations.
If a vaccinated individual can still transmit COVID, then herd immunity may not be practical.
"Herd immunity is a form of indirect protection from infectious disease ..Immune
individuals are unlikely to contribute to disease transmission, disrupting chains of
infection, which stops or slows the spread of disease. The greater the proportion of immune
individuals in a community, the smaller the probability that non-immune individuals will come
into contact with an infectious individual."
I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around this. What do the 'numbers' look like
for a proven vaccine that's been around for several decades or more (e.g. smallpox, polio,
etc)?
Are these vaccines truly "95% effective": illness prevented and infection eliminated in
95% of everyone vaccinated. Period?
Not everyone is going to be exposed to Covid-19 just like not everyone is going to be
exposed to the flu. So why do you take the flu vaccine? Isn't it because if you are unlucky
and DO get exposed, you have some protection from getting sick?
Not everyone was going to be exposed to small pox or polio, but for those that were
unlucky enough to get exposed, those vaccines protected MOST of them from getting the
diseases, I'm not sure what the 'effectiveness' of those vaccines were, but you don't hear of
small pox or polio pandemics any more. Isn't that what a vaccine is supposed to do?
The reason for getting a Covid-19 vaccine is just the same. You may never be exposed to
Covid-19 so the vaccine will have nothing to protect you from – so, according to this
article, it's effectiveness for you will be zero. Remember only 185 of 15,000 people who were
taking the placebo got exposed. So, if you are unlucky and do get exposed, wouldn't you like
to have some protection from what Covid-19 can do? And what the numbers are saying is that IF
you do get exposed to Covid-19 that you have a 95% chance of being protected and NOT getting
that disease. To me that sounds a whole lot better than nothing!
I call articles like the above "fun with math". They send you down the wrong path when it
comes to what you can rationally expect from vaccines and they provide fodder for the
anti-vaxxers.
That said, I wish we had more time to see what the possible side effects are, but sadly
Covid is killing people at a too rapid pace for us to wait for the perfect vaccine.
I have a growing problem with the claims without any proof of efficacy. One of the vaccine
makers bragged about creating the vaccine "one weekend" Vaccines take years to develop. That
these are miraculously appearing within months by companies with a financial interest in
being first. In a word, bushwa.
So far many claims have been made that have passed no test to justify. Only immunity from
prosecution and personal responsibility are important to the vaccine makers at this point.
The populous waits on bated breath for every word they spew.
Dr. Chris Martenson has a few things to say about it from his perspective as an expert in
pathology. We, the people, desparately need rational voices that know statistics to begin
with. Numbers are always mistaken for facts when presented by those alleged to be in
authority. It doesn't mean they understand them, or are working hard to be certain that the
statistics are accurate, not just supportive of their claims.
I would make this silly prediction based on what I know now;
Prophylaxis with Ivermectin and vitamin supplements has already shown much higher efficacy in
preventing infection, transmission, length of symptoms and outcome. But it doesn't make huge
profits. There are no horrible side effects.
When was the last time we were asked to accept a drug that was supported by the pharma
companies? Statins? The benefits only seem to appear if one is hospitalized in critical care.
The side effects may have injured more than the drug helped. But this sacred cow too is
making companies lots of money.
Stop the viral functions vs. alter the body chemistry. When did our science think this was
acceptable to alter our functioning immune systems and then say it was AOK? Was it just the
lucre? We can't imagine that our science has become snake oil from where it began.
I am not an expert or have medical training. I do read a lot. Re "Vaccines take years to
develop", you are correct. From my reading, the basic science for mRNA started in 1983. What
happened afterwards has irony. The principle scientist/investigator repeatedly had difficulty
in getting grant money to do her study because granting agencies did not think that the mRNA
would be accepted by the human body. It was thought that the auto immune system would
automatically reject it. The principle scientist/investigator failed to get tenure at her
university because she was not able to bring much grant money to the university. Nonetheless,
she persevered and finally together with a collaborator, they found a way of introducing mRNA
without alerting the immune system. Their work was published in 2005. Their work was largely
unnoticed except for two people who saw the medical opportunity provided by mRNA. Further
study was done and eventually medical science and entrepreneurship merged together which led
to the formation of BioNtech (based on the words, "biopharmaceuticals", "New",
"Technologies") and Moderna (based on the words "Modified", "RNA"). Neither BioNtech nor
Moderna had a vaccine a year ago. Instead, they had the technology. When the genetic code for
the virus was released to the world by Chinese scientists, BioNtech and Moderna could then
program their mRNA technology for the Sars-Cov-2 virus. With their technology, it could be
said that they already had a head start in making the vaccine. The principle scientist and
her collaborator work separately. One is now employed with Moderna and the other is with
BioNtech.
None of the "Western" developers would of course now give any credit to their Chinese
helpers!!! We only hear of "China steals our intellectual property."
Remember the days when Jonas Salk refused to patent and make money from his polio
vaccine?
They had a head start in making this vaccine *and possibly all future ones too*. This is a
game-changer: it's quite possible that future diseases may routinely have a vaccine entering
clinical trials *days* after its genome is known, rather than having to work on it for months
to decades first.
(Now all we have to do is convince people that it's not a dark plot and that actually
these things do save lives.)
I too am getting dizzy with all these statistics and caveats. I have had a flu jab every
year for the last 12. I have had bugs of one kind or another over the years but I only had
some kind of flu once -- this February as it happens. There is no way that anybody can
estimate how many flu bugs I was exposed to and what their impact would be on a healthy man
in his 60s in the last decade. Anyway, I don't worry about the statistics but make a simple
risk assessment. Is the risk of a flu vaccine less than the risk of getting flu? The answer
has to be yes.
With covid19 vaccinations I don't much care whether it's efficacy can be measured as 95%
or 70% or 60%. Anything is better than nothing. Anyway, it's like wearing masks. Its efficacy
depends upon large numbers of people being vaccinated. I help protect you as well as myself
and you protect me as well as yourself. I worry that large numbers of people will decide not
to have any vaccine, ensuring that covid19 will continue to kill unprotected people.
Only one thing concerns me at present. Safety. Sadly, enough doubts have been raised about
the two new experimental vaccines to make me think the risk is not worth it. I will wait for
the Oxford vaccine to become available I think -- while trying to keep a sensible open-minded
watching brief.
There is no reason that you should go right out and get poked with these barely-tested,
and IMHO experimental vaccines.
Salk and Sabin were hailed as heroes – which they were – for giving humanity
polio vaccines. What has gone down the memory hole though, is how Pharma family blogged up
the production of the vaccines. You should really check these links to see how bad this
was/is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SV40 (90% of US
children and 60% of adults inoculated with polio vaccine contaminated with a monkey virus
that turns out be carcinogenic – it's also passed down in-utero, so we all have
increased likelihood of certain cancers, thanks pharma)
Public health is standing between greedy sociopaths and a big pile of cash, and it'll
probably get run over. I fail to see why we should expect a sound vaccine in this
environment.
I haven't seen my parents in a year. My parents haven't seen anyone in a year.
There's a bloody good reason to go out and get vaccinated for us!
There's a reason for everyone else too: some old and vulnerable people won't be able to
get vaccinated, which means they'll be stuck in isolation until enough people have
been vaccinated that they don't need to worry about dying of this thing every time they go
out in public or meet anyone ever.
Whether or not the vaccine is capable of interrupting transmission absolutely should have
been front and centre in these studies especially when it's presented to people with an
extremely low chance of being harmed by the virus (ie. the fit & young who might be the
ones likely to be affected by any fertility issues).
It could be assumed that less severe symptoms means less chance for spread which may be
the case, but then I can't see how logically that fits with the mainstream view that of the
virus as something that is transmitted asymptomatically so readily anyway? (Although I think
this asymptomatic spread idea is probably wildly overblown).
Asymptomatic and presymptomatic are not the same. Studies show that most of the
asymptomatic people who transmit the disease end up developing symptoms (I've seen systematic
reviews that show anything between 83% to 94%). I.e.: asymptomatic transmission is possible,
but mostly by presymptomatic people.
As a practical matter, I expect that these vaccines will reduce the incidence and severity
of both disease and transmission in the treated populations, and do so with little risk to
the treated indivduals, so that there is very likely to be a net benefit to a treated
individual, to the population of treated individuals, and [to a lesser exent] to the
non-treated individuals in the general population.
I am confident that more information will emerge to support and refine the above
hypotheses. It will only be a matter of degree. Speaking as a 69 year-old physician, I would
take any of the three leading vaccines at the first opportunity. I expect that when we look
back in a few years we will see that the immunized population did better than the age-sex-etc
matched non-immunized population. To some extent, my wife and I are relying on unbalanced
articles like this to at least temporarily deter some people from having the vaccine, so that
we can get to the front of the line more quickly.
Out of curiosity, what informs your confidence in these vaccines apart from the press
releases and efficacy claims from the pharma companies developing them? Is it something we
the general public aren't privy to that physicians have given the heads up on? I'm in now way
being flippant, it's just that a good number of doctors I know personally wouldn't go near
any of these vaccines, at least not until there's enough data backing up their efficacy in
the real world.
it's just that a good number of doctors I know personally wouldn't go near any of these
vaccines, at least not until there's enough data backing up their efficacy in the real
world.
That's a pretty contradictory position. You don't get real world data unless real world
people take the vaccine. Very telling of those -probably wealthy- doctors to let others
assume that risk. Let's not forget that tens of thousands of people already took the vaccine
with significantly fewer assurances. I guess it's alright to go to poor and desperate people
first? That's what I call solidarity and prosocial behavior.
No, the doctors aren't convinced by the studies and the claims emerging from that, at
least not yet. If signing up to be a guinea pig for something you're not entirely convinced
of is your idea of solidarity and pro-social behaviour then by all means, go right ahead,
they're not stopping you. By the way, more data can be the result of more extensive clinical
trials with better designed studies that aren't "designed to succeed", and is not limited to
being obtained from poor people being lined up to volunteer as guinea pigs, as you imply.
In any event all of this "being at the head of the queue" talk is academic for us in
Africa, the big wealthy nations have resolved to hoard the supplies of whatever credible
vaccine becomes available. Maybe you could lobby them to share in the name of solidarity.
If signing up to be a guinea pig for something you're not entirely convinced of is your
idea of solidarity and pro-social behaviour then by all means, go right ahead, they're not
stopping you
If you put it like that, and people interpret it like that, no clinical trials ever would
happen, except in Nazi Germany, where they forced people to submit to medical experiments
(see, we can all be overly dramatic). If the vaccine is not good enough for you, it shouldn't
be good enough for anybody, and we never get a vaccine for anything, ever.
Therefore, yes, I will gladly accept the vaccine once it's my turn, because at this point
is civic duty and safety is as guaranteed as any other Phase IV drug. Again, the two
alternatives are being a hypocrite or not having a vaccine.
Maybe you could lobby them to share in the name of solidarity
Even better, I advocate to allow the vaccine to be produced in developing countries
freely, without IP concerns. I doubt the wealthy countries will accept the proposal, but I
also hope those countries will ignore international law and manufacture it for local
consumption anyway.
I don't know if it's selfishness on the doctors' part, or just so much familiarity with
the avarice of the pharmaceutical industry that they don't trust the data that has been
molded into a neat report, likely as not full of hidden flaws or deliberately misleading
conclusions. Unfortunately the truth will not come out til a lot of people have taken the
vaccines, and I can't blame a front line worker for not wanting to be at the front of the
line.
I don't doubt the avarice of Big Pharma. I count on it. But the people who actually
developed the vaccine and actually run the experiments won't see a penny of the billions
Pfizer is going to make with this vaccine. At that point, I would expect at least a couple of
trustworthy sources, with a conscience and without billions to blind it, would blow the
whistle on any data manipulation. Like all conspiracies, the more people are involved, the
shorter they live. Thousands have participated in the Phase III. So far, all the complains
come from people who don't trust Pfizer because Pfizer is not trustworthy, and people who are
concerned for political reasons. And don't get me wrong, you can't trust Pfizer and there are
clear political concerns, but as long as it's just that, keeping an eye open and taking the
vaccine is the right thing to do. Again, because otherwise we probably won't get a vaccine in
decades, if ever.
I have a good friend who is a practicing MD dealing with Covid patients who I talk to
regularly about the vaccines and the epidemic. He has a low opinion of how the trials have
been conducted and thinks that there is a high chance of several surprising issues popping up
(like the adverse reactions mentioned above). He, contrary to you, intends to let the early
vaccine recipient's finish the more comprehensive testing which should have occurred as part
of the stage 3 trials.
Dr. Smith
You are no doubt aware that mRNA "vaccines" are not really vaccines at all in the
conventional sense, but rather might more accurately be termed "genetic immune response
modifiers.' This approach to disease control has been speculated about for some time and
subject to investigation, but has never been administered at scale in a human population.
"Testing" to observe whether recipients immediately fall ill after the first or second shot
is essentially meaningless except to the extent that it may retard or stop entirely the use
of the drug. There are enough theoretical pitfalls with this radical methodology that no one
can predict their long term impact. Perhaps after three years, but certainly not after 90
days.
Conventional vaccines like those for Polio and Smallpox utilize modified or disabled forms
of the disease pathogens to stimulate antibodies to provide resistance when they encounter
the disease "in the wild." We have decades of experience and millions of cases using this
type of vaccine which lends a high level of confidence that a new conventional vaccine can be
used safely on a new pathogen.
MD's like yourself have years of experience and training in identifying and treating
disease -- certainly far beyond that of the the average layman. But you are also the product
of a culture that determines how you think about your practice. For example, "Only medicines
that have gone through the approval and patent process are suitable for human use." Or, "All
medicines obtained from foreign countries are suspect or dangerous." Or: "Authorities like
the AMA, NIH or WHO are the only reliable sources of information" Or: "Deviating from
approved practice can/will result in lawsuits and being barred from practicing medicine."
By all means dash to the head of the Pfizer/Moderna Corvid vaccine line. We need more
willing volunteers like yourself so authorities like Bill Gates won't have to test new
vaccines on poor children in Africa and India to determine whether the side effects include
sterility or the re-emergence of Polio.
Considering the questions that people have been asking on this website on how the mRNA
vaccine works, I doubt that most people understand that this is not like the other vaccines
that people have taken, and uses a completely different mechanism for eliciting an immune
response than traditional vaccines.
It uses exactly the same mechanism: presentation of an antigen on cell surfaces. It even
uses the same antigen as some of the more conventional SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. The
antigen is even produced in the same place: the inside of the recipients' cells. The only
unusual thing is where the RNA comes from that is used to do this: is it on its own, or does
it come packaged with other viral RNA implementing a complete working virus not common in
human populations which has been modified to produce this antigen?
(I don't know why anyone would consider it safer to take a traditional vaccine which has
an actual working virus in it, even if said virus only causes a mild cold, than it would be
to take these new ones which have no viral replication machinery whatsoever . The
Moderna/biontech stuff is new, but not because it was previously believed unsafe, merely
because eukaryotes are vicious to naked RNA outside their cells and destroy it on sight with
some of the most efficient enzymes known because, well, it's a sign of viral infection. So
RNA-based vaccines never got close to getting inside enough cells to be useful, so you needed
a whole viral capsid to do the job, like the more traditional Astra-Zeneca vaccine.
That's the problem that's been solved.)
There will be some who make the specious argument that only ~2% of the subjects in the
study got symptomatic Covid, so "big deal". That sort of argument would carry more weight if
it had been expressed in terms of "cases per unit time". In this case, it looks as though the
median time was about 2 months.
I expect that as time goes on we would find that a very large proportion of the control
group [maybe 10%] would develop clinical symptoms, and a much larger proportion would develop
asymptomatic disease [which carries a poorly defined risk of serious but silent damage to the
heart, brain, etc].
As good studies emerge, like BioNTech, we can read the original peer reviewed literature
and the commentaries on it, and draw our own conclusions:
SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination -- An Ounce (Actually, Much Less) of Prevention https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2034717?query=RP
To some extent, my wife and I are relying on unbalanced articles like this to at least
temporarily deter some people from having the vaccine, so that we can get to the front of the
line more quickly.
Fine by me. The more human guinea-pigs that stand between me and this stuff – and
remain standing – the more likely I'll be to take it. Eventually. Tho' if your
confidence is justified and you help take Runder1 perhaps I won't even have to risk it.
While there are some clear misunderstandings about these numbers from both sides, several
pointed out that we have zero knowledge about other aspects of the vaccine, such as:
1) Can people still transmit the virus after "successful" immunization from the vaccine?
2) How long will the immunity from vaccination last?
3) How long before a vaccine-resistant mutation emerges?
We should be focused on better testing (both developing and administering), pervasive
contact tracing, and innovative technologies such as air filtering with vertical flow, better
masks, better public support for masks, better strategies for isolating sick individuals in
crowded situations, better treatments. What terrifies me about the vaccine craze is that it
is distracting everyone from doing the right things not just to stem the death toll from this
pandemic, but also from using this as a learning experience to be better prepared for the
next one.
There is the expression "closing the barn doors after the cows have gone." A more complete
analogy in this case would be "a fire started in the barn, luckily the cows were able to run
out the open door. We went into the barn and closed the door from the inside without a fire
extinguisher."
The second surprise from these protocols is how mild the requirements for contracted
Covid-19 symptoms are. A careful reading reveals that the minimum qualification for a case
of Covid-19 is a positive PCR test and one or two mild symptoms. These include headache,
fever, cough, or mild nausea. This is far from adequate. These vaccine trials are testing
to prevent common cold symptoms.
Why is that damning? The lower their threshold for a positive, the more likely they are to
have false positives. False positives in the vaccine group make the efficacy values
plunge.
It is totally counterproductive if the intention is to game the results. Then the smart
play would be to only count serious disease.
By tomorrow, according to Worldmeters, 5% of the population in the US will have tested
positive for c-19-studies have put the actual penetration of those infected at anywhere from
2X to 10X the counted numbers (16 million, or so). Are persons that have been tested
positive, or carry antibodies, exempt from any mass vaccination program? It seems to me the
enormous rush to get vaccines to market is the fear that, lockdowns notwithstanding, we are
heading towards that time when a majority of the US population will have already become
infected. I can envision the panic in big phamas boardrooms as the see that every week
another million potential customers are removed from their expected profit sheets.
It's worse than that. Not long ago some were saying how the number of American dead in
this pandemic was approaching the number killed in Vietnam. Now the daily total exceeds that
lost on 9/11 and is accelerating.
Not to worry. Simply denying the ability to fly, work, drive a car, or go to the
supermarket to everyone without a digital vaccine certification card will ensure a high level
of compliance with the Universal Mandate and continued joy in the boardrooms of Pfizer. The
goal is to monetize Pharma Power, not to control Corid19. So bringing all those who have
self-vaccinated by contacting a mild case of the disease or have a strong T-cell immunity
response into the Fold is just good business.
Speaking of business opportunities, printing black market certification cards @ $100 each
promises to put BitCoin to shame.
About that 5% of the US population that have tested positive:
At the conventional PCR Cr of 40 about 5% will have a viral loading such that they are
actively spreading infection to others. The other 95% could be more accurately termed as
false positives.
The goal is to monetize Pharma Power, not to control Corid19.
I assume it's probably some degree of both. I mean just cause something might be
true doesn't mean it is true.
At the conventional PCR Cr of 40 about 5% will have a viral loading such that they are
actively spreading infection to others. The other 95% could be more accurately termed as
false positives.
I also question these numbers and/or reasoning. Do you have a link supporting this
statement?
I too have a problem with the way my source arrived at their 97% false positive claim. The
internal logic is indeed correct, but it feels like using statistics in a less than
transparent manner.
Regarding monetizing Pharma Power: The Norwegian institute CEPI – Coalition for
Epidemic Preparedness Innovations was founded in 2017 with the goal (amongst others) of being
in the forefront in the development of vaccines for new infectious diseases and their
distribution at an affordable price (or no price if countries can't afford it) throughout the
world. Funding for CEPI has come from the governments, trusts and foundations. Read all about
it here. https://cepi.net
What happened with CEPI and the development of Covid vaccines? The pharma companies would
not give up their right to determine prices, for "competitive business reasons".
Goggle Translate of an NRK article:
https://www.nrk.no/dokumentar/ble-makteslost-vitne-til-dod-_-selv-om-vaksinen-fantes-1.15060685
-- -- -
The pharmaceutical industry, on the other hand, did not like the rules, according to Richard
Hatchett. He has been the director of CEPI since April 2017, when he left his job as deputy
commander of BARDA. It is the agency of the US Department of Health that buys and develops
vaccines.
In a sensational article, Hatchett explains what happened to CEPI's policy:
CEPI's rules are based on the idealism on which the coalition was founded. However,
several multinational vaccine companies said they did not "reflect the business reality of
vaccine developers," according to the CEPI director. They also disliked the fact that CEPI
should be able to set the price.
-- -
Before Covid-19 was identified last December, CEPI had raised three-fourths of the $1 billion
it determined was necessary to fund the innovative research for expedited development of
vaccines to treat new epidemics. Japan, Germany, Canada, Australia and Norway, as well as the
Wellcome Trust and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, had given $460 million. In the
last two years, CEPI has used that money to provide grants for some leading edge
biotechnologies that could revolutionize vaccine research and production.
But what has played mostly out of public view over that same time was the organization's
failed effort to get large pharmaceutical firms to agree to be partners without insisting on
substantial profits or proprietary rights to research that CEPI helped to finance and produce
(my bolding). That did not surprise many industry observers who knew that since the 1930s,
the National Institutes of Health had spent over $900 billion on grants that drug firms
relied on to patent brand-name medications.
-- -- -- --
The band plays on: Tanz mit Laibach https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glu9wA4HjE0
Several lines of evidence show that immunity after COVID-19 wanes quite rapidly, and that
immunity after immuniztion with several of the vaccines persists quite nicely, both in animal
and human models. The reason for this is that the vaccines are engineered to stimulate strong
defensive responses which include both antibody-mediated immunity and T-cell mediated
immunity. Many of the vaccine candidates include adjuvants, which are materials which
facilitate and enhance the immune response to the antigens in the vaccine.
just a thought to all who venture here now and again,
this post represents the reason i make Naked Capitalism my first click of the day
the content and the comments are priceless
and the combination unique and invaluable
The big unknown is of course the number of people in the test population who were actually
exposed to the infection. If everyone in the test population were exposed and only 11 of the
15000 vaccinated developed symptons then we have 11/15000 or 99.9% effectiveness. However, if
only 5% (1500)were actually exposed to infection during the test period then we have 11/750
or 98.5%, which looks pretty good. Does this sound logical? Ok the other unknown is the
number of people in the vaccinated population whose own immune systems would have defeated
the virus without the vaccine. That's where the ratio helps 1-11/185 or 94% effective. Looks
good to me.
The assumption is that the exposure rate was the same in both groups, therefore the
expected number of infections in both groups should be about the same. The inoculated group
had 5% the number of cases of the placebo group, and that's where the 95% effectiveness rate
comes from. Whether you like how they calculated it or not, the important thing to understand
is that there's nothing special or ad-hoc about this method, this is how they calculate the
effectiveness of all vaccines (and prophylactic treatments in general), and the effectiveness
of a good flu vaccine is around 60%, and it's frequently as low as 40%.
The author also fails to address one other important issue: the trials have so far not
demonstrated that these vaccines prevent real morbiidity mortality.
to do so, the trials would have needed to be MUCH larger.
Still, preventing symptomatic infection looks good. Does that translate into preventing
mortality? We dont yet know. The published data admits this . the differnce in severe cases
HAD Extremely wide confidence intervals.
Stopping transmission would be nice. But instilling sufficient immunity to not become
seriously ill, much less die, is REALLY nice. If we could cut our current 3,000 deaths a day
by even 50%, wouldn't that be great?
Note I am a month into recovery from COVID, caught from my son, who probably caught it
from anti-maskers at the factory where he works. (He's in a high-metal-dust environment, his
clothes are a different color by the end of the day, so for someone to not wear a mask is
political correctness taken way too far.) We were both fortunate – he was back to
12-hours days once his quarantine was done. I still have some head cold symptoms, but it is
that time of year. However, I know multiple people who have been hospitalized, and one person
who died. One 30-something RN whose avocation is boxing (eg, he was in extraordinary physical
condition) ended up critical. And all this was before Thanksgiving, before the current
explosion of cases and consequent deterioration of the care that those critically ill will
receive.
As to the math, it's unfortunate from a statistical sense that right now wasn't the core
of the testing period. The number of cases among the placebo group would be far higher, and
it would be easier to explain to the vast majority of the population who are not trained in
statistical thinking. Even there humility is needed: I have formal training, graduate school
courses in math stats and econometrics, and decades of empirical work employing that
training. Nevertheless my reflexes remain those of a normal human in terms of misperceiving
the impact of long odds. I have to consciously apply my training.
Finally, the above paragraph reflects a mind game. It's not unfortunate in a human sense
that the vaccines are far enough along to grant provisional approval. If only they'd been
available even earlier
Am I being overly cynical, or does it occur to anyone else that making a vaccine that just
prevents symptoms but doesn't prevent infection and transmission will tend to make the virus
endemic, rather than extinguishing it. This will gradually increase the dangers to the
unvaccinated population, creating a class of sick whose 'access' to vaccination has not
actually provided vaccine. Assuming the vaccination will need to be refreshed, it also
creates a large group of hostages repeat customers. -- Nice lungs you got
there, it'd be a shame if somethin' were to happen to 'em
And here we see the inevitable result of poor analysis: the author speculates the vaccine
may not prevent transmission; of course, many readers interpret this as "the vaccine doesn't
stop transmission" and now will spread this speculation as rock hard fact.
I'm starting to think the best health measure we could take would be to dismantle the
internet. Crowdsourced wisdom will be our end.
another option is ending public health as a path to riches, as this is the primary reason
for most of the skepticism, who would you like to blame that on?
Seems to me it's the inevitable result of a broken health care system
By requiring that the vaccine provides durable sterilizing immunity you've set the bar
higher, maybe by orders of magnitude, I don't think the science is there for anyone to know
for this virus.
I think Mike Smitka makes a compelling case for setting a lower threshold in preventing
serious disease is priority number one, and one can say that without being a shill for the
pharma companies. If none of the vaccines provide durable immunity it is of course great for
their collective bottom lines, but if you know of an immunologist who thinks that they're
doing so deliberately I would be very interested to see a link.
Errr this disease is endemic. With approaching a billion likely cases at this
point, extinguishing it is a pipe-dream. It'll be almost as hard to exterminate as it is to
exterminate the flu. That horse has left the barn. It probably left the barn before the end
of last year
Indeed. At least at present, however, there is one big difference with flu: low levels of
mutation (perhaps zero = a single strain) for the surface proteins of SARS-CoV-2, so that the
vaccines currently being approved will continue to be effective. So while we may need a
booster every year or two, depending on how long the immunity from a given vaccine, it will
"work."
In contrast flu vaccines protect against only a few strains (the most common vaccine type
in the US targets 3), but with many, many strains in circulation at any given time (and new
ones arising on a regular basis), those may not be the right strains. Hence new vaccines are
developed 2x a year to target the strains epidemiologists predict will be the most prevalent.
They can for example look at the strains prevalent in the winter in the southern hemisphere,
and use what they see to guide their choices. Ditto what's going on in winter in the north to
guide vaccines for administration in the south. Needless to say, those predictions are not
always accurate, and even if they do target the 3 most prevalent strains, you may by chance
be exposed to one of the strains not included. Adding more strains to the flu vaccine doesn't
work, as the body won't react equally to all of them: put in 6 strains, and your body may
generate weak immunity to 2, very weak to another 2, and none at all to the last 2. (My body
might develop moderate immunity to 1 and none to 5.)
Over time we may see substantive mutations that affect vaccine efficacy. But with the
current vaccines, it would in principle be possible to wipe out the virus that causes COVID,
assuming that a very high proportion of the population gets vaccinated (and potentially
revaccinated), and constant monitoring for new zoonotic outbreaks among humans catching it
from animal populations in which it would remain endemic.
I don't expect that to happen. That's because, thankfully, average mortality rates for
COVID are well under 1%, whereas for smallpox they were 20%-30%. Too many people will be lax
about immunizations, while governments will not enact the draconian policies that would be
needed to offset that – unlike if we saw a reemergence of smallpox.
I am frustrated but hopeful that viable treatments will be approved for use like CytoDyn's
Leronlimab. I personally would choose a proven safe and effective treatment vs any of the
vaccines!
Antiviral treatments or monoclonal antibodies are only useful if you apply them very early
in the course of disease. Most people, by the time they show up in the hospital, can not
benefit from these treatments and can have worse outcomes. I suggest searching for Dr. Daniel
Griffin's material about the "phases of covid" to understand how clinical protocols are
evolving.
"With only about 20,000 people have received this Pfizer's vaccine. Will unexpected
safety issues arise when the number grows to millions and possibly billions of people? Will
side effects emerge with longer follow-up? Implementing a vaccine that requires two doses
is challenging. What happens to the inevitable large number of recipients who miss their
second dose? How long will the vaccine remain effective? Does the vaccine prevent
asymptomatic disease and limit transmission? And what about the groups of people who were
not represented in this trial, such as children, pregnant women, and immunocompromised
patients of various sorts?"
I can 100% answer at least the last question: the vaccine has not been approved for
children nor pregnant woman, and immunocompromised people never get vaccines. They are
protected by herd immunity or not at all. Same for people with allergic reactions to any of
the vaccine components.
As usual, we won't have the answer to most of the other questions until we're further into
Phase IV, which just started.
Several vaccine candidates are expected to induce the formation of humoral antibodies
against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. Syncytin-1 (see Gallaher, B., "Response to nCoV2019
Against Backdrop of Endogenous Retroviruses" -
http://virological.org/t/response-to-ncov2019-against-backdrop-of-endogenous-retroviruses/396
, which is derived from human endogenous retroviruses (HERV) and is responsible for the
development of a placenta in mammals and humans and is therefore an essential prerequisite
for a successful pregnancy, is also found in homologous form in the spike proteins of SARS
viruses.
There is no indication whether antibodies against spike proteins of SARS viruses would
also act like anti-Syncytin-1 antibodies. However, if this were to be the case this would
then also prevent the formation of a placenta which would result in vaccinated women
essentially becoming infertile.
To my knowledge, Pfizer/BioNTech has yet to release any samples of written materials
provided to patients, so it is unclear what, if any, information regarding (potential)
fertility-specific risks caused by antibodies is included.
Cycle threshold is everything with the PCR test. Anything above 35 is rubbish. 97% false
positives. Chris Martenson just presented some compelling information regarding these tests.
A recent paper basically shoots down a paper ( Corman-Drosten paper ) that was rushed to
press (before any real peer review) in January 2020 that declared the PCR test the end all
best way to test for covid. NOT TRUE. It was never meant for this purpose and is now being
grossly abused by TPTB. The paper says:
3. The number of amplification cycles (less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles); In case of
virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious
virus as determined by isolation in cell culture [reviewed in 2]; if someone is tested by PCR
as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most
laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected
is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97% [reviewed in
3]
Most testing sites are using a cycle threshold of 40 or more meaning the results mean
nothing. In fact many labs are using a CT of 47! The paper goes on to say:
3. The number of amplification cycles It should be noted that there is no mention anywhere
in the Corman-Drosten paper of a test being positive or negative, or indeed what defines a
positive or negative result. These types of virological diagnostic tests must be based on a
SOP, including a validated and fixed number of PCR cycles (Ct value) after which a sample is
deemed positive or negative. The maximum reasonably reliable Ct value is 30 cycles. Above a
Ct of 35 cycles, rapidly increasing numbers of false positives must be expected . PCR data
evaluated as positive after a Ct value of 35 cycles are completely unreliable. Review Report
by an International Consortium of Scientists in Life Sciences (ICSLS) - Corman-Drosten et
al., Eurosurveillance 2020 (Updated: 29.11.2020) Citing Jaafar et al. 2020 [3]: "At Ct = 35,
the value we used to report a positive result for PCR, <3% of cultures are positive." In
other words, there was no successful virus isolation of SARS-CoV-2 at those high Ct values.
Further, scientific studies show that only non-infectious (dead) viruses are detected with Ct
values of 35 [22]. Between 30 and 35 there is a grey area, where a positive test cannot be
established with certainty. This area should be excluded. Of course, one could perform 45 PCR
cycles, as recommended in the Corman-Drosten WHO-protocol (Figure 4), but then you also have
to define a reasonable Ct-value (which should not exceed 30). But an analytical result with a
Ct value of 45 is scientifically and diagnostically absolutely meaningless (a reasonable
Ct-value should not exceed 30). All this should be communicated very clearly. It is a
significant mistake that the Corman-Drosten paper does not mention the maximum Ct value at
which a sample can be unambiguously considered as a positive or a negative test-result. This
important cycle threshold limit is also not specified in any follow-up submissions to
date.
Hillary's Fish Taco 6 hours ago remove link
The PCR test will go down in history as the biggest part of this scamdemic. Covid 19 was a
novel virus resulting in a bad flu that killed the elderly and the already ill.
That will be Covid's legacy...the politicians will be shamed for all eternity.
The First World is leaving the "sweet spot" of its capitalist development stage, marked by
a relatively inflated petit-bourgeois middle class, and is reentering a proletarianization
phase. Call it the reproletarianization of the First World.
@ Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 27 2020 1:35 utc | 69
You didn't read the link I provided. I'll recap:
1) Western Big Pharma "forgot" how to develop new vaccines over these last decades because
they're not profitable. That opened the gates for Gamaleya to occupy the sector, therefore
dominating the main technology used today, human adenovirus; (see Dmitriev's "forbidden
op-ed").
Proof of this is J&J's difficulty in developing a simple human adenovirus vaccine (by the
time they finish theirs, we'll already have billions of Sputnik V and Sinovac doses
produced). The reason we still don't have an effective cold vaccine is because we don't have
enough investment, not because it is impossible;
2) Sputnik V and Sinovac (and other Chinese variants) use a known, tested and tried
technology for their vaccines - human adenovirus -, while Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca use
untested and untried technologies (mRNA and chimpanzee adenovirus). It is the difference
between the known and the unknown, except that this time hundreds of millions of human lives
are at the table. We suspect the Western pharmaceuticals are resorting to these exotic
technologies because they want something they can patent and sell at monopolistic prices to
national governments; (see Dmitriev's "forbidden op-ed" and his "questions")
3) mRNA technology is only effective theoretically. In the real world, it potentially has
devastating effects on the human body. It is already known it can potentially cause
infertility. It very likely has carcinogenic properties; (see Dmitriev's "questions")
4) chimpanzee adenovirus technology doesn't make any sense when you already have a viable
human adenovirus option. Besides the fact that it can cause more adverse effects on a human
(because the virus is strange to the human organism), the doctor I linked raised the question
of contamination when extracting the adenovirus from the chimpanzees (contamination rate of
10%, or one in ten). It also cause sever spinal cord inflammation - contrary to the official
version in much more than one patient. It also probably killed a healthy 28-year old subject
in the Brazilian trials (the Brazilian MSM initially "leaked" he was on the placebo group;
later even this version was put into doubt)
5) silver bullet vaccines are very rare (e.g. polio). Most likely scenario, these vaccines
will just shield you from a severe case of COVID-19, thus relieving the pressure over the
national healthcare systems. Deaths of COVID-19 only begin to pile up exponentially after the
limit of the healthcare system is surpassed (Italy). That's the "line of death", after which
COVID-19 really begins to ravage entire populations. In this scenario, it doesn't make any
sense not to go with the tried and tested technology of human adenovirus, over which Gamaleya
has primacy, or, second best, the Chinese vaccines, which will be produced the most because
China has manufacture supremacy. In the Russian and Chinese options, you have the choice
between the best and the most available - a common decision any working class family takes
daily in the free market for the purchase of their goods;
6) AstraZeneca will still have privileges in the British market. Evidence of this is the
British MSM being the first to publish the fake news that it had 90% efficacy, while the
American MSM went with the 70% figure. Make no mistakes: the AstraZeneca will be the only
option in the NHS for the British people, with or without transverse myelitis;
7) The "half dose" mistake simply doesn't happen in the Big Pharma. It is simply not
believable. The story is clearly a pathetic attempt of the British to create a comparison
with the story of the penicillin discovery (by a British scientist), which also happened by
accident. There wasn't half dose and, even if that really happened (the doctors involved
should be immediately fired), you would be giving credence to the homeopathy thesis, which
states the lower the dose, the stronger the effect. Doesn't make any sense.
AstraZeneca, by the way, is already feeling the heat. It will have to redo its trials
because nobody was born yesterday:
Interesting read from F William Engdahl who takes a deeper look at the Pfizer
vaccine
Suspicious events
However it seems Albert Bourla, the CEO of Pfizer, doesn't share the confidence of his
own claims. On the day his company issued its press release on the proposed vaccine
trials, he sold 62% of his stock in Pfizer, making millions profit in the deal. He made
the sell order in a special option in August so it would not appear as "insider selling",
however he also timed it just after the US elections and the mainstream media
illegitimately declared Joe Biden President-elect.
It seems from appearances that Bourla had a pretty clear conflict of interest in the
timing of his press release on the same day.
It appears the Outlaw US Empire has put all its chips on the table in favor of vaccines
providing the path to "normalcy" :
"US Covid-19 vaccinations may begin as soon as December 11, reach enough people for
return to normalcy in May – program chief."
When was it determined that the two potential vaccines on offer have "efficacy rates of
about 95 percent" since the reports posted here were extremely dubious about them being
effective at all? More:
"An FDA vaccine advisory committee is scheduled to meet on December 10 and may grant
Pfizer's request for emergency use authorization that day, Dr. Moncef Slaoui said on Sunday
during an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper. The Trump administration stands ready to ship
the vaccine to immunization sites in all 50 states within 24 hours, he said, so the first
doses would be administered to recipients on December 11 or December 12."
As for a vaccine being a panacea, this is from the editorial I linked @56:
"The US has made certain breakthroughs in vaccine development, but so have China, Russia
and other countries. The US' attitude toward vaccines seems much too optimistic. As WHO
Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on November 16, ' A vaccine will
complement the other tools we have, not replace them a vaccine on its own will not end the
pandemic .'" [My Emphasis]
So yet again, the USA's citizenry is being told by the two institutions it trusts the
least--federal government and media--that the End is Near IF they imbibe the new
Miracle.
As researchers struggle to understand what makes infection with COVID-19 so mild in some
cases, and so deadly in others, we have kept a close eye out for any new links between symptoms
different strains of the virus. And on Wednesday we noticed new comments from South Australia's
top health official who warned that a particularly deadly strain of SARS-CoV-2 is circulating
in the state.
Chief Health Officer Professor Nicola Spurrier explained that the reason for the recently
imposed six-day lockdown is the fact that "this particular strain has had certain
characteristics" she said.
The State of South Australia,
which became home to this dramatic scene yesterday , is also bracing for the risk that this
new strain could spread more quickly, in addition to being more deadly. Professor Spurrier said
a typical generation, or stage, of the virus was only about three days.
"We also know, because of that characteristic, that what we call a generation, is only
about three days and a generation is when one case is passing it on to the next level, and
then that (next) level, so if they pass it on to two people, they will pass it on to another
lot of people, and that is your third generation," she said.
Already, the virus has progressed to the fifth generation, she said.
"At the moment in SA we have done contact tracing to the fourth generation but the fifth
generation is out there in our community and at the moment we are contact tracing to get on
to that generation and that is the Woodville pizza bar."
Authorities have traced the local outbreak to a pizza shop in Parafield. The cluster began
with a worker at Peppers Warmouth, which is being used as a quarantine hotel, was infected with
the virus.
Vaccine against coronaviruses is a very tricky business as the virus tend to mutate with
time. Still it looks like Russian found some nw avenue to tackle this problem which might be more
efficient then alternatives.
Western reporters to not like to correct their own false reporting. They rather reinforce it
as much as possible. Only when overwhelmed by the facts will they silently admit that they were
wrong in the first place. Here is a prime example of how that's done.
In mid-August we exposed how 'western' media lied about the approval for phase-3 testing of
the Russian Sputnik vaccine against Covid-19. They said that Russia claimed the vaccine was
ready to go population wide. That never was the case.
Russia has not approved a vaccine against Covid-19 and it is not skipping large-scale
clinical trials. The Russia regulator gave a preliminary approval for a vaccine candidate to
start the large-scale clinical trial. [...]
Science Magazine is one of the few media who
got it right : ...
One of the false reports we pointed out was by the New York Times Moscow
correspondent Andrew E. Kramer:
Russia has become the first country in the world to approve a vaccine for the coronavirus,
President Vladimir V. Putin announced on Tuesday, though global health authorities say the
vaccine has yet to complete critical, late-stage clinical trials to determine its safety and
effectiveness.
...
By skipping large-scale clinical trials, the Russian dash for a vaccine has raised widespread
concern that it is circumventing vital steps -- and potentially endangering people -- in
order to score global propaganda points.
Russia had, as we and Science Magazine reported, never the intent to skip
large-scale clinical trials. Kramer made that up.
In new report today Kramer reinforces his previous false and disproven claims to lament
about an alleged slow distribution of the Sputnik vaccine in Russia:
More than a month after becoming the first country to approve a coronavirus vaccine, Russia
has yet to administer it to a large population outside a clinical trial, health officials and
outside experts say.
The approval, which came with much fanfare, occurred before Russia had tested the vaccine
in late-stage trials for possible side effects and for its disease-fighting ability. It was
seen as a political gesture by President Vladimir V. Putin to assert victory in the global
race for a vaccine.
It is not clear whether the slow start to the vaccination campaign is a result of limited
production capacity or second thoughts about inoculating the population with an unproven
product.
The Times author reinforces his own lie that Russia had declared its vaccine ready
for population wide application. It had never done that. The official registration of the
vaccine by the relevant authorities was only a necessary precondition to start the large scale
phase-3 testing of the vaccine. There never was a Russian intent to distribute the vaccine to a
large population without phase-3 testing.
In the bottom third of his long piece Kramer comes near to admitting that. There he
describes that the Sputnik phase-3 testing is now ongoing. That contradicts all of his previous
reporting on the issues though he himself never says that. But even now he is getting the
details wrong:
The trial in Russia began on Sept. 9, and Russian officials have said they expect early
results before the end of the year, though the Gamaleya Institute, the scientific body that
developed the vaccine, has scheduled the trial to continue until May.
That timeline is similar to the testing schedules announced by the three pharmaceutical
companies testing potential vaccines in the United States, AstraZeneca, Moderna and
Pfizer.
...
The Russian late-stage, or Phase 3, clinical trial is being carried out entirely in Moscow,
where 30,000 people will receive the vaccine and 10,000 will get a placebo.
Yevgenia Zubova, a spokeswoman for the Moscow city health department, said in an interview
that the vaccine was available only to trial participants.
Those last two paragraphs, which completely debunk Kramer's original reporting, should have
been at the very top of the piece. They are buried down in paragraph 23 and 24 of a 29
paragraphs story that starts out with an epic repeat of the previously made false claims.
Post-registration clinical trials involving more than 40,000 people in Russia will be
launched in a week starting from August, 24. A number of countries, such as UAE, Saudi
Arabia, Philippines and possibly India or Brazil will join the clinical trials of Sputnik V
locally. [...] Mass production of the vaccine is expected to start in September 2020.
That testing of Sputnik V will also happen outside of Moscow has been confirmed
by recent reports :
Russia's sovereign wealth fund will supply 100 million doses of its potential coronavirus
vaccine to Indian drug company Dr Reddy's Laboratories, the fund said on Wednesday, as Moscow
speeds up plans to distribute its shot abroad.
...
Dr Reddy's, one of India's top pharmaceutical companies, will carry out Phase III clinical
trials of Sputnik-V in India, RDIF said.
It is not Russia that is fudging the testing of its vaccine. It is the Trump administration
that is
planning to do so out of political reasons:
We have the protocols. Now we know how there will very likely be an Emergency Use Approval
(EUA) for a vaccine prior to November 3. The company and political motivations are fully
aligned.
In contrast to the U.S. the Russian testing of its Sputnik vaccine will be -as usual- of
high integrity and will strictly follow the protocols such trials are supposed to follow. In
paragraph 29, the very last one in today's NYT story, the author at last admits as
much :
[W]hen medicines are tested, Russia has an exceptionally good track record on managing
clinical trials , according to a database of U.S. Food and Drug Administration inspections of
clinical trials around the world. The F.D.A. found a lower percentage of trials with problems
in Russia than in any other European country or the United States.
If I get the chance to chose a vaccine for myself I will rather take the one which was
developed by a highly qualified state financed research institution and approved in Russia than
one developed by some profit oriented pharmaceutic conglomerate that is in cahoots with a
politicized regulator under the Trump administration.
Posted by b on September 20, 2020 at 12:12 UTC |
Permalink
If I get the chance to chose a vaccine for myself I will rather take the one which was
developed by a highly qualified state financed research institution and approved in Russia
than one developed by some profit oriented pharmaceutic conglomerate that is in cahoots
with a politicized regulator under the Trump administration.
To top it off, Gamaleya's vaccine simply has the better science behind it. It uses two
human adenoviruses, in opposition to the single chimpanzee adenovirus used by the AstraZeneca
one (the Chinese one also uses only one adenovirus, but I don't remember if it is human or
chimpanzee).
No other laboratory in the world is using Gamaleya's technology - which it already
dominates. Two American laboratories (Moderna and one more that I forgot the name) are
testing the untried and dangerous mRNA technology. It is very unlikely those two mRNA
vaccines will ever come out to the public; those two labs probably just cashed in their USD 2
billion checks they received from the USG.
This gives force to my original hypothesis: the Anglo-Saxon laboratories are exploiting
exotic technologies for their vaccines because they want something the can patent, thus
charging astronomical prices to the national governments and thus emerge from this pandemic
even richer.
--//--
Speaking of AstraZeneca (Oxford), it released its blueprints yesterday after "public
pressure":
The USG is, behind the scenes (I already posted the link here in the open thread),
extremely worried about this vaccine.
AstraZeneca will try to get what it can get, but the fact is it's game over for them. The
thing here is that the Gamaleya alternative is better and if the USA (where the vaccine
makers will really make money) wants to get political, it will simply opt for one of the many
American vaccines that will come out - ready or not, satisfactory or not - next year. As a
British vaccine, AstraZeneca-Oxford will, at best, have to do with the British market, which
is very tiny for a big pharmaceutical company.
It is better if they just cancel the trials and abandon production.
If I had money I'd fly to Russia for their vaccine. They made theirs for the people and in
Amerika we make it for profits and protect the makes from lawsuits.
To be frank, at this point, ironically, it's Big Pharma's own self-interest that might help
us to counter Trump's lunacy. There are enough anti-vaxxers around for them not to want a
screwed up vaccine and a big scandal that would only comfort the vaxxers and sow mistrust
among the population. They need people to assume vaccines are well done and mostly harmless
if they want to keep making profit with them. Trump is only interested in a victory in the
next few weeks, Pharma business is interested in making profits for the next decades.
That's quite a damning indictment of our Western system, but then 2020 is a milestone, the
threshold beyond which it won't be possible to consider the Western liberal capitalistic
system as the superior one, if not the best one possible - quite the opposite.
The Kramer reporting is highly unusual. Normally the important information should be in the
third paragraph from the end and now it's in the sixth and seventh last.
Anyway, while I agree that this vaccine should be treated as an entirely legitimate effort
I want to add:
- phase 1/2 testing did appear a too lightweight and the article on it in the Lancet has been
criticized by russian scientists (
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/09/08/leading-scientists-question-highly-improbable-russian-vaccine-results-published-in-lancet-a71384).
- one family of vaccines can be more controversial and experimental than another and the
judgement of the testers can take this in account when considering shortcuts.
- One should distinguish what the makers of the vaccine claim with the political
(exaggerated) statements from Putin about it .
- The statements on testing on the Sputnikvaccine have changed over time. In the beginning it
said 2000 people in Russia and it listed 4 more countries(UAE, KSA, Brazil,Mexico). That was
insufficient. Several of these countries have been omitted since, and others have been added.
One can say that the intent to do decent testing was always there but the confirmed planning
was not.
- rollout to large population was impossible anyway at an early stage because the production
capacity was limited.
Kramer is not wrong, he simply lies. In the Relotius media this is standard practice when
covering politically sensitive topics, combined with omissions.
Of course, many well-researched and truthful articles are published in the nyt, faz, nzz etc.
That is exactly what makes these media so refined and what they base their claim to be
quality media on. One lies and distort as little and as targeted as possible.
The Europena and Australian vassals of the USA would not be given a choice to choose the more
authetic option of the vaccine. But Israel would probably opt for the Russian version without
consequence. It's over for the West!
Nobody is saying the Gamaleya vaccine will be the second coming of the polio vaccine.
Whichever COVID-19 vaccine comes out will inevitably be imperfect (in relation to the already
tested and tried vaccines everybody takes nowadays).
Your worries are all legitimate. Indeed, Gamaleya publicly admitted phases 1 and 2 of its
trials has small samples of subjects.
However, you also have to take into account that the science is solid (two human
adenoviruses, a tested and tried technology) and that Gamaleya is the center of excellence in
adenovirus vaccine technology. That's why - and not because it is Russian - we can trust
Gamaleya's vaccine is, given the circumstances (pandemic), reliable. The fact Gamaleya
already dominated the adenovirus technology also explains why it was the first laboratory to
come out with a solution - it simply used a tested and tried method it already dominated,
while the other pharmaceuticals are basically having to relearn how to develop a vaccine
and/or are adventuring in uncharted territory because they want something they can
patent.
So yes, we can search and find defects in Gamaleya's trials - but the strongest argument
in its favor is not the trials, it's the solid science and technology behind it.
Vk and the wabbit - right on. And Thanks to you, B, for this clear and straightforwardly
informative piece (as usual).
Is it any surprise that the NYT uses the usual propaganda format of truth (when it accords
with the ruling elites perspective) and lies (when "reporting on" what is happening in those
"bad hat" countries)? And might I add that NPR and the BBC World Service do exactly the same
thing, boosting the US-UK-NATO worldview (which equals the western
corporate-captitalist-imperialist, oh so exceptional, ruling elites world position) while
denigrating Russia, China, Iran (and now Lukashenko - indeed the Beeb refuses to pronounce
his name properly, always reducing it to the feminine form, and believe me, as born and
raised Brit, that's deliberate) via lies, lies and more lies. And via those weasely words:
"likely," "Highly likely" and so on and on ....
All that this latest vaccine competition (western) will produce is more anti-vaxxers. And
this time round, sensibly so.
Tuyzefot (5): it is common for the NYT to lead with propaganda and bury the facts at the end
of the article.
I noticed it decades ago in articles covering Palestine. I learned to skip whatever was
printed on the front page and immediately jump to the final five paragraphs found deep within
the paper. I guess they print the facts at all there only as a bizarre way of covering their
asses in a feeble attempt at integrity.
The vaccine uses a unique two-vector human adenovirus technology which no-one else in
the world currently has for COVID-19.
[...]
On the surface the Sputnik V trial with 76 participants seems smaller in size compared
to 1,077 people that, for example, AstraZeneca had in its Phase 1-2 studies. However,
the design of the Sputnik V trial was much more efficient and based on better
assumptions.
[...]
The post-registration studies involving more than 40,000 people started in Russia on
August 26, before AstraZeneca has started its Phase 3 trial in the U.S. with 30,000
participants. Clinical trials in Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), the Philippines,
India and Brazil will begin this month. The preliminary results of the Phase 3 trial will
be published in October-November 2020.
[...]
Q.: Why has the Sputnik V vaccine already become eligible for emergency use
registration?
Because of the very positive results of the Phase 1-2 trials and because the human
adenoviral vector-based delivery platform has been proven the safest vaccine delivery
platform over decades including through 75 international scientific publications and in
more than 250 clinical trials.
[...]
Some other companies are using human adenoviral vector-based platforms for their
COVID-19 vaccines. For example, Johnson & Johnson uses only Ad26 vector and China's
CanSino only Ad5 while Sputnik V uses both of these vectors. The work of Johnson &
Johnson and CanSino not only validates the Russian approach but also shows Sputnik V's
advantage as studies have demonstrated that two different vectors produce better
results than one.
[...]
The monkey adenovirus and mRNA vaccines have never been used and approved before and
their research is lagging the proven human adenoviral vector-based platform by at least 20
years. However, their developers have already secured supply contracts worth billions of
dollars from Western governments and may potentially apply for fast-track registration --
while receiving full indemnity at the same time.
At the end of the Q&A, Dmitriev counters his Western colleagues:
Question 1: Are there any long-term studies of mRNA and monkey adenovirus vector-based
technologies for carcinogenic effects and impact on fertility? (Hint: there are none)
Question 2: Could their absence be the reason why some of the leading pharmaceutical
firms making COVID-19 vaccines based on these technologies pushed the countries buying
their vaccines for full indemnification from lawsuits if something goes wrong?
Question 3: Why is Western media not reporting a lack of long term studies for mRNA and
monkey adenoviral vector-based vaccines?
The constant Russia bashing is a disconnect from the truth and the real world.
It is annoying to wade through.
Far more important, it is crippling for a nation if its leadership actually does
disconnect from reality and believe its own fantasy.
Disconnect from reality, belief in convenient fantasy, is exactly how the Democrats went
from losing with Hillary to running again with Hillary II, the same donors and advisers and
influence peddlers pushing the same right wing triangulation by the Democratic Party.
Maybe they can squeak out a win this time. It should not be close.
Far more important, there are things that need doing, things that would win like health
care for all, that they simply won't offer or run on. We are not going to get from them what
we need, we know that, and that is why they again have a squeaker election even against a
joke like Trump.
Perfect example of the free and unfettered press at work. What do you mean we're just a
propaganda rag? See, right down at the bottom, the bit you didn't bother to read down to,
right next to the denture ad, we told the truth. So there! Balanced and accurate reporting!
Trump's "national security" state has managed to kill 200000 by him the autocrat in chief to
come out and tell the truth as he admitted so to Woodward. This fucking American national
security phobia is costing American lives more than all past 70 years of national security
wars.
@JohnH 13 , it was hm, a joke. There is indeed rule of thumb that you have to look fore the
third to last paragraph. I upgraded it into something of a law, which is then violated in
this case.
@vk 10, I wouldn't call it my worries, just that I think B. posted a version which was too
simple and rosy. In the meantime I saw your post 14 which I roughly expected but hadn't read
about yet.
Andrew Kramer's reporting on the Sputnik V vaccine is deliberately written to discredit the
Russians and anything and everything they do, which includes the way they conduct scientific
and medical research (because it's govt-funded, not funded by global pharmaceutical
corporations) and the way they run their healthcare system (not privatised).
First, Kramer says the Kremlin approved the vaccine: this is to set up Moscow and Putin in
particular as rash, so that the supposed "roll-out" of the vaccine can be (secondly)
portrayed as inefficient.
Kramer knows he is lying which is why his piece is long (he knows most NYT readers are
time-poor and want the celebrity news and baseball results) and the most important
information is squeezed into the last two paragraphs of his article.
I tried linking to that Moscow Times article at your link and either I hit a dead end or
the newspaper removed the article, which does not surprise me since that newspaper is as
credible as The New York Times. It used to be given away f o r free in Moscow but I believe
it now exists only as an online paper.
@Jen, you have to remove the last two characters ').' because I omitted a space. The article
in the moscow times is ok and not too alarming. It is also not discrediting the lancet
article. Just raising concerns.
Last week we warned
readers to be cautious about new COVID-19 vaccines, highlighting how key parts of the clinical
trials are being skipped as big pharma will not be held accountable for adverse side effects
for administering the experimental drugs.
A senior executive from AstraZeneca, Britain's second-largest drugmaker, told
Reuters that his company was just granted protection from all legal action if the company's
vaccine led to damaging side effects.
Last week we warned
readers to be cautious about new COVID-19 vaccines, highlighting how key parts of the clinical
trials are being skipped as big pharma will not be held accountable for adverse side effects
for administering the experimental drugs.
A senior executive from AstraZeneca, Britain's second-largest drugmaker, told
Reuters that his company was just granted protection from all legal action if the company's
vaccine led to damaging side effects.
Russia's health minister is preparing a mass vaccination campaign against the novel
coronavirus for October, local news agencies reported on Saturday, after a vaccine completed
clinical trials.
Health Minister Mikhail Murashko said the Gamaleya Institute, a state research facility in
Moscow, had completed clinical trials of the vaccine and paperwork is being prepared to
register it, Interfax news agency reported.
He said doctors and teachers would be the first to be vaccinated.
On June 26, a small South San Francisco company called Vaxart made a surprise announcement:
A coronavirus vaccine it was working on had been selected by the U.S. government to be part of
Operation Warp Speed, the flagship federal initiative to quickly develop drugs to combat
Covid-19.
Vaxart's shares soared. Company insiders, who weeks earlier had received stock options worth
a few million dollars, saw the value of those awards increase sixfold. And a hedge fund that
partly controlled the company walked away with more than $200 million in instant profits.
The race is on to develop a coronavirus vaccine, and some companies and investors are
betting that the winners stand to earn vast profits from selling hundreds of millions -- or
even billions -- of doses to a desperate public.
Across the pharmaceutical and medical industries, senior executives and board members are
capitalizing on that dynamic.
They are making millions of dollars after announcing positive developments, including
support from the government, in their efforts to fight Covid-19. After such announcements,
insiders from at least 11 companies -- most of them smaller firms whose fortunes often hinge on
the success or failure of a single drug -- have sold shares worth well over $1 billion since
March, according to figures compiled for The New York Times by Equilar, a data
provider.
In some cases, company insiders are profiting from regularly scheduled compensation or
automatic stock trades. But in other situations, senior officials appear to be pouncing on
opportunities to cash out while their stock prices are sky high. And some companies have
awarded stock options to executives shortly before market-moving announcements about their
vaccine progress.
The sudden windfalls highlight the powerful financial incentives for company officials to
generate positive headlines in the race
for coronavirus vaccines and treatments , even if the drugs might never pan out.
Some companies are attracting government scrutiny for potentially using their associations
with Operation Warp Speed as marketing ploys.
For example, the headline on Vaxart's news release declared: "Vaxart's Covid-19 Vaccine
Selected for the U.S. Government's Operation Warp Speed." But the reality is more complex.
Vaxart's vaccine candidate was included in a trial on primates that a federal agency was
organizing in conjunction with Operation Warp Speed. But Vaxart is not among the companies
selected to receive significant financial support from Warp Speed to produce hundreds of
millions of vaccine doses.
"The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has entered into funding agreements with
certain vaccine manufacturers, and we are negotiating with others. Neither is the case with
Vaxart," said Michael R. Caputo, the department's assistant secretary for public affairs.
"Vaxart's vaccine candidate was selected to participate in preliminary U.S. government studies
to determine potential areas for possible Operation Warp Speed partnership and support. At this
time, those studies are ongoing, and no determinations have been made."
Some officials at the Department of Health and Human Services have grown concerned about
whether companies including Vaxart are trying to inflate their stock prices by exaggerating
their roles in Warp Speed, a senior Trump administration official said. The department has
relayed those concerns to the Securities and Exchange Commission, said the official, who spoke
on the condition of anonymity.
It isn't clear if the commission is looking into the matter. An S.E.C. spokeswoman declined
to comment.
"Vaxart abides by good corporate governance guidelines and policies and makes decisions in
accordance with the best interests of the company and its shareholders," Vaxart's chief
executive, Andrei Floroiu, said in a statement on Friday. Referring to Operation Warp Speed, he
added, "We believe that Vaxart's Covid-19 vaccine is the most exciting one in O.W.S. because it
is the only oral vaccine (a pill) in O.W.S."
Well-timed stock transactions are generally legal. But investors and corporate governance
experts say they can create the appearance that executives are profiting from inside
information, and could erode public confidence in the pharmaceutical industry when the world is
looking to these companies to cure Covid-19.
"It is inappropriate for drug company executives to cash in on a crisis," said Ben Wakana,
executive director of Patients for Affordable Drugs, a nonprofit advocacy group. "Every day,
Americans wake up and make sacrifices during this pandemic. Drug companies see this as a
payday."
Executives at a long list of companies have reaped seven- or eight-figure profits thanks to
their work on coronavirus vaccines and treatments.
Shares of Regeneron, a biotech company in Tarrytown, N.Y., have climbed nearly 80 percent
since early February, when it announced a collaboration with the Department of Health and Human
Services to develop a Covid-19 treatment. Since then, the company's top executives and board
members have sold nearly $700 million in stock. The chief executive, Leonard Schleifer, sold
$178 million of shares on a single day in May.
Alexandra Bowie, a spokeswoman for Regeneron, said most of those sales had been scheduled in
advance through programs that automatically sell executives' shares if the stock hits a certain
price.
Moderna, a 10-year-old vaccine developer based in Cambridge, Mass., that has never brought a
product to market, announced in late January that it was working on a coronavirus vaccine. It
has issued a stream of news releases hailing its vaccine progress, and its stock has more than
tripled, giving the company a market value of almost $30 billion.
Moderna insiders have sold about $248 million of shares since that January announcement,
most of it after the company
was selected in April to receive federal funding to support its vaccine efforts.
While some of those sales were scheduled in advance, others were more spur of the moment.
Flagship Ventures, an investment fund run by the company's founder and chairman, Noubar Afeyan,
sold more than $68 million worth of Moderna shares on May 21. Those transactions were not
scheduled in advance, according to securities filings.
Executives and board members at Luminex, Quidel and Emergent BioSolutions have sold shares
worth a combined $85 million after announcing they were working on vaccines, treatments or
testing solutions.
At other companies, executives and board members received large grants of stock options
shortly before the companies announced good news that lifted the value of those options.
Novavax, a drugmaker in
Gaithersburg, Md., began working on a vaccine early this year. This spring, the company
reported promising preliminary test results and a $1.6
billion deal with the Trump administration.
In April, with its shares below $24, Novavax issued a batch of new stock awards to all its
employees "in acknowledgment of the extraordinary work of our employees to implement a new
vaccine program." Four senior executives, including the chief executive, Stanley Erck, received
stock options that were worth less than $20 million at the time.
Since then, Novavax's stock has rocketed to more than $130 a share. At least on paper, the
four executives' stock options are worth more than $100 million.
So long as the company hits a milestone with its vaccine testing, which it is expected to
achieve soon, the executives will be able to use the options to buy discounted Novavax shares
as early as next year, regardless of whether the company develops a successful vaccine.
Silvia Taylor, a Novavax spokeswoman, said the stock awards were designed "to incentivize
and retain our employees during this critical time." She added that "there is no guarantee they
will retain their value."
Two other drugmakers, Translate Bio and Inovio, awarded large batches of stock options to
executives and board members shortly before they announced progress on their coronavirus
vaccines, sending shares higher. Representatives of the companies said the options were
regularly scheduled annual grants.
Vaxart, though, is where the most money was made the fastest.
At the start of the year, its shares were around 35 cents. Then in late January, Vaxart
began working on an orally administered coronavirus vaccine, and its shares started rising.
Vaxart's largest shareholder was a New York hedge fund, Armistice Capital, which last year
acquired nearly two-thirds of the company's shares. Two Armistice executives, including the
hedge fund's founder, Steven Boyd,
joined Vaxart's board of directors. The hedge fund also purchased rights, known as
warrants, to buy 21 million more Vaxart shares at some point in the future for as little as 30
cents each.
Vaxart has never brought a vaccine to market. It has just 15 employees. But throughout the
spring, Vaxart announced positive preliminary data for its vaccine, along with a partnership
with a company that could manufacture it. By late April, with investors sensing the potential
for big profits, the company's shares had reached $3.66 -- a tenfold increase from January.
On June 8, Vaxart changed the terms of its warrants agreement with Armistice, making it
easier for the hedge fund to rapidly acquire the 21 million shares, rather than having to buy
and sell in smaller batches.
One week later, Vaxart announced that its chief executive was stepping down, though he would
remain chairman. The new C.E.O., Mr. Floroiu, had previously worked with Mr. Boyd, Armistice's
founder, at the hedge fund and the consulting firm McKinsey.
On June 25, Vaxart announced that it had signed a letter of intent with another company that
might help it mass-produce a coronavirus vaccine. Vaxart's shares nearly doubled that day.
The next day, Vaxart issued its news release saying it had been
selected for Operation Warp Speed. Its shares instantly doubled again, at one pointing
hitting $14, their highest level in years.
"We are very pleased to be one of the few companies selected by Operation Warp Speed, and
that ours is the only oral vaccine being evaluated," Mr. Floroiu said.
Armistice took advantage of the stock's exponential increase -- at that point up more than
3,600 percent since January. On June 26, a Friday, and the next Monday, the hedge fund
exercised its warrants to buy nearly 21 million Vaxart shares for either 30 cents or $1.10 a
share -- purchases it would not have been able to make as quickly had its agreement with Vaxart
not been modified weeks earlier.
Armistice then immediately sold the shares at prices from $6.58 to $12.89 a share, according
to securities filings. The hedge fund's profits were immense: more than $197 million.
"It looks like the warrants may have been reconfigured at a time when they knew good news
was coming," said Robert Daines, a professor at Stanford Law School who is an expert on
corporate governance. "That's a valuable change, made right as the company's stock price was
about to rise."
At the same time, the hedge fund also unloaded some of the Vaxart shares it had previously
bought, notching tens of millions of dollars in additional profits.
By the end of that Monday, June 29, Armistice had sold almost all of its Vaxart shares.
Mr. Boyd and Armistice declined to comment.
Mr. Floroiu said the change to the Armistice agreement "was in the best interests of Vaxart
and its stockholders" and helped it raise money to work on the Covid-19 vaccine.
He and other Vaxart board members also were positioned for big personal profits. When he
became chief executive in mid-June, Mr. Floroiu received stock options that were worth about
$4.3 million. A month later, those options were worth more than $28 million.
Normally when companies issue stock options to executives, the options can't be exercised
for months or years. Because of the unusual terms and the run-up in Vaxart's stock price, most
of Mr. Floroiu's can be cashed in now.
Vaxart's board members also received large grants of stock options, giving them the right to
buy shares in the company at prices well below where the stock is now trading. The higher the
shares fly, the bigger the profits.
"Vaxart is disrupting the vaccine world," Mr. Floroiu boasted during a virtual investor
conference on Thursday. He added that his impression was that "it's OK to make a profit from
Covid vaccines, as long as you're not profiteering."
Craig
Murray lambasts a Russophobic media that celebrates a supposed cyber attack on UK vaccine research, ignores collapse
of key evidence of a "hack" and dabbles in dubious memorabilia.
The Guardian's
headquarters
in London.
(Bryantbob,
CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons)
Andrew Marr, center, in 2014.
(
Financial
Times
, Flickr)
A whole slew of these were rehearsed by Andrew Marr on his flagship BBC1 morning show. The latest is the accusation
that Russia is responsible for a cyber attack on Covid-19 vaccination research. This is another totally evidence-free
accusation. But it misses the point anyway.
The alleged cyber attack, if it happened, was a hack not an attack -- the allegation is that there was an effort to
obtain the results of research, not to disrupt research. It is appalling that the U.K. is trying to keep its research
results secret rather than share them freely with the world scientific community.
As I have
reported
before
, the U.K. and the USA have been preventing the WHO from implementing a common research and common vaccine
solution for Covid-19, insisting instead on a profit driven approach to benefit the big pharmaceutical companies (and
disadvantage the global poor).
What makes the accusation that Russia tried to hack the research even more dubious is the fact that Russia had
just
bought
the very research specified. You don't steal things you already own.
Evidence of CIA Hacks
If anybody had indeed hacked the research, we all know it is impossible to trace with certainty the whereabouts of
hackers. My VPNs [virtual private networks] are habitually set to India, Australia or South Africa depending on where
I am trying to watch the cricket, dodging broadcasting restrictions.
More pertinently,
WikiLeaks'
Vault
7 release of CIA material showed the
specific
programs
for the CIA in how to leave clues to make a leak look like it came from Russia. This irrefutable
evidence that the CIA do computer hacks with apparent Russian "fingerprints" deliberately left, like little bits of
Cyrillic script, is an absolutely classic example of a fact that everybody working in the mainstream media knows to
be true, but which they all contrive never to mention.
Thus when last week's "Russian hacking" story was briefed by the security services -- that former Labour Party Leader
Jeremy Corbyn deployed secret documents on U.K./U.S. trade talks which had been posted on Reddit, after being stolen
by an evil Russian who left his name of Grigor in his Reddit handle -- there was no questioning in the media of this
narrative. Instead, we had another round of McCarthyite witch-hunt aimed at the rather tired looking Corbyn.
Personally, if the Russians had been responsible for revealing that the Tories are prepared to open up the NHS
"market" to big American companies, including ending or raising caps on pharmaceutical prices, I should be very
grateful to the Russians for telling us. Just as the world would owe the Russians a favor if it were indeed them who
leaked evidence of just how systematically the DNC rigged the 2016 primaries against Bernie Sanders.
But as it happens, it was not the Russians. The latter case was a leak by a disgusted insider, and I very much
suspect the NHS U.S. trade deal link was also from a disgusted insider.
When governments do appalling things, very often somebody manages to blow the whistle.
On the core subject here: By necessity, a
pandemic requires a cooperative international response. Only one country has refused to do so: The US. In their supreme
arrogance, our ruling class lost track the fact that the US needs the rest of the world, not the other way way around.
Study identifies six different "types" of COVID-19
A new study of COVID-19 , based on
data from a symptom tracker app, determined that there are six distinct "types" of the disease involving different clusters of symptoms.
The discovery could potentially open new possibilities for how doctors can better treat individual patients and predict what level
of hospital care they would need.
Researchers from
King's College London
studied data from approximately 1,600 U.K. and U.S. patients who regularly logged their symptoms in the COVID Symptom Tracker App
in March and April.
Typically, doctors will look for
key symptoms
such as cough, fever and
loss
of the sense of smell to detect COVID-19. The study, which has not been peer-reviewed, says the six different "types" of COVID-19
can vary by severity and come with their own set of symptoms.
"I think it's very, very interesting," Dr. Bob Lahita, who is not affiliated with the study, told CBSN anchors Vladimir Duthiers
and Anne-Marie Green. "Among the patients I see, those who recovered, many of them present different ways: some people with fever
and some without fever, and some with
nausea and vomiting, some people with diarrhea , etc."
The six clusters of symptoms outlined in the study are:
Flu-like with no fever: Headache, loss of smell, muscle pains, cough, sore throat, chest pain, no fever.
Flu-like with fever: Headache, loss of smell, cough, sore throat, hoarseness, fever, loss of appetite.
Gastrointestinal: Headache, loss of smell, loss of appetite, diarrhea, sore throat, chest pain, no cough.
Severe level one, fatigue: Headache, loss of smell, cough, fever, hoarseness, chest pain, fatigue.
Severe level two, confusion: Headache, loss of smell, loss of appetite, cough, fever, hoarseness, sore throat, chest
pain, fatigue, confusion, muscle pain.
Severe level three, abdominal and respiratory: Headache, loss of smell, loss of appetite, cough, fever, hoarseness,
sore throat, chest pain, fatigue, confusion, muscle pain, shortness of breath, diarrhea, abdominal pain.
The first level, "flu-like with no fever," is associated with headaches, loss of smell, muscle pains, cough, sore throat and chest
pain. Patients at this level have a 1.5% chance of needing breathing support such as oxygen or a ventilator.
The second type, "flu-like with fever," includes symptoms like loss of appetite, headache, loss of smell, cough, sore throat,
hoarseness and fever. Researchers say about 4.4% of patients at this level needed breathing support.
Patients with the third type, simply described as "gastrointestinal," do not have a cough as part of their illness. Instead, they
experience headache, diarrhea, loss of smell, loss of appetite, sore throat and chest pain, and about 3.3% needed breathing support.
Lahita referred to the following three clusters of COVID-19 as the "really severe types."
In type four, or "severe level one," patients experience fatigue along with headache, loss of smell, cough, fever, hoarseness
and chest pain. Patients at this level needed breathing support at a rate of 8.6%.
Type five, "severe level two," includes the symptoms of type four along with loss of appetite, sore throat and muscle pain, and
is mainly distinguished by
confusion
.
"That means you don't know where you are or where you live, whether you are in or out of the hospital, who your relatives are,"
Lahita explained. "That is very scary." Almost 10% of patients at that level need breathing support.
The most severe type of COVID-19 is referred to as "severe level three, abdominal and respiratory," and has all the above symptoms
along with abdominal pain, shortness of breath and diarrhea. Nearly 20% of these patients need breathing support.
"Those are the severe level threes who wind up on a ventilator, and then it is touch-and-go as to whether they survive the
infection entirely," Lahita said.
The U.K. researchers also found that only 16% of patients with type one COVID-19 required hospitalization, compared with nearly
half of the patients with type six.
Patients in the severe clusters also tended to be older or with pre-existing conditions and weakened immune systems, compared
to those in the first three.
Scientists hope the discovery, once further studied, could help predict what types of care patients with COVID-19 might need,
and give doctors the ability to predict which patients would fall into which category.
"I'm very happy that these six types have been identified and can give us an idea of a prognosis going forward for patients who
are afflicted with this virus," Lahita said.
More talk about T-cells and B-cells (per Volchkov) Australia
T-cell and B-cell research
To recap: Volchkov, a Russian geneticist/medical researcher, was quoted in a John Helmer
article that he believes the true COVID-19/nCOV/SARS-2 immunity comes from T-cell and B-cell
activity. His view is based upon multiple European studies employing a very expensive
T-cell/B-cell test called ELISPOT - and is that the actual nCOV infection rate is likely far
higher than spot PCR or antibody tests can ever detect. In particular, if 20% of people
tested by PCR or antibody tests show exposure, the likely actual exposure rate is 3 times
higher (60% vs. 20%).
This has huge ramifications if true: it means places with high nCOV death rates have likely
already achieved herd immunity levels.
One thing is true: death rates in every single nation and region with a high nCOV
death/million count have fallen dramatically.
People are still dying, but they are dying at a far lower CFR/IFR rate.
IF, and I mean *IF*, this is true, this means the lockdown strategies actually did very
little to "contain" the outbreak.
This is why looking at the historical behavior in different US states is so important.
California locked down early, but the nCOV mortality rates (both absolute and relative) have
basically been flat from April until now.
Last week, we shared news of what Russia's scientific community had touted as a major
breakthrough in the development of a vaccine for SARS-CoV-2: A vaccine trial at Moscow's
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University had yielded the first successful human trials.
The American business press slavishly parrots every Moderna press release as the company
regurgitates its Phase 1 trial results, despite the fact that the politically-connected biotech
company's stage 3 clinical trials won't begin until later this month. Meanwhile, its CEO
Stephane Bancel and other executives have cashed in on their Moderna shares,
prompting SEC chief Jay Clayton to sheepishly caution against credibility-destroying insider
selling.
Despite all of this, we didn't hear a peep out of the western press about
the Sechenov trial's accomplishments . However, a few days later, with anxieties about
Russia-backed electoral interference intensifying and 'national polls' hinting at a Biden
landslide,
the British press reported on a new 'policy paper' accusing those pesky Ruskies of trying
to steal British research involving COVID-19 vaccines. Intel shared by Canada and the US
purportedly supported this conclusion, though Russia has vehemently denied the accusations.
But that's not all: Around the same time, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab accused Russia of
trying to meddle in the UK's December election (which returned the Tories to power and ended
the reign of opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn).
Were these reports about Russia's vaccine-trial successes merely a smokescreen? The British
might see it that way, but on Monday, US-based Bloomberg News published an interesting report
claiming that certain Russian VIPs had been administered experimental doses of a vaccine
prototype as early as April. Reportedly developed by Moscow's Gamaleya Institute and financed
by the state-run Russian Direct Investment Fund, this Russian vaccine candidate is a so-called
"viral vector vaccine" based on human adenovirus - a common cold virus fused with the spike
protein of SARS CoV-2 to stimulate a human immune response.
It's similar to a vaccine being developed by China's CanSino Biologics, according to
Bloomberg.
Scores of members of Russia's business and political elite have been given early access to
an experimental vaccine against Covid-19, according to people familiar with the effort, as
the country races to be among the first to develop an inoculation.
Top executives at companies including aluminum giant United Co. Rusal, as well as
billionaire tycoons and government officials began getting shots developed by the state-run
Gamaleya Institute in Moscow as early as April, the people said. They declined to be
identified as the information isn't public.
The Gamaleya vaccine, financed by the state-run Russian Direct Investment Fund and backed
by the military, last week completed a phase 1 trial involving Russian military personnel.
The institute hasn't published results for the study, which involved about 40 people, but has
begun the next stage of trials with a larger group.
Gamaleya's press office couldn't be reached by phone Sunday. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry
Peskov didn't respond to a text message asking whether President Vladimir Putin or others in
his administration have had the shots. A government spokesman couldn't immediately
comment.
Wait... so the Russians hacked the British vaccine research, traveled back in time, then
decided to test their vaccine prototype on some of the most powerful people in Russia's (highly
unequal) society? Well, they had to first travel to the future to steal the time-travel
technology from the Americans (bear with us...we're still piecing it all together).
The program under which members of Russia's business and political elite have been given
the chance to volunteer for doses of the experimental vaccine is legal but kept under wraps
to avoid a crush of potential participants, according to a researcher familiar with the
effort. He said several hundred people have been involved. Bloomberg confirmed dozens who
have had the shots but none would allow their names to be published.
It's not clear how participants are selected and they aren't part of the official studies,
though they are monitored and their results logged by the institute. Patients usually get the
shots - two are needed to produce an immune response Gamaleya says will last for about two
years - at a Moscow clinic connected to the institute. Participants aren't charged a fee and
sign releases that they know the risks involved.
Dmitriev of the RDIF said he and his family had taken the shots and noted that a
significant number of other volunteers have also been given the opportunity. He declined to
provide further details. The Gamaleya Institute said it vaccinated its director, as well as
the team working on the trial, when it started. In May, state-controlled Sberbank recruited
volunteers among employees to test the institute's vaccine.
O ne top executive who had the vaccine said he experienced no side effects. He said he
decided to risk taking the experimental shots in order to be able to live a normal life and
have business meetings as usual. Other participants have reported fever and muscle aches
after getting the shots.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Is it so hard to believe that Russia had enough faith in its vaccine prototype that it would
allow certain individuals the choice of receiving an early dose? After all, EU governments are
already buying up millions of doses of Moderna's still-largely-untested vaccine candidate.
Similarly, is it possible that Russian spies were simply monitoring the competition?
Who knows? When it comes to the shadowy world of espionage, the public rarely hears the full
story. Russia's outbreak has slowed in recent weeks as it has been overtaken by India, which
now counts more than 1 million confirmed cases. Meanwhile Russia has confirmed more than
750,000 cases of Covid-19, the fourth-largest total in the world.
pdate (0935ET): A coronavirus vaccine candidate developed by Oxford and AstraZeneca has
shown promise in an early trial which found it to be safe for human consumption while reliably
producing antibodies that are effective at stopping the virus.
In what looked like a coordinated one-two punch, one of the top researchers leading the
Oxford-Astrazeneca trials said in an interview published Monday morning that the research was
making "good progress". Minutes later, the Lancet published the first Phase 1/2 trial results,
which showed that the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine caused "robust immune responses" and was
"tolerated" by all study subjects.
That interview was published Monday morning in the US, just minutes before the Lancet
released the results of a Phase 1/2 study of the Oxford-AZ vaccine, the most highly anticipated
COVID-19 news of the day.
There are currently more than 137 vaccine candidates undergoing preclinical development, and
23 in early clinical development, according to WHO. Of these, candidates from Moderna and the
Oxford-AstraZeneca partnership are two of the most closely followed prototypes. Governments
have already started ordering the vaccine from Moderna, even though approval is still months,
perhaps years, away.
According to the Lancet, research has shown that vaccine candidates from Cansino and
Astra-Oxford trial have been making good progress, and while they couldn't say much
conclusively, the Astra-Oxford trial showed no worrisome "adverse effects".
The Phase 1/2 trial, one of the first human studies of the vaccine, showed an appropriate
"immune response". Patients who received 2 doses instead of one saw a stronger response. All
patients who received the vaccine generated the desired immune response.
Oxford's candidate "showed an acceptable safety profile, and homologous boosting increased
antibody responses. These results "support large scale evaluation of this candidate vaccine in
an ongoing phase 3 program." The Oxford-AZ study included 1,077 participants spread across 5
test sites in and around the UK.
In the study, researchers measured the number of antibodies, and the strength of the immune
response, after administering single doses and double doses of the vaccine to various groups of
study subjects, and compared those results with a control group who received another vaccine.
Pain and swelling caused by the injection were easily treated with paracetemol.
There were no serious adverse events related to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. In the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19
group, spike-specific T-cell responses peaked on day 14 (median 856 spot-forming cells per
million peripheral blood mononuclear cells, IQR 493–1802; n=43). Anti-spike IgG
responses rose by day 28 (median 157 ELISA units [EU], 96–317; n=127), and were boosted
following a second dose (639 EU, 360–792; n=10). Neutralising antibody responses
against SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 32 (91%) of 35 participants after a single dose when
measured in MNA80 and in 35 (100%) participants when measured in PRNT50. After a booster
dose, all participants had neutralising activity (nine of nine in MNA80 at day 42 and ten of
ten in Marburg VN on day 56). Neutralising antibody responses correlated strongly with
antibody levels measured by ELISA (R²=0·67 by Marburg VN; p<0·001).
The result: The vaccine candidate has been deemed safe enough to move on to 'Phase 3', which
would involve large-scale human trials.
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed an acceptable safety profile, and homologous boosting increased
antibody responses. These results, together with the induction of both humoral and cellular
immune responses, support largescale evaluation of this candidate vaccine in an ongoing phase
3 programme.
By Dr. Sherri Tenpenny – May 21, 2020 – an osteopathic medical doctor,
board-certified in three specialties. She is the founder of Tenpenny Integrative Medical Center, a medical clinic located
near Cleveland, Ohio. Her company, Courses4Mastery.com provides online education and
training regarding all aspects of vaccines and vaccination.
_____________________________
In 1965, scientists identified the first human coronavirus; it was associated with the
common cold. The Coronavirus family, named for their crown-like appearance, currently includes
36 viruses.
Within that group, there are 4 common viruses that have been causing infection in humans for
more than sixty years. In addition, three pandemic coronaviruses that can infect humans: SARS,
MERS, and now, SARS-CoV-2.
As the news of deaths in China, South Korea, Italy, and Iran began to saturate every form of
media 24/7, we became familiar with a new term: COVID-19. To be clear, the name of the newly
identified coronavirus is SARS-CoV-2, short for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
Coronavirus-2. This virus is associated with fever, cough, chest pain, and shortness of breath,
the complex of symptoms that form the diagnosis of COVID-19.
The Trump administration declared a public health emergency on January 31, 2020, then on
February 2 placed a ban on the entry of most travelers who had recently been in China. On
February 4, Alex Azar, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a declaration of
public health emergency and activated the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act,
otherwise known as the PREP
Act. This nefarious legislation provides complete protection of manufacturers from
liability for all products, technologies, biologics, or any vaccine developed as a medical
countermeasure against COVID-19. For those nervously waiting for the vaccine to become
available, be sure to understand the PREP Act
before rushing to the get in line.
Calls for testing – to see if a person is or isn't infected – began soon after
the emergency was declared, but performing those tests was initially slow due to an inadequate
number of test kits. As the kits became available, those
developed by the CDC had a defect: The reagents reacted to the
negative control sample , making the test inaccurate and the kits unusable.
In various
countries, thousands of test kits purchased from China were found to be contaminated with
the SARS-CoV-2 viruses. No one really knows how that happened, but theories spread like
wildfire. Could the test kit infect the person being tested? Or, did it mean the test would
return a false-positive result, driving up the numbers of those said to be infected so those in
power could implement stronger lockdowns and accelerate the hockey-stick unemployment rates?
Neither of those questions has been adequately answered.
Mandatory Testing of what?
Authorities claim that testing is important for public health officials to assess if their
mitigation efforts – "shelter in place" and "social distancing" and "wearing a mask"
– are making a difference to "flatten the curve." Officials also claim that testing is
necessary to know how many persons are infected within a community and to understand the nature
of how coronaviruses spread.
Are these reasons sufficient to give up our health freedom and our personal rights, being
tested and shamed in public?
Despite the challenges with test kits, testing began. By the end of March 2020, more than 1
million people had been tested across the US. By May 9, the number tested had grown to over
8.7M. Testing methods include a swab of the
nasal passages or by inserting a long, uncomfortable swab through the nose to scrape the back of the
throat. Specimens have also been obtained bronchoalveolar lavage, from
sputum , and from stool
specimens.
The call for mandatory testing has been gathering steam and becoming ever more onerous. In
Washington state, Governor Inslee
has declared:
Individuals that refuse to cooperate with contact tracers and/or refuse testing, those
individuals will not be allowed to leave their homes to purchase basic necessities such as
groceries and/or prescriptions. Those persons will need to make arrangements through friends,
family, or state provided 'family support' personnel .
But what do the results really mean?
Who Should Be Tested
On May 8, 2020, the CDC has listed specific priorities
for when testing should be done. As of May 16, more than 11-million samples have been
collected and more than 3700 specimens have not yet been evaluated.
High Priority
Hospitalized patients with symptoms
Healthcare facility workers, workers in living settings, and first responders with
symptoms
Residents in long-term care facilities or other congregate living settings, including
prisons and shelters, with symptoms
Priority
Persons with symptoms of potential COVID-19 infection, including fever, cough, shortness
of breath, chills, muscle pain, new loss of taste or smell, vomiting or diarrhea, and/or sore
throat
Persons without symptoms who are prioritized by health departments or clinicians
, for any reason, including but not limited to public health monitoring, sentinel
surveillance, or screening of asymptomatic individuals according to state and local
plans.
Read that last priority again: That means virtually everyone can be required to get a
test.
Is that a violation of your personal rights? And, if you submit to testing, what does a
"positive test" actually mean?
Types of Testing: RT-PCR
PCR, short for polymerase chain reaction , is a highly specific laboratory technique. The
key to understanding
PCR testing is that PCR can identify an individual specific virus within a viral
family.
However, a PCR test can only be used to identify DNA viruses; the SARS-CoV2 virus is an RNA
virus. Therefore, multiple steps must be taken to "magnify" the amount of genetic material in
the specimen. Researchers used a method called RT-PCR, reverse transcription-polymerase chain
reaction, to specifically identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It's a complicated process. To read
more about it, go
here and here.
If a nasal or a blood sample contains a tiny snip of RNA from the SARS-CoV-2 virus, RT-PCR
can identify it, leading to a high probability that the person has been exposed to the
SARS-CoV-2 virus.
However – and this is important – a positive RT-PCR test result does not
necessarily indicate a full virus is present. The virus must be fully intact to be
transmitted and cause illness.
RT-PCR Testing: The Importance of Timing
Even if a person has had all the symptoms associated with a coronavirus infection or has
been closely exposed to persons who have been diagnosed with COVID-19, the probability of a
RT-PCR test being positive decreases with the number of days past the onset of symptoms.
For a nasal swab, the percentage chance of a positive test declines from about 94% on day
0 to about 67% by day 10. By day 31, there is only a 2% chance of a positive result.
For a throat swab , the percentage chance of a positive test declines from about 88% on
day 0 to about 47% by day 10. By day 31, there is only a 1% chance of a positive result.
In other words, the longer the time frame between the onset of symptoms and the time a
person is tested, the more likely the test will be negative.
Repeat testing of persons who have a negative test may (eventually) confirm the presence of
viral RNA, but this is impractical. Additionally, repeated testing of the same person can lead
to even more confusing results: The test may go from negative, to positive, then back to
negative again as the immune system clears out the coronavirus infection and moves to
recovery.
And what makes this testing even more confusing is that the
FDA admits that "The detection of viral RNA by RT-PCR does not necessarily equate with an
infectious virus."
Let's break that down:
You've had all the symptoms of COVID19, but your RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 is
negative.
Does that mean you're "good to go" – you can go to work, go to school or you can
travel? OR
Does that mean your influenza-like illness was caused by some other pathogen, possibly
one of the four coronaviruses that have been in circulation for 60 years? OR
Does that mean the result is a false-negative and you still have the infection, but it
isn't detectable by current tests? OR
Does that mean it was a sample was inadequately taken due to the faulty technique by the
technician? OR
Does that mean you have not been exposed, and you are susceptible to contracting the
infection, and you need to stay in quarantine?
So, what does a "positive" test actually mean? And that's the problem:
No one knows for sure.
Another Type of Testing: Antibodies
According to the nonprofit Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics
(FIND) , more than 200 serologic blood tests, to test for antibodies, are either now
available or in development.
There are two primary types of antibodies that are assessed for nearly any type of
infection: IgM and IgG. While several new testing devices are being touted as a home test, they
are not the same as a home pregnancy test or a glucometer to you're your blood sugar. The blood
spot or saliva specimen can be collected at home, must it must then be sent to a laboratory for
analysis. It can take a few days – or longer – to get the results. With so many
tests in the pipeline, the ability to test at home will be changing over time.
The first antibody to rise is IgM. It rises quickly after the onset of the infection and is
usually a sign of an acute, or current, infection. The IgM levels diminish quickly as the
infection resolves. The
FDA admits they do not know how long the IgM remains present for SARS-CoV-2 as the
infection is being cleared.
The interpretation of an IgG antibody is more difficult. This antibody is an indicator of a
past infection. The test is often not specific enough to determine if the past infection was
caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus or one of the four common coronaviruses that cause
influenza-like illness.
Because serology testing can yield a negative test result even if the patient is actively
infected (e.g., the body has not yet developed in response to the virus) or maybe falsely
positive (e.g., if the antibody indicates a past infection by a different coronavirus), this
type of testing should not be used to diagnose an acute or active COVID-19 infection.
Similarly, the CDC says the
following regarding antibody testing:
If you test positive:
A positive test result shows you have antibodies as a result of an infection with
SARS-CoV-2, or possibly a related coronavirus.
It's unclear if those antibodies can provide protection (immunity) against getting
infected again. This means that we do not know at this time if antibodies make you immune
to the virus.
If you have no symptoms, you likely do not have an active infection and no additional
follow-up is needed.
It's possible you might test positive for antibodies and you might not have or have
ever had symptoms of COVID-19. This is known as having an asymptomatic infection [ie you
have a healthy immune system!]
An antibody test cannot tell if you are currently sick with COVID-19.
If you test negative
If you test negative for antibodies, you probably did not have a previous infection.
However, you could have a current infection because antibodies don't show up for 1 to 3
weeks after infection.
Some people may take even longer to develop antibodies, and some people may not
develop antibodies.
An antibody test cannot tell if you are currently sick with COVID-19.
What? Wait!
Doesn't the vaccine industry call the IgG a "protective antibody"?
Isn't this the marker of immunity they assess after you've had an infection with measles
or chickenpox or mumps to determine if you are immune to future infections?
Isn't this the marker of induced immunity they are trying to achieve by administering a
vaccine?
If the FDA does not know if an IgG antibody to SARS-CoV-2 after recovering from the
infection is protective against a future infection, then they certainly don't know if an
antibody caused by a vaccine will prevent infection either.
Doesn't this completely eliminate the theory that antibodies afford protection and
antibodies from vaccines are necessary to keep you from getting sick?
Until we have a vaccine to defeat this dreaded disease, contact tracing in order to
understand the full breadth and depth of the spread of this virus is the only way we will be
able to get out from under this.
H.R.6666 would authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), acting through
the Director of the CDC to award grants to eligible entities to conduct diagnostic testing and
then to trace and monitor the contacts of infected individuals. The contact tracers would be
authorized to test people in their homes and as necessary, quarantine people in place.
Where do they intend to do this testing? Besides mobile units to test people in their homes,
the bill identifies eight specific locations where the testing and contract tracing could
occur: schools, health clinics, universities, churches, and "any other type of entity" the
secretary of HHS wants to use.
The bill would allocate $100 billion in
2020 "and such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2021 and any subsequent fiscal year
during which the emergency period continues."
But what are they looking for?
Is your test supposed to be positive – saying you've been exposed and you've
possibly recovered?
Or is your test supposed to be negative , meaning, you are healthy?
Or does a completely negative test – negative RT-PCR test and no IgG antibody mean
you're susceptible to infection and you need to stay in quarantine?
The virus is rapidly mutating, which is rather typical of RNA viruses. In a
study published in April 2020, researchers have discovered that the novel coronavirus has
mutated into at least 30 different genetic variations. If your RT-PCR test is positive, does
this identify exposure to the pandemic virus or exposure to one of the genetic variations? The
same can be said about the vaccines under development: With each mutation, is the vaccine more
likely to be all risk and no benefit when it reaches the market?
What You Can Do
Across the nation, police are being told to not apprehend criminals but instead, to arrest
parents at playgrounds, to arrest lone surfers on public beaches, to fine ministers and
congregation members sitting in their cars listening to a service on the radio, and to restrict
movement by creating one-way sidewalks.
People have had enough. They are beginning to see the huge scam that has been perpetrated on
the entire world over a viral infection with a global death rate of
1.4% (meaning, 1.4% of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 have a fatal outcome, while 98.6%
recover). This is far fewer deaths than a severe flu season.
We're already starting to see the thrust to take our power back:
In Virginia, people went to the beaches en mass,
ignoring social distancing and the orders of the Governor to stay home.
The central California city of Atwater has declared itself a "sanctuary
city," allowing business owners and churches to open, openly defying Democratic
California
Gov. Gavin Newsom's coronavirus-related stay-at-home order.
The truth about wearing
masks is starting to come out and people are voting with their feet. Retired
neurosurgeon, Dr. Russell Blaylock, warns that not only do face masks fail to protect healthy
people from contracting an illness, but they create serious health risks to the wearer.
While they shut us down and held us hostage in our homes, they changed our society, our
lives, our world.
I am not willing to accept this is the "new normal."
I won't submit to testing.
I will refuse mandatory vaccination.
I will stop wearing a mask.
I will not be afraid of standing next to a friend or family member and will not obey the
concept of "social distancing."
I will understand that an asymptomatic carrier is a normal, healthy person and I will not
buy into the fear that I might "catch something" from a normal, healthy person.
It's time for Americans to resist with non-violent civil disobedience. Be brave. Be bold.
Put on the full armor of God, as found in Ephesians
6:10-20 in the Bible, to stand against the world rulers of this present darkness. With God
on our side, all things are possible.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your
email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Vaccines Vaccines give broad parts of the population some level of immunity and are
considered crucial to ending the pandemic. They also take longer to develop, in part because
they must be proven to be extremely safe since they're given to healthy people. While
some researchers say a vaccine could be ready by the end of the year, others say it could
take far longer.
COMPANY Oxford University, AstraZeneca Plc NAME ChAdOx1 nCov-19 PROGRESS Phase 3
The vaccine is made from a harmless virus that's been altered to produce the surface spike
protein from SARS-CoV-2.
LATEST NEWS With human trials underway, the U.S. government has
pledged as much as $1.2 billion, and the company plans to produce as many as
30 million doses available in the U.K. by September. Other groups are moving to line up
access elsewhere. COMPANY Moderna Inc. NAME mRNA-1273 RECENTLY UPDATED Phase 2
Moderna's mRNA-1273 uses messenger RNA to prompt the body to make a key protein from the
virus, creating an immune response.
LATEST NEWS Moderna's vaccine produced antibodies to the
coronavirus in all patients tested in an initial safety trial. The company expects a phase 3
trial to begin July 27. COMPANY CanSino Biologics Inc. NAME Ad5-nCoV PROGRESS Phase 2
CanSino's vaccine was developed alongside China's military and is genetically engineered
with a replication-defective mutant virus.
LATEST NEWS CanSino's vaccine has received a
special authorization to be used by China's military after a study showed it generated an
immune response. President Xi Jinping says the country will make
any vaccine available as a global public good. COMPANY BioNTech SE, Pfizer Inc. NAME
multiple candidates PROGRESS Phase 2
BioNTech's BNT162 is another messenger RNA vaccine platform that the German company is
developing with Pfizer. In China, BioNTech is co-developing vaccines with Shanghai Fosun
Pharmaceutical Group.
LATEST NEWS One of the companies' vaccine candidates has shown
promising antibody responses. Further testing in up to 30,000 people may start as early as
July. COMPANY Sinovac Biotech Ltd NAME No name yet PROGRESS Phase 3
The vaccine uses inactivated virus, which can help the body develop antibodies to the
pathogen without risking infection.
LATEST NEWS Sinovac has begun human trials in China. The
company says its vaccine candidate can neutralize different strains of the virus. COMPANY China
National Biotec Group Co., Beijing Institute of Biological Products NAME No name yet PROGRESS
Phase 3
The vaccine uses inactivated virus, which can help the body develop antibodies to the
pathogen without risking infection.
LATEST NEWS With phase 2 trials complete, a vaccine
could be available as soon as the end of this year, according to an official report in May.
COMPANY Novavax Inc. NAME NVX-CoV2373 RECENTLY UPDATED Phase 2
Novavax's vaccine is meant to create antibodies that block a protein "spike" that the virus
uses to infect its host.
LATEST NEWS Novavax has received $1.6 billion from the U.S.
government as it prepares for a final-stage study as early as this fall. COMPANY Johnson &
Johnson NAME No name yet PROGRESS Preclinical
J&J is working on an unnamed adenovirus-based vaccine as well as two backups.
LATEST
NEWS J&J accelerated plans for human studies and aims to make up to
1 billion doses by the end of 2021 . J&J has said its vaccine could be ready for
emergency use by January, and it has received $456 million from the U.S. COMPANY Sanofi,
GlaxoSmithKline Plc NAME No name yet PROGRESS Preclinical
Sanofi is working on a vaccine using technology already employed in one of its flu vaccines,
which could speed development and production.
LATEST NEWS France's Sanofi has partnered with
the U.K.'s Glaxo on a project backed by U.S. funding. The companies plan to start human trials
in the second half of this year. Sanofi is also developing an mRNA vaccine with Translate Bio.
COMPANY Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc. NAME INO-4800 RECENTLY UPDATED Phase 1
Inovio's experimental vaccine uses DNA to activate a patient's immune system.
LATEST NEWS
Inovio says an early trial showed
positive immune responses but investors complained about a lack of detail. COMPANY Merck
& Co. NAME No names yet PROGRESS Preclinical
Merck's two vaccine candidates employ exisiting technology behind its Ebola virus shot and a
measles virus vector platform discovered by the Pasteur Institute, respectively.
LATEST NEWS
Merck
has partnered with AIDS researchers to develop a vaccine using technology already employed
in its Ebola virus shot. The company has also agreed to buy biotech Themis, gaining a vaccine
candidate that uses an existing measles virus vector platform. COMPANY Imperial College London
NAME No name yet PROGRESS Phase 1
When injected, the RNA vaccine candidate delivers genetic instructions to muscle cells to
make the "spike" protein on the surface of the coronavirus.
LATEST NEWS Researchers have
received U.K. funding and have begun human trials.
There is no exit strategy for this haphazard insanity. Once this over-reaction to a fairly
innocuous infectious agent was accepted as being necessary, there's no way to ever declare
reversion to normalcy.
In my opinion, rather than endlessly focussing on this not particularly interesting virus,
coming up with creative signboards and banners restricting movement, wrecking people's
livelihoods and painting crosses on the pavement where one must stand, we should have been onto
a more obvious problem by now. What if this HAD been a deadly pathogen? Why aren't we prepared
to quickly open special quarantine/treatment centers, disconnected from regular hospitals? And
what are we going to do about it?
This little rehearsal showed how unprepared we are should a real existential threat
arise.
But no, we must instead continue to waste our time, money and effort in playacting that this is
a real biological crisis, and creating an actual breakdown in our way of life. We must continue
to double down, because if we take ever more extreme action about corona, that will prove that
the idiocy we've demonstrated thus far was necessary ..right?
[Hide MORE]
Given the way corona virus is being handled, one would think we don't realize that people die
quite regularly, especially when they're in bad condition. Now, we're practically demanding
that nobody should die from catching a microbe – that we should stay home and hold our
breath until everyone is guaranteed to survive. Since when have we ever believed that? Is that
how we built civilization? The civilization that we're now destroying?
There's little reason for insulin-sensitive people – with healthy immune status and
without metabolic disease – to stay home, wear a mask or 'social distance' themselves.
Since they won't be getting seriously ill, their staying home wouldn't help 'flatten the curve'
of sick people overburdening the healthcare system (as usual, to the expense of all of us). On
the contrary, active healthy people can contribute something to the economy.
The main benefit of herd immunity is that it will allow the country to function again. And
that would be good for everyone, healthy and sickly alike. The metabolically/immunologically
compromised will be vulnerable to catching the corona virus from anyone who's contracted it and
is temporarily contagious, no matter whether the carrier's general health is good or poor. And
that's the same fix that people with poor immune function are in, always and everywhere. The
answer for protecting these most vulnerable people from COVID – which is only one of the
many dangers to their health that they face – can be one of two things; the best one
being that they start eating right. And/or, we can build as much equipment and medical
facilities, where they're most needed, as they may require. Either of these solutions is much
more viable, less disruptive and less expensive than what we're doing now. And with either
solution, healthier people would no longer be punished for possessing normal human
vitality.
While governments, health agencies and scientists take steps to upgrade the availability of
care facilities, equipment and treatments, individuals should follow this
CORONA VIRUS PROTOCOL
Part A (Everyone)
Begin a therapeutic diet to quickly upgrade and regulate the immune system. This consists of,
wholly or mostly:
Home cooked meat, oily fish, eggs (especially yolks), animal fat, bone broth, collagen or
gelatin, and liver, and the elimination of corn, soy, canola, safflower, sunflower, grapeseed
and rice bran oils as well as flours, sugar and prepared foods.
Part B (those most at risk for COVID complications- individuals with high BMI or chronic
health issues, or taking prescription medications, etc.)
While following the part A protocol, take reasonable precautions to limit your exposure to
possible infection from others, such as limiting time or wearing a mask when in close contact
with other people.
@john
cronk with this knowledge is talk about it. Lots of talk, little action. The only active
pieces on the board are hopping around and trying to do a cultural revolution and proceeding
with an absolute poverty of energy.
This might be the most sedentary collapse ever. The world is taking a hard turn towards a
prolonged dark age and for the lack of reaction it seems people are just going with the flow.
Welcome to the future. A little bit of 1984, a heavy dose of Idiocracy, and a whole bunch of
pudgy kids trying to live out their Harry Potter headcanon.
Nevermind all the attention given to "Black Lives" while Black voices (Lest we forget the
'Shaun King is transracial' scandal of not long ago) are shut out of the conversation
Nonsense reigns!
"The current work suggests that while the G614 variant may be more infectious, it is not
more pathogenic. There is a hope that as SARS-CoV-2 infection spreads, the virus might become
less pathogenic,"
With the 24/7 media circus coverage of Covid-19 I find it particularly interesting that
there is an obvious glaring omission of some extremely important facts relative to dealing with
a virus, especially one that is allegedly so virulent like this one. Yes, I read all about the
critical need to shelter in place, stay inside away from other people, wash your hands
constantly, avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth, wear your face mask and by all means
observe social distancing if you MUST venture outside for food!
Then it's repeated ad infinitum that the ONLY hope we have of ever returning to a semblance
of normalcy is to have a vaccine to protect us! Then to add some drama to this narrative the
media highlights their death-o-meter scoreboard with the implied threat that you'll be next IF
you don't obey the rules as dictated by the "experts".
But what is assiduously avoided at all cost is any reference to our most potent defense
against any virus; our body's natural immune system. Try as I might I couldn't find anything
about this first line of defense on the World Health Organizations (WHO) website or Centers for
Disease Control (CDC) website. It's as if it doesn't exist and is completely irrelevant.
If these organizations were genuinely concerned about the health of citizens they would
obviously discuss the vital role a healthy immune system plays in protecting us from illnesses.
But since they don't its obvious some other motive is at work, at least to me, and I strongly
suspect to other critical thinkers as well.
We now know from the science and data that over 90% of the people exposed to Covid-19 have
no symptoms at all or at worst a mild cold. The flu vaccines we have are only effective 30% to
60% of the time and the bugs change regularly so a vaccine that worked OK last year may barely
work at all this year. Let's learn some more about our body's immune system.
Virus
protection without a vaccine
There is an enlightening article on Web MD titled: "How to use Your Immune System to Stay
Healthy". That's a pretty straight forward title now isn't it? Early on Bruce Polsky, MD,
interim chairman department of medicine and chief division of infectious disease at St.
Lukes-Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York City says:
"We are endowed with a great immune system that has been designed evolutionarily to keep
us healthy."
The article goes on. . .
"The immune system is your body's natural defense system. It's an intricate network of
cells, tissues and organs that band together to defend your body against invaders. Those
invaders can include bacteria, viruses, parasites, even fungus, all with the potential to
make us sick. They are everywhere-in our homes, offices and backyards. . . "
The truth is no amount of social distancing, hand washing or face mask wearing is going to
eliminate our exposure to these various bugs. That's why we were created with this amazing
first line of natural defense.
Here's more from Web MD . . .
"The immune system can recognize millions of different antigens. And it can produce what
it needs to eradicate nearly all of them. When it's working properly, this elaborate defense
system can keep health problems ranging from cancer to the common cold at bay. . . "
Wow! That's pretty amazing stuff isn't it! According to Web MD a properly functioning immune
system can "keep health problems ranging from cancer to the common cold at bay." So why isn't
this "science" being included in all the other health recommendations we're being bombarded
with daily? It seems to me that any "expert" worth their salt would be talking about the
importance of a healthy immune system to stay healthy.
But there's more . . .
The Web MD article noted that failure to eat a healthy diet, sitting around not exercising,
not getting enough sleep and chronic stress can all lead to a compromised immune system. To
quote Dr. Polsky again:
". . . Lifestyle aspects are very, very important."
So if our lifestyle is very, very important to staying healthy as the good doctor says ask
yourself this question? Based on the Web M.D. article virtually all the results of the lockdown
serve to weaken our immune systems. The stress of unemployment, constant harping about
infections and rising death rates, lack of exercise and now a crack in our food distribution
system all are known to weaken the human immune system.
I also find it quite interesting that large groups of people can shop at Walmart, Home Depot
or other big box stores but they can't attend their local church even if it's a "drive through"
service?
Web M.D. says:
"Research shows that people with close friendships and strong support systems tend to be
healthier than those who lack such supports."
During times of crisis people need encouragement and their faith built up more than ever
before. Mandating people huddle in fear in their homes with constant media reports of
infections and death bombarding them continually is there any wonder peoples immune systems are
under severe stress?
WHO now says asymptomatic spread of coronavirus is 'very rare'
Jun. 09, 2020 - 4:06 - World Health Organization changes its tune on asymptomatic patients
spreading COVID-19; reaction from Fox News medical contributor Dr. Marc Siegel.
Although numerous studies have suggested people can spread the virus before they show
symptoms, the WHO has largely dismissed those as anecdotal or pointed out that they were
based on modelling.
Babak Javid, an infectious diseases doctor at Cambridge University Hospital, says many
scientists are persuaded by the studies published so far and think WHO should publish the
data it is citing to explain why it believes transmission of the disease in people without
symptoms is "rare".
"If you're going to make a really important statement like that, it would be good to
back it up," Javid said. "I think WHO is an important organisation, but they've made a lot
of statements that have been misleading."
"The top teams rushing to develop coronavirus vaccines are alerting governments, health
officials and shareholders that they may have a big problem : The outbreaks in their countries
may be getting too small to quickly determine whether vaccines work
A leader of the Oxford University group, one of the furthest ahead with human trials, admits
the reality is paradoxical, even "bizarre," but said the declining numbers of new infections
this summer could be one of the big hurdles vaccine developers face in the global race to beat
down the virus.
Even as new cases are growing worldwide, transmission rates are falling in Britain, China
and many of the hardest-hit regions in the United States -- the three countries that have
experimental vaccines ready to move into large-scale human testing in June, July and August."
Washpost
---------------
Well, pilgrims it would seem that the Post staff does not see the irony in their own
writing, or perhaps they do. There have been scattered evidences of rationality there lately.
Even as Democrat governors and mayors across the country drag their feet on the re-opening of
the American economy, infection rates are falling. In the Faucibirxist view of things
everything depends on vaccine development (or herd immunity post holocaust). But, alas there
just aren't enough new, vibrant infections to make development of the vaccines convenient. What
will happen to the flow of government money to these projects if this phenomenon becomes
general knowledge. Someone at the Post should be disciplined for this indiscretion. pl
"What will happen to the flow of government money to these projects if this phenomenon
becomes general knowledge."
Well Fauci is almost 80 so I think he's set for life. I hear the left wants lots of
redevelopment funds and jobs programs, with the attendant opportunities for graft that comes
with them, for thier cities which we are all assured had neither rioting nor looting.
Thank you Col. Lang for all the posts on novel coronavirus.
For shining light on this, this utter failure by the medical community and their various
and sundry enablers in government and in business.
On these liars and charlatans and killers and criminals.
The video below is about an hour long. It is a nurse, who worked in NYC hospital, the
alleged epi center of epi centers.
She basically says, without saying directly, but points to the fact that doctors were
murdering patients there, it seems.
She paints a picture of doctors not as scientists but as zealots, as neo neanderthals, as
craven monsters, who care not about life, the elderly, the sick, the least among us.
As Nurse Ratchets
Towards the end of video, she recounts her last day at this hospital, discussing a patient
she had nursed for many days, and who was doing fine, making progress, . . . and how she was
removed from his bed on direct orders, sent to the ER where she was not assigned, and 20
minutes later, the man she was caring for is dead.
These sorts of stories abound; this rage is not going away anytime soon. This is the rage,
and what caused it, that our "lords and masters" who censor us and tell us black is white,
and want to destroy our country. . . this is the rage they don't want to see expressed and
exposed. Will they get their way?
Well...they can always test their vaccines in the USA. We seem not to be faring as well and
can help out. (I believe this is a glass half-full moment.)
Trump needs to stop the $600 a week federal bonus to the unemployed. My neighbor told me
about how his daughter-in-law worked one day a week as a barmaid before the virus shut the
bar down and made a little over a hundred a week. Oregon unemployment pays her 150 a week and
with the added 600 she now makes over 7 times what she did working. How many protesters and
rioters are just as flush getting paid to party in the street? Most i'd say. That makes these
government funded protests a powerful voice and recruitment tool for the Democratic Party.
Ending the federal subsidy to the unemployed would reduce, if not stop, the demonstrations
and mau-mauing of the country.
Absolutely. There were howls of protests before Minneapolis when Georgia, Florida and
Texas started tellling people that if they recieved a recall to work notice from an employer
and refused to go they would be considered a voluntary quit and no longer eligable for
unemployment insurance payments. They'll howl again when they figure out this is all taxable
income.
Take everything the WaPo claims with a grain of salt. There is no real worry over lower covid
infections. What made Covid decrease was the lockdowns. Remove the lockdowns and covid
infection rates will climb, as we are seeing in the already reopened states.
Then when fall rolls around, and people are stuck indoors again, rates will skyrocket.
There will be plenty of test subjects for a vaccine.
With the spread rate of the coronavirus, any outbreak of the infection will peter out once
the total immunity rate of the population approaches 65-70 percent.
In Bergamo (Italy), 57 percent a population sample have tested positive for coronavirus
antibodies, which means that they must have had the infection before and are now most likely
immune.
If you are a Karen, then don't listen to me, but take it from the German government's very
own propaganda outlet, Deutsche Welle:
"Out of nearly 10,000 Bergamo residents who had their blood tested between April 23 and
June 3, 57% had antibodies, indicating they had come into contact with the virus and
developed an immune response.
Health authorities said the sample size was 'sufficiently broad' to be a reliable
indicator of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 among Bergamo province's population."
Try doing a search on Kary Mullis, creator of the PCR process. He died last year so we can
only go by past statements. He always stated that PCR was completely inappropriate and
meaningless for diagnostics or for any other clinical purpose.
CDC guidance on PCR until earlier this year was that doctors do diagnosis, not
laboratories. Doctors were allowed to consider PCR results as a factor, cautioned not to rely
on them. In current situation PCR results are the definition of COVID.
If the test is allowed to run too many cycles any sample will test positive.
And it is never entirely certain how many cycles have elapsed, clock does not tell exactly
what the RNA is up to.
I was considering using "All that is fomites melts into air," but I couldn't bring myself
to, so count yourself lucky (and anyhow, it's not really true). From the beginning of the
#COVID19 pandemic, we've been washing our hands, masking up, cleaning surfaces, and social
distancing. These measures have worked (
especially masking ), but now we know more. There's mounting evidence that airborne
transmission indoors is a key -- perhaps the main -- pathway to SARS-COV-2 transmission. In
this post I want to look at why that's so, give examples, and suggest a simple heuristic to
stay safe. Material like this might also be used to inform public policy ( here ; here
) by reducing superspreader events in enclosed spaces like churches (airborne transmission via
singing), restaurants (loud talking, especially if room is noisy), bars (ditto), nursing homes
(shouting[1]), gyms (
grunting ), meat-packing plants ( shouting ), call centers (talking),
offices generally (air conditioning), and other hot spots, but working that polucy out is not
the object of this post ( see here for engineering controls for
airborne transmission , and here for covid-proofing
public spaces ).
Speech droplets generated by asymptomatic carriers of severe acute respiratory syndrome
coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are increasingly considered to be a likely mode of disease
transmission. Highly sensitive laser light scattering observations have revealed that loud
speech can emit thousands of oral fluid droplets per second. In a closed, stagnant air
environment, they disappear from the window of view with time constants in the range of 8 to
14 min, which corresponds to droplet nuclei of ca. 4 μm diameter, or 12- to 21-μm
droplets prior to dehydration. These observations confirm that there is a substantial
probability that normal speaking causes airborne virus transmission in confined
environments.
That experiment was done inside a box.
Vox translates to real world terms:
A crowded indoor place, then, with poor ventilation, filled with people talking, shouting,
or singing for hours on end will be the riskiest scenario. A sparsely populated indoor space
with open windows is less risky (but not completely safe). Running quickly past another
jogger outside is on the other end of the spectrum; minimal risk.
(In other words, the problem is not density or proximity; the problem is transmission of the
virus, through the air, by human vocalization[2] (of which coughing and sneezing are a small,
and symptomatic, subset.)
That would explain why masks have worked. (One could argue that masks need only be worn
indoors, but most people are constantly moving from the outdoors to the indoors and out again,
which would involved touching the mask constantly to remove and replace it; better to wear it
all the time. In any case, minimal risk, to others, is not no risk). From the South China
Morning Post, "Coronavirus: hamster research shows effectiveness of masks 'huge' in Covid-19
battle, Hong Kong scientists say":
Hong Kong scientists conducting research on hamsters have offered the first proof of what
many residents have believed all along – that wearing surgical masks can significantly
reduce the rate of airborne Covid-19 transmission.
The study, which the team called the first of its kind, found the rate of non-contact
transmission – in which the virus was transmitted via respiratory droplets or airborne
particles – dropped by as much as 75 per cent when masks were present.
A passenger, known as "A", boarded a fully booked long-distance coach and settled down on
the second row from the back.
The passenger already felt sick at that point but it was before China had declared the
coronavirus outbreak a national crisis, so "A" did not wear a mask, nor did most of the other
passengers or the driver on the 48-seat bus."It can be confirmed that in a closed environment
with air-conditioning, the transmission distance of the new coronavirus will exceed the
commonly recognised safe distance," the researchers wrote in a paper published in peer-review
journal Practical Preventive Medicine last Friday. They said the study proves the importance
of washing hands and wearing face masks in public places because the virus can linger in the
air attached to fine droplet particles.
Here is a seating chart of the bus:
After reading this, I altered my practice not to mask up, which I was already doing, but to
avoid (air-conditioned) public transportation entirely, and indeed air-conditioned spaces
entirely.
We conclude that in this outbreak, droplet transmission was prompted by air-conditioned
ventilation. The key factor for infection was the direction of the airflow. Of note, patient
B3 was afebrile and 1% of the patients in this outbreak were asymptomatic, providing a
potential source of outbreaks among the public (7,8). To prevent spread of COVID-19 in
restaurants, we recommend strengthening temperature-monitoring surveillance, increasing the
distance between tables, and improving ventilation.
Here again is a seating chart:
I was already not going to restaurants because of the Chinese bus episode, if I had been, I
would have stopped. One can't wear a mask while eating!
Vocalization . We have several examples of vocalization (singing, shouting, talking,
grunting, etc.) causing transmission.
Following a 2.5-hour choir practice attended by 61 persons, including a symptomatic index
patient, 32 confirmed and 20 probable secondary COVID-19 cases occurred (attack rate = 53.3% to
86.7%); three patients were hospitalized, and two died. Transmission was likely facilitated by
close proximity (within 6 feet) during practice and augmented by the act of singing.
(Sadly, privacy concerns forbid a seat diagram.) I don't agree that proximity in and itself
transmits anything; it seems clear to me that singing was the issue (although transmission
through fomites was possible, as choir members put away chairs, etc.). Supporting evidence from
Missouri's Daily Journal, "
A surprising way you may risk getting Covid-19 ":
The possibility that singing might help transmit infectious diseases is not a new concept.
A 1968 article, "Singing and the Dissemination of Tuberculosis," described an elaborate box
that volunteers could talk, sing and cough into, allowing investigators to measure the
number, size and length of time airborne of individual infectious droplets they breathed out.
And a few TB outbreaks have featured singing, including one in a New Jersey church choir in
1995.
Some situations may be particularly risky. Meatpacking plants are likely vulnerable
because many people work closely together in spaces where low temperature helps the virus
survive. But it may also be relevant that they tend to be loud places, [Gwenan Knight of the
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine] says. The report about the choir in
Washington made her realize that one thing links numerous clusters: They happened in places
where people shout or sing. And although Zumba classes have been connected to outbreaks,
Pilates classes, which are not as intense, have not, Knight notes. "Maybe slow, gentle
breathing is not a risk factor, but heavy, deep, or rapid breathing and shouting is."
This report describes the cluster of 16 cases of confirmed or probable COVID-19, including
three deaths, likely resulting from transmission of SARS-CoV-2 at two family gatherings (a
funeral and a birthday party)
Here, instead of a seating diagram, we have a timeline:
I'm guessing "Happy Birthday" was sung at the birthday party, hence the greater number of
cases originating from it.
Here is the case of a South Korean call center. From the CDC, "Coronavirus Disease Outbreak
in Call Center, South Korea":
We described the epidemiologic characteristics of a COVID-19 outbreak centered in a call
center in South Korea. We identified 97 confirmed COVID-19 case-patients in building X,
indicating an attack rate of 8.5%. However, if we restrict our results the 11th floor, the
attack rate was as high as 43.5%. This outbreak shows alarmingly that severe acute
respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can be exceptionally contagious in crowded
office settings such as a call center. The magnitude of the outbreak illustrates how a
high-density work environment can become a high-risk site for the spread of COVID-19 and
potentially a source of further transmission. Nearly all the case-patients were on one side
of the building on 11th floor. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, the predecessor
of SARS-CoV-2, exhibited multiple superspreading events in 2002 and 2003, in which a few
persons infected others, resulting in many secondary cases. Despite considerable interaction
between workers on different floors of building X in the elevators and lobby, spread of
COVID-19 was limited almost exclusively to the 11th floor, which indicates that the duration
of interaction (or contact) was likely the main facilitator for further spreading of
SARS-CoV-2.
Here we do have a seating diagram:
It seems unlikely to me that air conditioning was the major factor, because otherwise --
HVAC mavens in the readership will correct me -- the cases would have been distributed
throughout the floor. However, what call center personnel do is talk , a lot. Hence I
would urge that vocalization is the driver, not mere proximity.
Characteristics that might have led to transmission from the instructors in Cheonan
include large class sizes, small spaces, and intensity of the workouts. The moist, warm
atmosphere in a sports facility coupled with turbulent air flow generated by intense physical
exercise can cause more dense transmission of isolated droplets (6,7). Classes from which
secondary COVID-19 cases were identified included 5–22 students in a room ≈60 m2
during 50 minutes of intense exercise. We did not identify cases among classes with <5
participants in the same space. Of note, instructor C taught Pilates and yoga for classes of
7–8 students in the same facility at the same time as instructor B (Figure; Appendix
Table 2), but none of her students tested positive for the virus. We hypothesize that the
lower intensity of Pilates and yoga did not cause the same transmission effects as those of
the more intense fitness dance classes.
We see that "high intensity" classes accounting for all the transmission; there was no
transmission from Yoga and Pilates classes. Here the vocalization would be heavy breathing,
huffing and puffing.
Heuristic of Avoid Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Indoors
One salutary result of focusing on indoor transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is that we don't
have to get all het up [4] about photos like this anymore:
The foreground/background compressed photos of people enjoying outdoor spaces are
becoming an irresistible genre. This one from the Washington Post shows a few hundred
people in the space of a few hundred meters. In other words, reasonable numbers. The moral
panic will backfire. pic.twitter.com/MBBNNMVcXP
Photographer's tricks aside, these people are outdoors; the risk is minimal (though I still
won't answer for, say, small groups of people sitting on a beach blanket, sharing beers and
singing old songs). I would avoid groups like this, but then I would anyway, virus or no
virus.
The Japanese seem to have had some success by focusing on indoor transmission as well,
following a rule called "The Three C's." Here is a poster:
Experts are also credited with creating an easy-to-understand message of avoiding what are
called the "Three C's" -- closed spaces, crowded spaces and close-contact settings -- rather
than keeping away from others entirely.
"Social distancing may work, but it doesn't really help to continue normal social life,"
said Hokkaido University's Suzuki. "The 'Three C's' are a much more pragmatic approach and
very effective, while having a similar effect."
However, I think that knowing what we know now, we can add two more almost-C's to avoid: Air
C onditioning, and "Vo c alization (or perhaps C acophony?)
However, all in all, I think the best heuristic is offered by one Ángela Caída's
Twitter account:
This "Three C's environment is the same as a crowded, musty cave full of tightly packed,
chattering bats, which makes sense, because that's where the coronavirus evolved.
Caves are also cool, like air conditioned spaces, and while bats vocalize, I doubt they
transmit SARS-CoV-2 as well as we do[3].
So, to avoid SARS-CoV-2 airborne transmission, don't be like a bat! Avoid bat caves! Also,
learn sign language?
[3] "Much of the cacophony in a bat cluster, the researchers suggest , is bats
voicing their annoyance with those in very close quarters around them." Bat vocalizations are "
ultrasonic ",
"repeated bursts of only a few hundred milliseconds." So making the assumption that
lower-pitched and longer human communication emits more virus, one might speculate that bats
would be less vulnerable to airborne transmission of #COVID-19 than humans.
[4] Terry Pratchett, The Truth :
"Mrs. Tilly, I think you wrote a lovely well-spelled and grammatical letter to us
suggesting that everyone under the age of eighteen should be flogged once a week to stop them
being so noisy?"
"Once a day, Mr de Worde," said Mrs. Tilly. "That'll teach 'em to go around being
young!"
So, if you must stay in a hotel while driving interstate to avoid air travel:
– choose an older hotel with (noisy) under-window AC rather than the more efficient
but potentially deadly central HVAC in newer buildings?
– minimize your (masked) time checking in; wipe down all surfaces w/ bleach esp
bathroom, TV remote, table tops; shove bedcover into a drawer; decline room service if only
staying one night; avoid common areas; skip breakfast entirely or at most grab and go; remote
checkout?
I'm depressed -- and vulnerable -- enough to seriously consider bringing along a
lightweight 2 person tent, and pop it up on top of the motel bed. Sleep, read, surf Internet
in the tent. Another option is sleeping in an RV a campground or a WLMart parking lot.
Age and health issues mean I need to start thinking this through or spend remaining years
at home.
Air travel is not in the same category as riding on a bus. Airplanes have HEPA filters.
From an interview with an associate professor of aviation maintenance:
HEPA filters are a very high-intensity system of fibers that you essentially run air
through to filter out an incredible amount of contaminants -- not just dust, not just
bacteria, but moisture, any sort of contamination that could potentially harm or create an
atmosphere in the cabin or the cockpit that could harm the passengers or the crews. The
material in them is much closer together compared to cheaper air filters, and that makes it
very difficult for biological elements to penetrate them.
How common are HEPA filters?
I don't know of an airline that's operating right now that does not have HEPA-level
filters on them, but that does not mean that one does not exist. There's a certain amount
of air quality that you have to maintain in your commercial airplane. If you're flying
commercial passengers or corporate passengers, you're going to have a HEPA filter or better
air filtration system.
So the risk in flying is not the air circulation. It is:
1. An unmasked person coughing, sneezing, or talking loudly, and you get their cooties
before the air gets sucked into the filtration system. Everyone on a plane is supposed to be
masked up but it's not easy to enforce, given that the airlines can't toss someone out at
39,000 feet.
2. Getting to the plane and your sear. Hard to imagine that people can stay 6 feet apart
when dealing with airline security and getting on board. Passengers are now required to be
masked up from TSA onward, so that can be enforced. Airport security can remove people.
3. Those bins at security! Filthy! Wear gloves for that part and remove/replace shortly
afterwards.
Lambert, it really depends on how the HVAC system is configured; different zones on a
particular floor may be served by different airhandlers.
Some buildings have large central A/C plants with massive airhandlers that serve the
entire building, especially in 1960's though mid 1970's vintage high-rise office towers.
Several of NYC's larger office REITs are considering installing UV equipment in the
airhandler fan chambers, but I haven't heard of any contracts being let just yet.
"Photographer's tricks aside, these people are outdoors; the risk is minimal ."
That might be true for for deep focus shots along seaside boardwalks,
but maybe not for the overhead shots of Lake of the Ozarks resorts that we've all seen.
Not to mention that drunks trying to impress the other gender can get very vocal.
It will be a very long time before my nuclear family unit ventures forth.
It seems like the trick might be to stay within your nuclear unit outdoors and not mix
with others. We'll need luck trying to teach that to pool bound Arkansas high schoolers (see
link below) or possibly Lake of the Ozarks revelers.
I have been out mountain biking with my younger son lately. We feel pretty safe so far.
The nice thing about biking in a relatively secluded place is that we literally touch nothing
that isn't "ours". Our only debates are if we need to press a button to cross a street.
Shutting down churches without shutting down trains (no HEPA filters there, presumably) if
their choral music is taped, not live performance, would seem selective, for those who do not
believe in livin on bread alone (thus spiritual nourishment is essential).
One of my basic rules of thumb is to only go into buildings with very high ceilings
(typical big box store) and low density of people. There is lots of air available then for
recriculation and you should be able to avoid the virus if you generally stay away from
people. I avoid all conversation with people.
By definition, this is generally not going to be a restaurant or bar, so they are out for
the foreseeable future.
I like the way that this article brings together so many threads and articles over the
past few months into a handy page. It looks much better when you see it all on one page and
start to make your own conclusions. Of course some of the conclusions suck as in no public
transport, no restaurants, no gyms, etc. Of course some people will not take note-
When talking about church transmission I thought about something from history. About two
centuries ago many Scots followed religions that were not exactly in line with the British
Army's professed Church of England. So to avoid getting caught at their own lay services,
they would head off to a field or hill and post guards at each corner to give warning of
spies and proceed in their services.
So yes, a lot of these churches could have their services in fields while the local
sky-pilot could use a megaphone to give the service. They just need to space themselves out a
bit. More to the point, some groups forget that their people are the church and not
just the buildings that they happen to use. We have even seen services conducted over the net
or in drive-in like services. I think that, for example, those people in that Mississippi
church that had their church burnt down may have forgotten that fact.
No. They are waiting for the Rapture..From a NC Contributor Tom Stone, "I have no problem
with individual Christians rushing to their Heavenly Rewards, it's when they take others with
them without their consent that I see an issue.."
In my comment I see that I neglected to say that it was not Scottish people that were
going off to fields and hills to have their lay services but Scottish Regiments .
Compounding the distrust is the polarizing figure of President Donald Trump himself, who proudly
announced the shortened timetable for vaccine development last week. Thirty-six percent of those
polled by Reuters said they would be less likely to take a potential Covid-19 vaccine if it came
recommended by Trump, while just 14 percent thought the president's seal of approval was a positive.
Trump's narrative flip-flops haven't helped his credibility on the vaccine front. From his early
reassurances that the virus would vanish in weeks, to his public conflicts with his own health
advisers over locking down and reopening the country, it's not hard to see why Americans are hesitant
to fall in line behind him on this. But the problem isn't necessarily political. Nearly half of those
uninterested in taking the vaccine said the speed of its development worried them, while over 40
percent said the vaccine would be riskier than actually contracting Covid-19 itself.
However, even 29 percent of those who said they were "
not very interested
" in the
vaccine allowed they'd be willing to change their mind if the shot was approved by the Food and Drug
Administration. The full approval process for vaccines usually takes over a decade, and even the most
optimistic experts – including Dr. Anthony Fauci, who has become the public face of the US' Covid-19
policy – believe a shot won't be ready for another year to 18 months. Rushing a vaccine to market in
the middle of a pandemic means sacrificing comprehensive safety checks for efficiency – a tradeoff
that can be disastrous, as in the case of the 2009 swine flu shot Pandemrix, which caused permanent
brain damage in over 1,000 British patients.
The parallels between Covid-19 and that epidemic are ominous – wildly inflated death predictions
had spooked the UK government into approving Pandemrix without sufficient safety data – and it surely
won't help Americans' trust in this vaccine that Trump's "
vaccine czar
" Moncef Slaoui ran
GlaxoSmithKline's vaccine division during the swine flu debacle. Nor has it been especially heartening
to discover Slaoui's extensive investments in not just Glaxo but many other drug companies working on
potential vaccines.
Slaoui earned $3 million on Monday alone from Moderna, which is still considered the leading
candidate in the vaccine race, even though the drug company has never brought a vaccine to market.
After hyping up what were essentially meaningless preliminary results, Moderna's stock shot up 25
percent, bringing his holdings to over $10 million. He pledged to donate those earnings to "
cancer
research
" after demands for him to divest reached a fever pitch. A vaccine produced at Oxford
University hasn't fared much better, with all six rhesus monkeys who received the shot becoming
infected anyway – despite a preliminary report that tried to spin the failure as representing "
some
"
success.
Threats of mandatory vaccination have unsurprisingly not helped to soothe Americans' worries over a
potentially unsafe vaccine. Fauci and other health officials have repeatedly warned the public that
there will be no return to "
normal
" without a vaccine, even as lockdown restrictions are
slowly lifted – a statement some have interpreted as a threat that the unvaccinated will be barred
from crowded public places or travel. Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz went further, declaring
the government has "
police power
" to mandate Americans take a vaccine and claiming such power
is "
not debatable
" constitutionally. And other experts downplayed the very real concerns
voiced by poll respondents in favor of blaming the "
very aggressive anti-vaccine movement
."
All this is bad news for the health experts Reuters cites, who say 70 percent of Americans would
have to be immune in order to achieve "
herd immunity
" and stop the virus from spreading
through the US, where upwards of 90,000 people have died since the pandemic began.
A top US scientist has said that people should not count on a Covid-19 vaccine being
developed any time soon...
William Haseltine, the groundbreaking cancer, HIV/AIDS and human genome projects
researcher, has said the best approach to the pandemic is to manage the
disease through careful tracing of infections and strict isolation measures whenever it
starts spreading. He said that while a vaccine could be developed, "I wouldn't count on it",
and urged people to wear masks, wash hands, clean surfaces and keep a distance.
"... According to the Mayo Clinic, a normal pulse oximeter oxygen level reading is between 95% and 100% , and anything less than 90% is considered dangerously low, or hypoxic. Some doctors have reported COVID-19 patients entering the hospital with oxygen levels at 50% or below . ..."
Some doctors are recommending these small, inexpensive devices to help monitor
symptoms.
A pulse oximeter attaches to a finger and uses light to detect the level of oxygen in your blood.
As
coronavirus
testing efforts
continue to ramp up and
face masks
are now a part of everyday life, a small diagnostic tool that clips to the tip of your
finger is fast becoming a must-have gadget in the
fight
against the coronavirus
. It's called a pulse oximeter, and it painlessly checks your blood oxygen
level, which can be affected by lung diseases such as COVID-19.
The device was already starting to surge in popularity as word got around
that people with the
coronavirus
frequently
arrive
at the hospital with abnormally low oxygen levels
. After an
op-ed
piece in The New York Times
recommended the use of pulse oximeters to detect a frightening
condition called "silent hypoxia," sales of the devices
skyrocketed
.
Many models are sold out or on lengthy backorder online. Same with brick-and-mortar drug stores,
supermarkets and box stores.
A new study from Los
Alamos National Laboratory has revealed a new, now-dominant strain of the coronavirus which
appears to be more contagious , according to the authors. Meanwhile, doctors in the United
States are wondering if the harder-hit East Coast is being hit with a different version of the
virus than the West Coast.
Emerging in early February, the new strain migrated from Europe to the East Coast of the
United States, where it became the dominant strain across the world beginning in mid-March.
Wherever the new strain has appeared, it's quickly infected far more people than earlier
strains which emerged from Wuhan, China. Within weeks it became the most prevalent strain in
some nations.
... ... ...
Emerging in early February, the new strain migrated from Europe to the East
Coast of the United States, where it became the dominant strain across the world beginning in
mid-March. Wherever the new strain has appeared, it's quickly infected far more people than
earlier strains which emerged from Wuhan, China. Within weeks it became the most prevalent
strain in some nations.
In addition to spreading faster, it may make people vulnerable to a second infection after
a first bout with the disease , the report warned.
The 33-page report was posted
Thursday on BioRxiv, a website that researchers use to share their work before it is peer
reviewed, an effort to speed up collaborations with scientists working on COVID-19 vaccines
or treatments. That research has been largely based on the genetic sequence of earlier
strains and might not be effective against the new one . - LA Times
(via Yahoo)
According to the report, fourteen mutations have been identified in the spike proteins of
SARS-CoV-2 , the protrusions on the exterior of the virus which make up its namesake 'corona.'
The report was based on a computational analysis of more than 6,000 coronavirus samples from
around the world, collected by the Germany-based Global Initiative for Sharing All Influenza
Data.
Assisted by scientists at Duke University and the University of Sheffield in England, the
Los Alamos team focused on a mutation called D614G, which controls changes in spike
proteins.
"The story is worrying, as we see a mutated form of the virus very rapidly emerging, and
over the month of March becoming the dominant pandemic form," said lead author Bette Korber, a
Los Alamos computational biologist. "When viruses with this mutation enter a population, they
rapidly begin to take over the local epidemic, thus they are more transmissible." The new
strain first appeared in Italy, almost at the same time as the original Wuhan strain appeared,
according to the report. By March 15, the mutated strain was dominant. The same was seen in New
York, which was hit by the original virus around March 15, but was overwhelmed by the new
strain within days.
The authors also warn that if the pandemic doesn't wind down during the summer as most
viruses do, it could undergo further mutations right as the first medical treatments and
vaccines - should the adhere to ambitious timelines we've been promised - begin to roll
out.
" We cannot afford to be blindsided as we move vaccines and antibodies into clinical testing
," Korber added on Facebook. "Please be encouraged by knowing the global scientific community
is on this, and we are cooperating with each other in ways I have never seen in my 30 years as
a scientist."
David
Montefiori , a Duke University scientist who worked on the report said it is the first to
document a mutation in the coronavirus that appears to make it more infectious.
Although the researchers don't yet know the details about how the mutated spike behaves
inside the body , it's clearly doing something that gives it an evolutionary advantage over
its predecessor and is fueling its rapid spread. One scientist called it a "classic case of
Darwinian evolution."
" D614G is increasing in frequency at an alarming rate , indicating a fitness advantage
relative to the original Wuhan strain that enables more rapid spread," the study said.
Different strains, different effects?
As the Times notes, doctors in the United States have begun to question whether new strains
of the virus could account for differences in how it affects different people , according to UC
San Francisco professor Alan Wu, who runs the clinical chemistry and toxicology laboratories at
SF General Hospital.
According to Wu, medical experts have speculated in recent weeks that at least two strains
of coronavirus were circulating in the US - one prevalent on the East Coast and one on the West
Coast.
"We are looking to identify the mutation," said Wu, who highlighted that his hospital has
only had a few fatalities out of the hundreds of cases it's treated, which is "quite a
different story than we are hearing from New York."
The Los Alamos study does not indicate that the new version of the virus is more lethal
than the original. People infected with the mutated strain appear to have higher viral loads.
But the study's authors from the University of Sheffield found that among a local sample of
447 patients, hospitalization rates were about the same for people infected with either virus
version.
Even if the new strain is no more dangerous than the others, it could still complicate
efforts to bring the pandemic under control . That would be an issue if the mutation makes
the virus so different from earlier strains that people who have immunity to them would not
be immune to the new version.
And if the mutation makes it back to those who have already had COVID-19, it would make
"individuals susceptible to a second infection," according to the authors.
@Kratoklastes ory tract that there might even be a second receptor that the virus could
use to launch its attack.
Even more troubling is the fact that SARS-COV-2 seems to make use of the enzyme furin from
the host to cleave the viral spike protein. This is worrying, researchers say, because furin
is abundant in the respiratory tract and found throughout the body.
It is used by other formidable viruses, including HIV, influenza, dengue and Ebola to
enter cells. By contrast, the cleavage molecules used by SARS-CoV are much less common and
not as effective
I do not think that Covid-19 is 'just a flu' and I think that the panic in Wuhan started in
the next microsecond after they had decoded the [warlike!] spike. rgds
Fears that the coronavirus would mutate into a more dangerous strain appear to have been
borne out, as research has identified that a new, more contagious strain of SARS-CoV-2 has
become the dominant form worldwide. The new strain, which has been dubbed 'Spike D614G' has
been proliferating in Europe since at least mid-February, and spread to become the dominant
form during the month of March. It is far more contagious than the original strain which
emerged from Wuhan, for reasons as yet unknown.
Wherever it emerged it became dominant very quickly, and in some countries it became the
only common strain within weeks. The paper notes that the
rapid global spread of the coronavirus has provided it with "ample opportunity for natural
selection to act upon rare but favorable mutations.'' Furthermore, if the virus does not
wane away as the weather warms in summer there will be nothing to stop it mutating into more
and more strains.
Warning call
The research , which was
carried out by a joint American and British team led by Los Alamos National Laboratory, has
been released ahead of peer review as 'an early warning' to other researchers. As it
stands, scientists studying the coronavirus around the world may be analysing the genetic
sequence of the older strain, and therefore it is crucial that they collaborate with this team
to get the latest information. "We cannot afford to be blindsided as we move vaccines and
antibodies into clinical testing," the lead author Dr Bette Korber, known for her work on
HIV, said.
Because the paper has not yet been peer-reviewed, it has been published online on the server
BioRxiv. However, the reputations of the scientists involved suggest that the findings are
sound and must be taken with the utmost seriousness -- the report is 33 pages long, and short
on laughs. "This is hard news,'' said Korber of the findings.
The scientists' methodology involved running computer analysis of over 6,000 coronavirus DNA
sequences collected from around the world. Although they remark that "observed diversity
among pandemic SARS-CoV-2 sequences is low'' there were no fewer than 14 different
mutations in the Spike protein sequences, just one of which is the strain that has everybody
worried.
This is the strain with the D614G mutation, which is probably causing the increased
contagiousness. The mutation affects the 'Spike proteins' on the outside of the virus, which
allow the virus to invade human cells. For this reason, these spikes have until now been the
main target of those trying to design vaccines or antiviral drugs to combat the virus. There
are currently at least 62 vaccines in development, and most of these are focused on the Spike
proteins.
Wasted efforts
Although there is not really any good news here, this may not be as bad as it sounds. There
is at present no suggestion that Spike D614G is any more deadly than the original. The British
team calculated that people were no more likely to be hospitalized by it, although they did
seem to have higher viral loads (more of the virus in their body).
But even if Spike D614G is not meaningfully different from the old strain, it does not mean
that nothing has changed. The problems introduced by multiple forms of a virus have everything
to do with immunity and vaccination. If a person had contracted and been ill with one strain,
that would still be no guarantee of immunity to another. Epidemiologists could be left every
winter having to guess what the commonest strain of coronavirus will be, as they do with the
flu.
Furthermore, the development of a vaccine relies on designing the antibodies to match
perfectly to the specific 'Spikes' on the outside of the virus. If these are mutated, any
potential vaccine might not be specific enough to target that strain. Receiving the vaccine
would provide no guarantee of immunity. This possibility is especially worrying to the study's
authors.
The authors have also been led to speculate that the wildly different outbreaks experienced
in different regions could be down to different strains. Spike D614G hit Italy in early
February, probably around the same time as the older strain hit there. Italy has been one of
Europe's worst affected countries.
And in America, just a few days after the first cases were reported in New York, Spike D614G
was the dominant form there. Contrasting New York City with the relatively mild outbreak on
America's West Coast suggests that different strains could be at play. No matter what details
transpire, it's clear that in a world with multiple strains of coronavirus, developing vaccines
or treatments is only going to get harder.
"Every time the virus replicates, there is a danger of error in the copy, which renders it
less effective for the most part, much as in human cells."
The issue is that the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein that binds to ACE2 and CD147 receptors
is what allows the virus to replicate more efficiently. In a given population of viral
particles a less efficient particle would result in fewer replicates leading its mutation to
be less prevalent in a population of the coronavirus.
Thus, I would expect the virus to retain its virulence over time which leads us back to Dr
Talab's conclusion on how to stop the transmission of a virus that needs a host. A subset of
the availability of a host is what happens if the host can also be a non-human such as the
Chinese raccoon dog, ferrets or even pigs?
In discussing viral mutations it is important to also note that articles that claim to
calculate viral mutation rates fail to understand that statistics is about populations, and
not individuals. The mutation rates of a population are not well represented by the PCR test
if the mutation is not frequent enough to be seen in the amplification process (38-39
times).
I would not bet against the persistence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus S-protein and thus its
continued virulence given the probability of mutations and the loss of function by a less
virulent strain.
As for a vaccine, I would not hold my breath and if partially successful might result in
more deaths due the the vaccine of the cytokine storm that the virus itself.
GSK partnered with Bill Gates to produce the Covid-19 Vaccine. GSK has been found guilty
for several criminal federal offenses, bribes and health violations, and paid Billions in
lawsuits including for birth defects & brain damage. https://www. drugwatch.com/manufacturers/ glaxosmithkline/ #BillGates#QAnon#q
Promising
his share of $450 million of $1.2 billion to eradicate polio, Gates took control of
India's National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI), which mandated up to
50
doses (Table 1) of polio vaccines through
overlapping immunization programs to children before the age of five. Indian doctors
blame the Gates campaign for a devastating non-polio
acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children beyond
expected rates between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian government dialed back Gates'
vaccine regimen and
asked Gates and his vaccine policies to leave India. NPAFP rates dropped precipitously.
Yesterday a preprint of a collaborative study involving medical, genomic and virology
researchers from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico-US, University Of Sheffield-UK,
Duke University in North Carolina-US, Sheffield Teaching Hospital-UK and the
NHS-Foundation-UK, was released. No quacks there.
It shows that the Spike elements of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus is mutating
It uses real-time mutation tracking in the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, specifically on the
Spike (S) protein because it mediates infection of human cells and is the target of most
vaccine strategies and antibody-based therapeutics.
It monitored changes over the last two months from the early strains in Wuhan to the
specific strains across the globe in conjunction with the GISAID data.
They focused on 14 specific sites on the virus and 2 Spike mutations were of particular
interests: D614G and S943P.
It was found that D614G is increasing in frequency at an alarming rate, indicating a
fitness advantage relative and enables more rapid spread. S943P is located in the fusion core
region, and is of particular interest as it is concerned with spreading via
recombination.
D614 is located on the surface of the spike protein protomer, where it can form contacts
with the neighboring protomer. The mutation allows from a structurally perspective more easy
'binding' to human host cells through a variety of ways and from a immunological function, it
disrupts antibody functions trying to attack it.
Hence the D614G mutation not only increases transmissibility, but also impacts severity of
disease.
The S943P mutation however allows recombinant strategies for the virus to evolve.
The study of the other mutation sites L5F, L8V V367F, G476S, and V483A all indicate that
he virus can easily and evolve depending and conditions, displaying characteristics that it
is even far more potent than HIV. There were also many other sites of mutations that the
study covered.
So thats not very encouraging and doesn't bode well. Not conclusive but just means this
needs watching.
"The real threat isn't the virus that has killed 59,000 Americans. It is a nonexistent
vaccine for it."
There are many valid comments in that post, but...call me crazy...I will not be taking any
vaccine that's been rushed in a few months. Vaccines take quite a while to develop and the
consequences of taking a poorly researched one are quite severe. However, I doubt it will
come to that, as even the most optimistic vaccine estimate seems to be 18 to 24 months. By
which time herd immunity will have happened whether anyone wants it to or not.
Clearly this is much worse than any flu in the past century. But I don't blame anyone for
being suspicious when so many contract the disease either have mild symptoms or none at
all.
I really can't see COVID-19 as a bio-weapon, it's far too non-specific for that, but what I
might think possible is that someone developed it plus corresponding vaccine and
anti-COVID-19 drug to make billions out of it. The longer the release of the vaccine and drug
are delayed, the more valuable they become. If someone had released the vaccine straight
after COVID-19, it might be worth a few million dollars and the authorities would be very
suspicious, but if release was delayed for a few months it would be worth billions and every
country is so desperate for a vaccine/treatment they most likely be too bothered. It'd need a
new definition for the term vulture capitalist.
Let's also remember that Gilead/Rumsfeld were the driving forces with the Avian Flu Hoax
(Tamiflu) that resulted in scandals and mass profiting- Rumsfeld himself who was once CEO of
Gilead sold his Gilead shares and netted a handsome return.
Don't forget Rumsfelds attraction to vast sums of money. After Tamiflu, Aspartame, and now
Gilead there are still the two trillion $ that disappeared from Pentagon's accounts just
before 9/11.(The records/archives were in Bat 7, and the thing that hit the Pentagon itself,
exploded in the Finance/accounts section).
So statistically, where there is Rumsfeld it is 100% certain there is something that will
be profitable. Or should that be, where there is some profit to be made from a disaster, it
ought to be statistically possible to calculate the part that goes to Rummy?
So statistically, where there is Rumsfeld it is 100% certain there is something that will
be profitable. Or should that be, where there is some profit to be made from a disaster, it
ought to be statistically possible to calculate the part that goes to Rummy?
Posted by: Stonebird | Apr 29 2020 19:48 utc | 33
And why is that this obviously crony dude is always absent from scrutiny by the media and
Congress?
Why always the same circus of Biden and Trump?
The latest round of 'surveillance' testing for coronavirus antibodies was
done on first responders, and found that the number who tested positive was once again
surprisingly high.
For the past few weeks, more than 50 scientists have been working diligently to do something
that the Food and Drug Administration mostly has not: Verifying that 14 coronavirus
antibody tests now on the market actually deliver accurate results.
These tests are crucial to reopening the economy, but public health experts have raised
urgent concerns about their quality. The new research, completed just days ago and posted
online Friday, confirmed some of those fears: Of the 14 tests, only three delivered consistently reliable results . Even the
best had some flaws.
The research has not been peer-reviewed and is subject to revision. But the results are
already raising difficult questions about the course of the epidemic.
Surveys of residents in the Bay Area, Los Angeles and New York this week found that
substantial percentages tested positive for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, the official name of the
new coronavirus. In New York City, the figure was said to be as high as 21 percent. Elsewhere,
it was closer to 3 percent.
The idea that many residents in some parts of the country have already been exposed to the
virus has wide implications. At the least, the finding could greatly complicate plans to reopen
the economy.
Already Americans are scrambling to take antibody tests to see if they might escape
lockdowns. Public health experts are wondering if those with positive results might be allowed
to return to work.
But these tactics mean nothing if the test results can't be trusted.
In the new research, researchers found that only one of the tests never delivered a
so-called false positive -- that is, it never mistakenly signaled antibodies in people who did
not have them.
Two other tests did not deliver false-positive results 99 percent of the time. But the
converse was not true. Even these three tests detected antibodies in infected people only 90
percent of the time, at best.
The false-positive metric is particularly important. The result may lead people to
believe themselves immune to the virus when they are not, and to put themselves in danger by
abandoning social distancing and other protective measures.
It is also the result on which scientists are most divided.
"There are multiple tests that look reasonable and promising," said Dr. Alexander Marson, an
immunologist at the University of California, San Francisco, and one of the project's leaders.
"That's some reason for optimism."
Dr. Marson is also an investigator in the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, which partly funded the
study.
Other scientists were less sanguine than Dr. Marson. Four of the tests produced
false-positive rates ranging from 11 percent to 16 percent; many of the rest hovered around 5
percent.
"... By JoNel Aleccia, Senior Correspondent at Kaiser Health News, who previously reported for The Seattle Times, NBCNews.com, TODAY.com and MSNBC.com. Originally published at Kaiser Health News ..."
By JoNel Aleccia, Senior Correspondent at Kaiser Health News, who previously reported
for The Seattle Times, NBCNews.com, TODAY.com and MSNBC.com. Originally published at
Kaiser Health News
After hearing for months about serious access issues involving tests that diagnose COVID-19
based on swabs from the nose or throat, Americans are being inundated with reports about
promising new tests that look for signs of infection in the blood.
There are high hopes for these antibody tests, which detect proteins that form in blood as
part of the body's immune response to an invading virus. Communities across the U.S. have been
rolling out the results of serological surveys that examine blood samples from people who
haven't been diagnosed with COVID-19 to see if they were, in fact, previously infected.
The thinking is, if there are blood markers that can detect when people have been infected,
such tests should be able to tell us how widely the novel coronavirus has spread. And equally
optimistic: those same antibodies could convey immunity to the disease, signaling someone is
safe from reinfection and able to get back to work.
Such high hopes, however, are running smack into the roadblocks of reality.
Infectious disease experts are raising pointed questions about the reliability of the early
tests and the studies that hinge on their results. And they warn that state and local
governments -- as well as individuals -- should be wary of shaping policy or changing behavior
based on any single report.
In the sharpest caution to date, officials with the World Health Organization on Saturday
warned against plans for proposed "immunity passports," which would allow people who have
recovered from the coronavirus to resume unrestricted travel and work.
"There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have
antibodies are protected from a second infection," the agency wrote in a scientific brief.
Even before the WHO weighed in, other experts were urging restraint in interpreting early
results of antibody screening.
"The science is catching up," said Dr. Liise-anne Pirofski, chief of the division of
infectious diseases at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Health System.
"Our ability to make a test at the moment is much greater than our understanding of what those
antibodies we are testing for mean."
In the past few weeks, more than 180 academic centers, hospitals and private manufacturers
have notified the federal Food and Drug Administration that they intend to create serology
tests for COVID-19, spokesperson Stephanie Caccomo said in an email. They've been able to jump
into the fray because the FDA in March
relaxed regulations for developing tests as part of its emergency response to the
pandemic.
But the FDA has not reviewed the vast majority of tests on the market, and their validity,
particularly point-of-care blood tests that promise rapid results within minutes, isn't clear,
said Dr. Michael Busch, director of the Vitalant Research Institute and a professor of
laboratory medicine at the University of California-San Francisco.
"Some of them have sensitivities that are quite poor," he said. "You may even miss some
infected people completely."
Other tests may flag people as positive for COVID-19 when they're not infected. That's
especially true in regions of the country with little spread of the novel virus. If the
prevalence of a disease is low, less than 5%, even an accurate test would yield a high number
of false positive results because of the way such screening tools operate.
So when people see advertisements for finger-prick antibody tests becoming widely available
at urgent care centers and medispas, they should think twice.
For one, antibody tests can't be used to diagnose the disease. Antibodies may not be present
in high enough levels to be detected in the earliest days of an infection. And because there
are several other known coronaviruses -- including those that cause the common cold -- people
infected with those viruses could produce antibodies that cross-react with those produced in
response to the new virus.
Scientists still know too little about whether antibodies to COVID-19 convey immunity that
could allow people to put away masks and halt social distancing, said Dr. Mary Hayden, director
of the division of clinical microbiology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago.
Immunity to a virus is a complicated process that takes place over one to two weeks, the WHO
noted. The immune system makes antibodies in response to an infection. But the body also makes
T-cells that recognize and eliminate other cells infected with the virus, creating what's known
as cellular immunity. Those two processes together may help a person recover and prevent
reinfection. But it is not yet clear whether cellular immunity is required to bolster recovery
and prevent subsequent infection with COVID-19.
"We do not know whether or not the antibodies detected are protective," Hayden told
reporters last week on a call organized by the
Infectious Diseases Society of America . "We recommend that people with antibodies not
change their behavior in any way."
Scientists are hoping, however, that future COVID-19 studies may demonstrate immunity that
could last for one or two years.
Concerns about the validity of the tests have cast a shadow on several recent reports aiming
to quantify the spread of the virus in specific regions. Last week, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo
revealed the results of a serological survey that suggested that 1 in 5 New
York City residents had been infected with the coronavirus. Statewide, the figure was
13.9%, according to the study of 3,000 New Yorkers in 19 counties who were recruited at grocery
stores.
But the results quickly drew criticism. Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, who directs the city's
disease control, warned that the tests could produce
"false negative or false positive results. " Florian Krammer, a microbiology professor at
the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai who designs such tests, tweeted -- and later
deleted -- that the results were "BS."
"I think this is too high," he said in a later tweet. "It is
possible. But a 20% plus infection rate seems too high for NYC due to a number of reasons. I
would think 6-8%, maybe 10% are closer to the truth. It would be nice to know more about the
test, its sensitivity and specificity and the test population."
Similarly, two serology studies in California, one in Santa Clara County and one in Los
Angeles County, drew wide criticism about the recruitment of subjects and the analyses
used.
In the Santa Clara study ,
Stanford University researchers tested 3,330 volunteers for antibodies showing exposure to
COVID-19; about 1.5% were positive. They concluded that meant from 48,000 to 81,000 people were
infected with the virus in the county.
"It was completely inadequate to interpret the results that 50,000 to 80,000 people were
infected," Busch said.
The L.A. study, conducted by University of Southern California researchers, concluded that
2.8%
to 5.6% of the county's adult population had been exposed to the coronavirus. That
translates to 221,000 to 422,000 adult residents who have been infected. Critics, however,
argued that the study sample was too small and that details of the methodology weren't
immediately available.
Busch understands the drive to conduct such tests.
"People are asking the questions: What's the real denominator to judge the case counts and
the death counts against?" he said. "People are urgently trying to get data."
Unfortunately, that data simply is not available yet, other experts said. This coronavirus
has never been seen before, so the science that will inform efforts to help communities respond
and recover is playing out in real time.
"The problem is that the science has not kept up with the tests," Hayden said. "Now we need
to do the research to tell what the results mean."
On the positive side, most of the scientific community has pivoted to focus on finding
solutions, said Pirofski, who was also on the IDSA call. "We just have to slow our roll."
"This is our first dive in trying to understand what's going on," she said. "I would say
it's a start."
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.
A diluted vial of the vaccine at Royal Free Hospital in London. Jack Hill/Agence France-Presse Vaccine Timeline
Dr. Ugur Sahin of BioNTech. BioNTech
The first trial participant being vaccinated in Germany. BioNTech
A vial of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Pool photo by Andy Stenning
Something went wrong.
Don't freak out if you get these side effects from a Covid-19 vaccine. They can actually be a good sign Officials didn't elaborate on the two hospital patients' conditions. "The state has no reason to believe that people who were vaccinated today at Dick's Sporting Goods Park should be concerned," state health officials said. The site closed early on Wednesday afternoon, before another 640 people were scheduled to receive their vaccine. Their appointments have been rescheduled to Sunday, Centura Health said. Enter your email to subscribe to the CNN Five Things Newsletter. "close Email Capture Inline Zone"
Do you want the news summarized each morning? We've got you. Sign Me Up By subscribing you agree to our privacy policy. Despite the hospital transport, the side effects the 11 patients reported were "consistent with what can be expected" from the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, Covid-19 Incident Commander Scott Bookman said in a statement. "We know it can be alarming to hear about people getting transported to the hospital, and we want to assure Coloradoans that the CDC and public health are closely monitoring all the authorized vaccines continually," Bookman said. "Based on everything we know, it remains true that the best vaccine to get is the one you can get the soonest." Severe side effects from Covid-19 vaccines are rare It's relatively common to experience side effects from any of the three vaccines available in the US -- about 10% to 15% of volunteers in vaccine trials developed "quite noticeable side effects," former Operation Warp Speed Chief Scientific Adviser Moncef Slaoui said late last year. The most common side effects are arm soreness, fatigue, body aches and, in some cases, a low-grade fever. Nausea, like the 11 patients in Colorado experienced, headaches and swelling at the injection site may occur, too, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Severe side effects, like an allergic reaction, are far less common, occurring around every two to five per million people, Baylor College of Medicine dean Dr. Peter Hotez told CNN earlier this month . Johnson & Johnson vaccine is effective Health officials continue to combat the stigma that Johnson & Johnson is a lesser vaccine than the Moderna and Pfizer two-shot offerings, which a recent CDC study found are 90% effective at preventing Covid-19. Johnson & Johnson's vaccine was found to be 66% effective in preventing moderate to severe illness. It's difficult to draw comparisons between Johnson & Johnson and the two-shot alternatives, though, because the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was studied after highly contagious variants of coronavirus were discovered, said Dr. Leana Wen , a CNN medical analyst. The vaccine was found to be effective in preventing severe disease in South Africa, where a contagious variant became dominant, and no patients who received the vaccine were hospitalized or died. "Having a vaccine that is clearly effective against this type of mutation is a distinct advantage," she told CNN in March.
Anthony Fauci, DDS 2 hours ago
Chris Moyler 5 hours ago
Nancy Woolf 6 hours ago
LM BENZ 8 hours ago
Phil 9 hours ago
Jack Heginbotham 10 hours ago
Jill 10 hours ago
Sharles 12 hours ago
Anna 12 hours ago
Tara Fairweather 15 hours ago
Tom Camilleri 15 hours ago
Shelley 15 hours ago
Procopio 19 hours ago
Gavin Wyatt 22 hours ago
June B 1 day ago
Hsaive 1 day ago
rod densmore 1 day ago
FILE PHOTO. © Reuters / Wolfgang Rattay 362 Follow RT on 
![]({"default":{"load":"defer","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB16rmax.img?h=100&w=100&m=6&q=60&u=t&o=t&l=f"}})
Opinion: There is more to picking a place to retire than low taxes -- avoid these 5
![]({"default":{"load":"defer","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17bxwx.img?h=100&w=100&m=6&q=60&u=t&o=t&l=f"}})
Reserving a 2021 Ford Bronco? Get Ready To Wait 18 Months to Take Delivery 
![a close up of a cell phone screen with text: Selling Vaxart stock made more than $197 million in profit for Armistice Capital, a hedge fund that owned two-thirds of the company's shares.]({"default":{"load":"default","w":"80","h":"45","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aQpp.img?h=450&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=808&y=530"},"size3column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"35","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aQpp.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=808&y=530"},"size2column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"35","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aQpp.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=808&y=530"}})
© Rafael Henrique/Getty Images Selling Vaxart stock made more than $197 million in profit
for Armistice Capital, a hedge fund that owned two-thirds of the company's shares.
![A trial of a potential coronavirus vaccine announced by Moderna in January. Since then, Moderna insiders have sold shares totaling about $248 million.]({"default":{"load":"default","w":"80","h":"45","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aQpj.img?h=450&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=1045&y=466"},"size3column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"35","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aQpj.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=1045&y=466"},"size2column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"35","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aQpj.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=1045&y=466"}})
© Ted S. Warren/Associated Press A trial of a potential coronavirus vaccine announced by
Moderna in January. Since then, Moderna insiders have sold shares totaling about $248 million.
![a man smiling for the camera: Andrei Floroiu, the chief executive of Vaxart, received stock options worth about $4.3 million in June. A month later, they were worth more than $28 million.]({"default":{"load":"default","w":"80","h":"45","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aOkc.img?h=449&w=799&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=824&y=414"},"size3column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"35","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aOkc.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=824&y=414"},"size2column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"35","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB17aOkc.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=824&y=414"}})
© Will Ragozzino/Patrick McMullan Andrei Floroiu, the chief executive of Vaxart, received
stock options worth about $4.3 million in June. A month later, they were worth more than $28
million.
97,209
© Global Look Press / Fotostand / K. Schmitt
Follow RT on
Trump's WARP SPEED vaccine czar oversaw an infamously
BOTCHED vaccination. Wonder why a THIRD of Americans want to dodge this one?
