COVID-19 Viruses and Vaccines

[Spartacus]

11 hours ago, Foxx said:

Well, mRNA, also known as gene therapy, is new. It didn't go through regular trials, it was live tested on billions of human guinea pigs.

 

Had they done regular trials, with all the complications that are coming to light, I'm not sure it would have gotten out of the trial phase.

it's not really new.

it was the magic answer to SARS 20 years ago.

it killed all of the ferrets used in their trial

so it was 100% effective back then too

[Jabba The Hutt]

10 hours ago, Nouseforaname said:

Yes. 

Thanks for elaborating in such fine detail!

[Fansince88]

10 hours ago, Nouseforaname said:

I’m sure your analysis is thorough and accurate. 

Lets call it personal and private experience.  

[Spartacus]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/pfizer-and-moderna-covid-vaccines-efficacy-exaggerated-effectiveness-well-below-50-percent-researchers-say-5595590?utm_source=morningbriefnoe&src_src=morningbriefnoe&utm_campaign=mb-2024-03-07&src_cmp=mb-2024-03-07&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAbOgkJEpUneHL474Nv3ZNRbp%2F31%2FyqHFiK9b24IczW9b5GA0%3D

 

Researchers allege that biases and manipulation of Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine clinical data have exaggerated vaccine efficacy and underestimated vaccine adverse events.

 

While most clinical trials would evaluate the effects of a drug from the day it is administered, these COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are not being evaluated from the first day the vaccines are given. A later date is chosen, which inflates the vaccine’s perceived efficacy and safety, researchers say.

 

It could make an ineffective vaccine — a COVID vaccine with zero efficacy — have a perceived vaccine effectiveness of up to 48 percent, said researcher Raphael Lataster on Feb. 26, citing a paper authored by professor Peter Doshi from the University of Maryland and others.

[Hedge]

Was this a mistake? Joke? Or...

 

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24463984-cdc-moving-foia

[devnull]

2 hours ago, Hedge said:

Was this a mistake? Joke? Or...

 

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24463984-cdc-moving-foia

 

Trust The Science!

 

Why aren't the Scientists sharing data?

 

Shuddup Insurrectionist

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

2 hours ago, devnull said:

 

Trust The Science!

 

Why aren't the Scientists sharing data?

 

Shuddup Insurrectionist

 

The very essence of science is communication, so work can be built on.  That was the major innovation of the classical Greek philosophers: they discussed shit in the agora.  If it's completely redacted, it's not science by any remote definition.

 

 

(Also, for that matter, why Columbus discovered America - Native Americans, Vikings, probably Cornish and Portugese fisherman, and probably the Chinese all got to the Americas first.  Columbus was the first one to come back and say "You're not gonna believe this shit...")

[Ann]

This is terrible (long thread).

 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

New COVID guidance from the federal government:

• Don't come to work if you're feeling sick.
• Don't come back to work if you're not feeling better.
• You're encouraged to wash your hands and wear a mask for a few days after you come back.

 

Basically: "act like you have a the flu."

 

Things I was saying THREE YEARS AGO!!!!!

Edited March 13 by Crap Throwing Clavin

[Spartacus]

https://www.outkick.com/analysis/harvard-fires-professor-for-telling-the-truth-about-covid-mandates

 

Pursuit Of Science Abandoned In Favor Of ‘Religious Dogma’

Kulldorff requested an exemption to the university's vaccine mandate, on the grounds that he'd already had COVID and recovered from it, leading to superior natural immunity. Unsurprisingly, like so many others who attempted to counter the "religious dogma" of vaccine mandates, he was denied.

 

"Having had COVID disease, I have stronger longer lasting immunity than those vaccinated (Gazit et al). Lacking scientific rationale, vaccine mandates are religious dogma, and I request a religious exemption from COVID vaccination," he said.

 

Debate Has Disappeared In Modern Science

Kulldorff offered to debate those in the scientific community at Harvard over their differing views on COVID.

 

No one took him up on it. 

 

And as he says, "The public should not trust scientists, even Harvard scientists, unwilling to debate their positions with fellow scientists." But that's exactly what's happened over the past decades, culminating in the "expert" community's horrifying, dangerous, malicious performance during the pandemic.

Harvard scientists do not believe they have to debate anyone with differing views. Their views are correct, because of who they are. Opposition and fact finding are not done in the pursuit of truth, in their minds, but in service of an incorrect ideology. One that they label "anti-science," ignoring that the abandonment of debate and unquestioning acceptance of incorrect, manufactured consensus is the true "anti-science."

 

[Jabba The Hutt]

16 hours ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

New COVID guidance from the federal government:

• Don't come to work if you're feeling sick.
• Don't come back to work if you're not feeling better.
• You're encouraged to wash your hands and wear a mask for a few days after you come back.

 

Basically: "act like you have a the flu."

 

Things I was saying THREE YEARS AGO!!!!!

Love a the Italian accent a Thomas

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Spartacus]

 

On 3/15/2024 at 9:45 AM, B-Man said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

keeping the Covid fearporn alive

 

https://www.outkick.com/analysis/new-york-times-commemorates-four-years-of-covid-by-celebrating-masks-fear-of-catching-the-virus

 

  

[Fansince88]

2 hours ago, Spartacus said:

 

 

keeping the Covid fearporn alive

 

https://www.outkick.com/analysis/new-york-times-commemorates-four-years-of-covid-by-celebrating-masks-fear-of-catching-the-virus

 

  

All this time later and the bride and I went into a local store with 6 cars in the parking lot. one couple in the store we passed both had masks on. There may have been 5 of us total shopping. So much fear. Sad. 

[CarpetCrawler]

1 hour ago, Fansince88 said:

All this time later and the bride and I went into a local store with 6 cars in the parking lot. one couple in the store we passed both had masks on. There may have been 5 of us total shopping. So much fear. Sad. 

 

I still see the occasional lone person driving their car with a mask on.  I think as the election gets closer and closer we will see more and more of the virtue signaling mask wearing. 

 

 

[IDBillzFan]

One of the weakest things a person can utter is "I told you so," and I remind myself daily not to use that phrase, but there are times it's pretty difficult.

 

This is one of those times.

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

4 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

One of the weakest things a person can utter is "I told you so," and I remind myself daily not to use that phrase, but there are times it's pretty difficult.

 

This is one of those times.

 

 

 

ATOP the hardest hit.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

21 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

One of the weakest things a person can utter is "I told you so," and I remind myself daily not to use that phrase, but there are times it's pretty difficult.

 

This is one of those times.

 

 

 

 

[Cinga]

On 3/22/2024 at 11:40 AM, IDBillzFan said:

One of the weakest things a person can utter is "I told you so," and I remind myself daily not to use that phrase, but there are times it's pretty difficult.

 

This is one of those times.

 

 

 

Lost in all of this would be the fact that hundreds of thousands of lives were lost because they were denied this inexpensive and readily available drug. Can we string the Fauci's and Burkes of the world up yet?

[Spartacus]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/fda-concedes-on-ivermectin-yet-deeper-concerns-exist-5613288?utm_source=healthnoe&src_src=healthnoe&utm_campaign=health-2024-03-29&src_cmp=health-2024-03-29&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAbOgkJEpUneHL474Nv3ZNRbp%2F31%2FyqHFiK9b24IczW9b5GA0%3D

 

Ivermectin also has proven broad-spectrum antiviral activity against various types of RNA viruses, including AIDS, dengue fever, West Nile, Zika, influenza, yellow fever, and Japanese encephalitis.

 

When a virus enters a human cell, it is carried by a vehicle-like transporter to replicate inside the cell and spread throughout the body. Ivermectin has the ability to block the function of this transporter, thereby preventing the virus from replicating and spreading.

 

At the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, its safety and multifunctionality attracted global attention.

 

USE IN TREATING COVID-19

When a new viral outbreak occurs, scientists typically test existing drugs for efficacy, as developing new drugs within a short timeframe is often impossible. An example of this is SARS-CoV-2.

Scientists considered using ivermectin as a potential solution, and it proved to be effective, resulting in one success after another.

 

In mid-2020, Australian scientists found that ivermectin could effectively fight against SARS-CoV-2. Two days after adding ivermectin to a cell model, the virus RNA dropped to 0.001 percent, a 5,000-fold reduction.

 

In September 2020, a U.S. lab published a modeling study showing that ivermectin docks to the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain, prohibiting the virus from attaching to human cells, thus stopping its infection. A lab in Bangladesh found a similar effect.

 

In June 2021, an Indian review used artificial intelligence-brd and molecular dynamics simulation-brd studies and reached a conclusion that ivermectin is a potential treatment for COVID-19.

It has also demonstrated efficacy in specific human studies.

 

A large-scale prospective clinical observational study in Brazil that included 159,561 residents found that administering ivermectin at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg for two consecutive days every 15 days significantly reduced infection, mortality, and hospitalization during the Omicron epidemic period. The study showed that treatment with ivermectin was associated with a decrease of 44 percent, 68 percent, and 56 percent in infection, mortality, and hospitalization rates, respectively, as compared to the non-treatment control group.

 

Another analysis of the same study setting, brd on 88,012 subjects, showed that regular use of ivermectin for 150 days was linked with an even greater effect on COVID-19, reducing the infection, mortality, and hospitalization rates by 49 percent, 92 percent, and 100 percent, compared to non-users.

 

These observational studies have a strict level of control and exclude the bias from confounding factors in treated and non-treated groups, presenting an advantage over randomized controlled trials (RCT).

Furthermore, a real-time meta-analysis of 101 studies indicated significant improvement using ivermectin treatment, with a 62 percent improvement for early treatment.

 

If a drug has treatment potential and is relatively safe, doctors should be allowed to use it off-label as long as they follow the correct human dosage.