2090 replies to this topic

[Hip]

"[We've] killed at least 217,000 Americans and seriously injured 33 million ... in just the rst year, and the CDC and FDA want to give you more shots ... Since deaths from the vaccine were higher in 2022, most experts would estimate the all-cause mortality death toll from the COVID vaccines to be in the range of 500K to 600K.

You win the Quack of Year award for that one!
 

Go and take a look at the excess death data for New Zealand. NZ had the population vaccinated, but managed to keep COVID out the country. During the first year of vaccination roll out, there were no excess deaths at all.

 

(Other countries which were hit by COVID of course had massive excess deaths, due to COVID itself).

 

A clear demonstration of the safety of the vaccines.

 

 

 

Try being an adult, and reading grown up scientific studies, not the nonsense pumped out by Mercola and his ilk, which is intended for retards.

[Hip]

Is it just the one study that you're hanging your hat on with respect to second infections being more deadly?

 

Yes, but that one Veterans Affairs study is massive, as it had access to a database of about 5 million veterans. 

 

 

Also I have been conducting my own surveys amongst long COVID patients. Last year asked LC patients if their LC symptoms got any worse after being hit with COVID again.

 

Obviously their long COVID symptoms started after a COVID infection, but I wanted to know whether a subsequent COVID infection might make their LC even worse.

 

Well, 59% of the 114  LC patients who answered my survey said they got even worse after a subsequent COVID infection. 

 

So it was already clear to me then that prior infection does not protect you from the ill effects of subsequent infections. 

Edited by Hip, 07 February 2023 - 11:21 PM.

[Gal220]

Unfiltered data from German hospitals

https://twitter.com/...034159928119300

 

 

[Hip]

But the vast majority perfectly strong enough to be done with this new corona virus already at the mucosal barrier without allowing any infection, as healthy immunity is suppost to.

 

You are confusing two things here. Of course we all have an immune system that can fight infections. But that's not what we were talking about. 

 

In this discussion, we were talking about the natural immunity acquired after you caught COVID, when someone develops antibodies to COVID from a COVID infection. 

 

Some believe that once you have caught COVID, you will develop natural immunity which will protect you in subsequent infections, and will even stop you from getting any subsequent infections. But it is clearly this is not true. People are getting new infections just months after previous ones.

 

The expert immunologists have from the beginning discounted natural immunity as offering strong protection, because they know coronaviruses are unique viruses which evade natural immunity acquired from previous infection.

[Hip]

 a meta analysis of 26 studies was just published suggesting the second infections caused much less severe disease

 

https://www.thelance...0801-5/fulltext

 

That review paper is a good find. 

 

Though it only seems to examine the rate at which patients were hospitalised on their second COVID infection, compared to the hospitalisation rate on their first infection. They found that hospitalisations were 75% less during the second infection compared to the first. 

 

By contrast, the Veterans Affairs study followed patients for a full 6 months after their first and second COVID infections, and examined all cause mortality during those 6 months. 

 

If you actually look at the top part of figure 3 of that Veterans study, you see that there was actually more mortality during the 6 month period after the acute COVID infection was over (the blue bars) than in acute infection (orange bar).

 

This is actually quite shocking, because most people will assume that if they survived the acute infection, their risk is over. But this study shows there is more risk of dying later on in the 6 month period, than during the one month acute infection stage.

 

So we need more studies which look at mortality across these longer periods, of 6 to 12 months after catching COVID. And maybe even look at mortality 2 or 3 years after an acute COVID infection. We have some studies like this already, which have shown that those who have caught COVID are twice as likely to die of all cause mortality in the subsequent 12 months, compared to those who had not caught COVID.

 

 

 

It's true that the Veterans Affairs study looked at older populations (though they also included some younger people); so this could be a factor; however, the older age range is quite relevant, since it is the older population where the issue of death is paramount. 

Edited by Hip, 07 February 2023 - 11:57 PM.

[healthmysteries31]

 

This is actually quite shocking, because most people will assume that if they survived the acute infection, their risk is over. But this study shows there is more risk of dying later on in the 6 month period, than during the one month acute infection stage.

 

 

The veteran study seems to be more interested in long-term effects after infection in older people.

 

I don't think it's telling us anything about immunity per se. Two different things. 

[Daniel Cooper]

Yes, but that one Veterans Affairs study is massive, as it had access to a database of about 5 million veterans. 

 

 

Also I have been conducting my own surveys amongst long COVID patients. Last year asked LC patients if their LC symptoms got any worse after being hit with COVID again.

 

Obviously their long COVID symptoms started after a COVID infection, but I wanted to know whether a subsequent COVID infection might make their LC even worse.

 

Well, 59% of the 114  LC patients who answered my survey said they got even worse after a subsequent COVID infection. 

 

So it was already clear to me then that prior infection does not protect you from the ill effects of subsequent infections. 

 

Then you'd admit that VA study is a bit of an outlier?

 

As far as your personal study goes, I'm sure you're familiar with the term "self selection bias". And you've conflated two different issues - death and worsening of long covid.

 

 

 

 

[geo12the]

Then you'd admit that VA study is a bit of an outlier?

 

As far as your personal study goes, I'm sure you're familiar with the term "self selection bias". And you've conflated two different issues - death and worsening of long covid.

 

As one of the moderators, why do you only correct Hip but not Mind when he mistates conclusions from papers? It seems to me you are very bias to one side here, or at least hold one side (the anti-vax side) to a much lower standard when it comes to calling them out on BS and distortions of reality,  although you often talk like you are impartial.  

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re post #845

 

"If you actually look at the top part of figure 3 of that Veterans study, you see that there was actually more mortality during the 6 month period after the acute COVID infection was over (the blue bars) than in acute infection (orange bar)."

 

Hip, it appears that you may have a fundamental misunderstanding about how to interpret a graph that has (in this case) one logarithmic axis (a "semi-log" graph). It seems that you may be "mentally" stacking the blue areas and concluding that the stack of blue areas is greater than the orange-bar area and therefore that the mortality was greater  "during the 6 month period after the acute COVID infection".

 

Figure 3 tells me that during the 5 months (five 30-day periods) after the initial 30-day period, that the all-cause mortality is slightly less than (or maybe equal to, for the benefit of doubt) the acute-phase all-cause mortality. Without raw numbers it's a subjective call on my part, but I suspect that I'm not that far off.

 

See an example of a semi-log graph here and then compare to the fig. 3 graph to help you in eyeballing approximate numbers to add up.

 

The veterans' study claims to have assessed demographic data, and yet no age, sex, or co-morbidity data are incorporated into figure 3. These data are critical to interpreting how "Outcome" (All-cause morbidity, Hospitalization, At least one sequela) is distributed over time demographically.

[Hip]

Hip, it appears that you may have a fundamental misunderstanding about how to interpret a graph that has (in this case) one logarithmic axis (a "semi-log" graph). It seems that you may be "mentally" stacking the blue areas and concluding that the stack of blue areas is greater than the orange-bar area and therefore that the mortality was greater  "during the 6 month period after the acute COVID infection".
 
Figure 3 tells me that during the 5 months (five 30-day periods) after the initial 30-day period, that the all-cause mortality is slightly less than (or maybe equal to, for the benefit of doubt) the acute-phase all-cause mortality. Without raw numbers it's a subjective call on my part, but I suspect that I'm not that far off.

 
You are quite right, the vertical axis of that graph is more logarithmic than it is linear. I never noticed that. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

But as you say, nevertheless, the amount of death taking place in 5 month period after the end of the 1 month acute infection period is roughly equal to amount of death in the acute period.

 

So the full impact on mortality of any acute COVID infection can only be assessed by following the patient for a longer period, at least month, and probably longer.

 

 

The veterans' study claims to have assessed demographic data, and yet no age, sex, or co-morbidity data are incorporated into figure 3. These data are critical to interpreting how "Outcome" (All-cause morbidity, Hospitalization, At least one sequela) is distributed over time demographically.

 
Yes, it would nice to have the results stratified by age group. The only details the study gives about age is the following:

Although the Veterans Affairs population which consists of those who are mostly older and male may not be representative of the general population, our cohorts included 10.3% women, which amounted to 589,573 participants, and 12% were under 38.8 years of age

[Hip]

The veteran study seems to be more interested in long-term effects after infection in older people.

 

I don't think it's telling us anything about immunity per se. Two different things. 

 

I agree to a certain extent.

 

The fact that as the virus hits the second time around, it causes more health issues and death than the first time round, is not necessarily just to do with immunity.

 

I've speculated that the during the first infection, the virus may cause some damage to organs, and/or may linger in various organs as an ongoing "smouldering" low-level infection, even after the acute infection is over (some theories suggest that long COVID is due to an ongoing smouldering coronavirus infection in organs such as the brain).

 

If this is the case, then when the virus hits the second time, it may add further damage to the damage already done the first time, and/or may further bolster the chronic smouldering infection. 

 

More simply put: if you hit someone over the head with a club, and then hit them again, the second blow is likely to have more severe results, because it adds to the damage already caused by the first blow.

 

 

 

However, acquired natural immunity does come into play too, because if the natural immunity to COVID were strong, then the second infection would not even have a chance to enter the body, the immune system would wipe it out before it could take hold. That's what happens with other non-coronaviruses. But it's the fact that natural immunity is weak that the second infection is not controlled, and thus during the second acute infection runs riot in the body in a similar way to the first.

 

 

So I think the Veterans Affairs study reflects both the weak immunity, and the fact that two blows will cause more damage than just one.

Edited by Hip, 08 February 2023 - 02:14 AM.

[Hip]

Then you'd admit that VA study is a bit of an outlier?

 

Well, it's a bit of an outlier, because it looked an an older population, and because it is the first study of its kind, that actually looked at all causes of death from COVID over a longer timescale, not just death from lung asphyxiation during the short acute phase. At the moment, we have no other comparable studies to the Veterans Affairs study.

 

 

 

20 years ago I had personal experience of a virus I caught going around killing my friends and family who caught it from me. I caught an enterovirus in 2003, which resulted in a nasty brain infection, causing lasting brain damage that still affects me today, as well as triggering my myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome illness.

 

But in 2003, as my virus spread to over 30 friends and family, it caused sudden heart attacks with myocarditis in four healthy people in their 40s (people who had no prior health issues or heart problems). One of these heart attacks was fatal, and the others all involved complications because of the ongoing myocarditis which took 6 months to clear in some cases.

 

The interesting thing is that these sudden heart attacks did not occur immediately on catching my virus; when people caught my virus, it typically caused an short acute gastrointestinal illness lasting a few days to begin with, but it would often take a few months before the virus would reach the heart and cause a heart attack. 

 

 

So I expect the same may be true with COVID: you may have an acute infection, and then this acute stage clears up. But the virus may remain in your body, smouldering away as a chronic infection, and only trigger a heart attack months later.

 

This is what has been observed with coronavirus: people with no previous heart problems are having sudden fatal heart attacks months after their acute COVID infection has cleared up.

 

"Those who had had covid-19 had a 72% increased risk of heart failure, 63% increased risk of heart attack, and 52% increased risk of stroke compared with controls". Ref: here.

Edited by Hip, 08 February 2023 - 02:46 AM.

[william7]

I am well informed on the medical benefits of Cannabis and its THC and CBD content. Cannabis works for a small range of conditions, as you say, for epilepsy, and for certain subsets of breast cancer (it helps for HER2-positive breast cancer, which accounts for 20% of breast cancers). It may help certain subtypes of brain cancer too. 

 

And Cannabis can help in multiple sclerosis. But it is not the the universal panacea that you are making out. For the vast majority of diseases and medical condition, Cannabis does very little. 

 

Only people who are high on Cannabis attribute to this plant some universal panacea qualities. 

 

 

Side effects of Cannabis include psychosis (especially with modern plant breeding, which creates Cannabis strains with a high THC to CBD ratio).

 

Cannabis is an intriguing plant, because it contains both a potent psychosis inducer (THC), and a potent antipsychotic compound (CBD). When THC and CBD are in the normal natural balance, the risk of psychosis from THC is largely mitigated by the antipsychotic effects of CBD. However, when plant breeders create high THC strains, this changes the balance, and that's why these days more people experience psychotic episodes from Cannabis requiring temporary hospitalisation. 

 

In the UK, there are over 30,000 Cannabis hospitalisations each year. Ref: here.

 

Recreational Cannabis users also tend to score highly for schizotypy traits. Ref: here. 

 

    You’re wrong again! It works for a wide range of conditions because of our body’s “endocannabinoid system” which was discovered in the 1990s. Here’s a link to some pages from the Reader’s Digest book “The Essential Guide To CBD” I’ve put in my Dropbox, at https://www.dropbox.com/s/h8vy3bf4nk63gxf/TheEssentialGuideToCBDpages10-11%3B%2023-41.pdf?dl=0, that explains this. This is why it can work as both a preventative and a treatment for Covid-19. In fact, it’s my belief that you can reset your system back to normal after the Covid-19 vaccination with a healthy diet of cannabis. 

   Did you ever notice that none of the people hospitalized for cannabis overdoses died and were as good as new after 24-48 hours? What happens when you overdose on big Pharma “mechanistic medicine”? You end up dead or else brain dead. 
   I think you might be overusing the schizotypy thing a bit. Possibly there’s some “psychological projection” involved. https://www.healthli...tion-psychology.
 

“Study: Hemp compounds may help prevent, treat COVID-19”, at https://www.ny1.com/...eat-covid-study

 

“Learning about CBGa and CBDa with Dr. Dustin Sulak, D.O.”, at https://youtu.be/jHAdXBwYJy8

 

“Raw Cannabis Advantages - William Courtney, MD”, at https:youtu.be/IlsBGXNxJYU

 

“Biggest Benefits of Cannabis You May Be Missing Out On: Acidic Cannabinoids (CBDA/ CBGA / THCA)”, by Dr. Dustin Sulak, at https://healer.com/a...cbda-cbga-thca/

 

https://www.nutritio...at-raw-cannabis 

“Cannabis is a powerhouse of a plant and, in its raw form, is actually one of the most nutritionally complete food sources on our planet. It has nutritious compounds such as omega fatty acids, minerals like calcium and iron, and an abundance of vitamins, including vitamin A, B1, B2, C, and E. Raw cannabis also boasts complete proteins, which means the proteins found in cannabis provide all essential forms of amino acids."

[pamojja]

You are confusing two things here. Of course we all have an immune system that can fight infections. But that's not what we were talking about. 

 

In this discussion, we were talking about the natural immunity acquired after you caught COVID, when someone develops antibodies to COVID from a COVID infection. 

 

...The expert immunologists have from the beginning discounted natural immunity as offering strong protection, because they know coronaviruses are unique viruses which evade natural immunity acquired from previous infection.

 

See how with tunnel-vision into LaLa-land you can't see the whole reality anymore: More than 91% of the world population didn't even had to get infected? -This is none other than natural immunity at the mucosal barrier getting rid of the vast majority of infections. Working as it should again and again.

 

If the first line of defence already failed, one still gets it and additional aquired immunity doesn't help in such a small percentage of obviouly already damaged immunity at the mucosal barrier, and you drill down into such too small to be significant and meaningless cohort only. Who had better improve their immunity with natural means to begin with. The exception, not the rule with natural immunity.

 

One doesn't has to have Covid once, for natural immunity preventing it anyway. Just as since 16 years I got the flu not even once.

[Daniel Cooper]

As one of the moderators, why do you only correct Hip but not Mind when he mistates conclusions from papers? It seems to me you are very bias to one side here, or at least hold one side (the anti-vax side) to a much lower standard when it comes to calling them out on BS and distortions of reality,  although you often talk like you are impartial.  

 

Because my job as a moderator isn't to police people's conclusions on anything. My moderator job is to try to keep the discussion from veering into personal attacks and mudslinging. Otherwise the forum turns into a bunch of chimps flinging poo at each other like so much of the internet.

 

Aside from that, 99% of my role as a moderator consists mainly of deleting commercial spam posts and helping people fix posts they can no longer edit. Pretty glamorous stuff if you think about it.

 

Outside of those limited things I do as a moderator, I'm just another user of the forum like you and I get to have my own opinions on topics and I get to discuss and debate those opinions just like everyone else here. If I disagree with anyone, that's me disagreeing with you, not an official position of Longecity.  And my opinions are as likely to be right or wrong as anyone else's.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 08 February 2023 - 03:58 PM.

[Hip]

See how with tunnel-vision into LaLa-land you can't see the whole reality anymore: More than 91% of the world population didn't even had to get infected? -This is none other than natural immunity at the mucosal barrier getting rid of the vast majority of infections. Working as it should again and again.

 

If the first line of defence already failed, one still gets it and additional aquired immunity doesn't help in such a small percentage of obviouly already damaged immunity at the mucosal barrier, and you drill down into such too small to be significant and meaningless cohort only. Who had better improve their immunity with natural means to begin with. The exception, not the rule with natural immunity.

 

One doesn't has to have Covid once, for natural immunity preventing it anyway. Just as since 16 years I got the flu not even once.

 

Perhaps others here can comment also, but my impression is that your brain seems to have turned to mush ever since you caught COVID. Not that you were very scientific to begin with, but since you caught COVID, you seem to have a very blurred mental state which is not able to follow conversations. You make random interjections which don't really relate to the discussion. A lot of ME/CFS patients have become cognitively worse after COVID. 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 08 February 2023 - 05:05 PM.

[pamojja]

Perhaps others here can comment also, but my impression is that your brain seems to have turned to mush ever since you caught COVID.

 

I didn't caught covid. Already said many times. - Its your brain which is mushed, if you can't understand you mother thongue anymore.
 

You make random interjections which don't really relate to the discussion. A lot of ME/CFS patients have become cognitively worse after COVID. 

 

The only one constantly off-topic is you, by posting in every covid thread here how critiques of covid managements would be schizotypic.

 

You repeatedly claimed here that there is little natural immunity. Where I pointed out now repeatedly that 92% non-infected of the world population isn't exactly a minority, but the vast minority protected through humoral immunity on the mucousal barrier from covid.

 

Your only response to that has been, humoral would have nothing to do with acquired immunity. - Which is just your fragmented mechanistic way of not understanding immunity. Oblivious to the fact that both parts of immunity are course working complimentary. If humoral already solved the onslought of viruses, then of course adaptive immunity can stay asleep.

 

It's nothing then your unsupported speculation, that ME/CFS are cognitively doing worse (most of them were already before, and I actually experienced remission from ME/CFS symptoms), but in your own case you really demonstrate with each of your posts here how that really that is true with yourself only.

 

 

 

 

[Hip]

I didn't caught covid. Already said many times. - Its your brain which is mushed, if you can't understand you mother thongue anymore.

 

The only one constantly off-topic is you, by posting in every covid thread here how critiques of covid managements would be schizotypic.

 

You repeatedly claimed here that there is little natural immunity. 

 

Well something has caused mushy brain, because you do not appear to understand the fairly simple concept of natural immunity. 

 

I would suggest you try to read this CDC website which explains it thusly:

 

Active Immunity

 

Active Immunity results when exposure to a disease organism triggers the immune system to produce antibodies to that disease. Active immunity can be acquired through natural immunity or vaccine-induced immunity.

• Natural immunity is acquired from exposure to the disease organism through infection with the actual disease.
• Vaccine-induced immunity is acquired through the introduction of a killed or weakened form of the disease organism through vaccination.

Either way, if an immune person comes into contact with that disease in the future, their immune system will recognize it and immediately produce the antibodies needed to fight it. Active immunity is long-lasting, and sometimes life-long.

[Hip]

    You’re wrong again! It works for a wide range of conditions because of our body’s “endocannabinoid system” which was discovered in the 1990s

 

First of all, you are contradicting yourself by trying to provide a mechanistic explanation of the medical effects of Cannabis, whilst you profess to be anti-mechanistic. Secondly, this sort of explanation you provide says nothing. It might sound impressive to the scientifically illiterate members who read these COVID threads, but it has no real meaning. 

 

It would be like saying magnesium can cure all diseases because it is a cofactor in more than 300 enzymes. That's equally pseudoscience.

 

 

Edited by Hip, 08 February 2023 - 08:14 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

I didn't caught covid. Already said many times. - Its your brain which is mushed, if you can't understand you mother thongue anymore.

 

Lay off the personal attacks please.

[pamojja]

Well something has caused mushy brain, because you do not appear to understand the fairly simple concept of natural immunity. 

 

I would suggest you try to read this CDC website which explains it thusly:

 

Detracting again, also from whom has the mushy brain?

 

- Just to remind you, due to your for a big part mental disabilties, you haven't been able to earn for your own living the last 20 years, but are at older age staying with your parents. While I having been employed as social worker in the same time periods (even with temorarily testified bodily disabilties). Shouldn't it actually be the other way around - if it would be as you say?

 

That's what is involved in real immunity:

https://en.m.wikiped...i/Immune_system

Layered defense

 

The immune system protects its host from infection with layered defenses of increasing specificity. Physical barriers prevent pathogens such as bacteria and viruses from entering the organism.^[1] If a pathogen breaches these barriers, the innate immune system provides an immediate, but non-specific response. Innate immune systems are found in all animals.^[2] If pathogens successfully evade the innate response, vertebrates possess a second layer of protection, the adaptive immune system, which is activated by the innate response.^[3] Here, the immune system adapts its response during an infection to improve its recognition of the pathogen. This improved response is then retained after the pathogen has been eliminated, in the form of an immunological memory, and allows the adaptive immune system to mount faster and stronger attacks each time this pathogen is encountered.^[4][5]

 

 

[pamojja]

Lay off the personal attacks please.

 

Sorry Daniel. But during these 3 years we had to endure ceaseless personal attacks all the times from Hip. He never got moderated for it. If you now would want to start moderate everyone else who finally loose their temper with hip too, please to go ahead.    It would be such a joke after 3 years of inacctivity in moderation.
 

[william7]

First of all, you are contradicting yourself by trying to provide a mechanistic explanation of the medical effects of Cannabis, whilst you profess to be anti-mechanistic. Secondly, this sort of explanation you provide says nothing. It might sound impressive to the scientifically illiterate members who read these COVID threads, but it has no real meaning. 

 

It would be like saying magnesium can cure all diseases because it is a cofactor in more than 300 enzymes. That's equally pseudoscience.

But, you’re not hip if you don’t do cannabis! 

[Mind]

Another interesting article from mainstream media in the U.S.

 

Bloomberg is noting the rise in severe heart ailments in young people since the rollout of the COVID injections AND...

 

...within the article they note that the COVID injections ARE probably causing some of the ailments...

 

...and that they cannot be sure of the degree this is being caused by the COVID injections because the CDC is NOT keeping accurate records...

 

...but their headline says "it's not the vaccines". 

 

This is poor journalism at its finest.

 

Also, a pre-print (not yet peer-reviewed) study out of Japan notes the vaccinated are getting myocarditis at a rate 7 times higher than the unvaccinated. This is similar to what several other peer-reviewed studies have found. Dozens of case studies have also found direct evidence of myocarditis being caused by the COVID injections.

 

Lastly, the COVID injections are noted for causing spontaneous hives. Moderna's mRNA injections cause this more than Pfizer's, apparently.

 

You could argue that hives and myocarditis probably aren't going to kill you, but a "safe" vaccine shouldn't have such a long list of severe side effects.

 

_________________________________________

 

For good or for bad, because of the violent reaction against anyone asking questions about the COVID policies and the COVID injections, an incredible number of people are now becoming essentially "anti-vax". A recent survey found that a majority of Italian parents are now hesitant about giving their kids vaccines. I have heard childhood vaccinations in the U.S. are at a 30 year low. Again, for good or for bad, the all out raging assault on rational discussion about the COVID injections, is driving more and more people to investigate past vaccine research and they are coming up rather light on solid science for their widespread use.

[Daniel Cooper]

Sorry Daniel. But during these 3 years we had to endure ceaseless personal attacks all the times from Hip. He never got moderated for it. If you now would want to start moderate everyone else who finally loose their temper with hip too, please to go ahead.    It would be such a joke after 3 years of inacctivity in moderation.
 

 

 

Well, maybe it's my fault for not moderating more heavily. The site in general likes to use a pretty light hand when it comes to moderation, but clearly sometimes that's not possible. I will be moderating personal attacks more closely moving forward. So everyone should consider this a notice that things that were allowed to slide previously will in many cases not be acceptable going forward.

 

You may have noticed that I admonished Hip just the other day for something similar. If I'm going to admonish him then I have to be even handed about it and call it out when someone else does it.

 

Don't take any of this too much to heart. Let's just try to keep our heads a little cooler and move on. Ideally there will be no need for moderation if everyone exercises self restraint.

 

The general rule is: You can attack ideas, but don't attack each other. 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 08 February 2023 - 09:57 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

You win the Quack of Year award for that one!
 

Go and take a look at the excess death data for New Zealand. NZ had the population vaccinated, but managed to keep COVID out the country. During the first year of vaccination roll out, there were no excess deaths at all.

 

(Other countries which were hit by COVID of course had massive excess deaths, due to COVID itself).

 

A clear demonstration of the safety of the vaccines.

 

 

 

Try being an adult, and reading grown up scientific studies, not the nonsense pumped out by Mercola and his ilk, which is intended for retards.

 

As an example, statements like those bolded above will not be allowed going forward.

 

I'm trying to let you guys know where the boundaries are. Going forward something like that will generate a temporary suspension. If someone persists after being warned the suspension will become lengthy up to and including becoming permanent. 

 

So please let's everyone try to exercise a little self control.

 

If you have any questions feel free to ask.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 08 February 2023 - 09:57 PM.

[joesixpack]

Here is an interesting article, one of the authors is Anthony Fauci.

 

 

Perspective

Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses

David M. Morens,1 Jeffery K. Taubenberger,2,* and Anthony S. Fauci1
1Office of the Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
2Viral Pathogenesis and Evolution Section, Laboratory of Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
*Correspondence: taubenbergerj@niaid.nih.gov
https://doi.org/10.1...hom.2022.11.016

 

 

It can be found here: https://www.cell.com...28?showall=true

 

 

A couple of takeaways, somewhat unusual given that Fauci is an author.

 

The flu vaccine doesn't work. Neither do the Covid 19 vaccines. Here are a couple of quotes.

 

"Viruses that replicate in the human respiratory mucosa without infecting systemically, including influenza A, SARS-CoV-2, endemic coronaviruses, RSV, and many other “common cold” viruses, cause significant mortality and morbidity and are important public health concerns. Because these viruses generally do not elicit complete and durable protective immunity by themselves, they have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines."

 

"As of 2022, after more than 60 years of experience with influenza vaccines, very little improvement in vaccine prevention of infection has been noted. As pointed out decades ago, and still true today, the rates of effectiveness of our best approved influenza vaccines would be inadequate for licensure for most other vaccine-preventable diseases."

 

"During the COVID-19 pandemic, the rapid development and deployment of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines has saved innumerable lives and helped to achieve early partial pandemic control.

However, as variant SARS-CoV-2 strains have emerged, deficiencies in these vaccines reminiscent of influenza vaccines have become apparent."

 

 

"Past unsuccessful attempts to elicit solid protection against mucosal respiratory viruses and to control the deadly outbreaks and pandemics they cause have been a scientific and public health failure that must be urgently addressed. We are excited and invigorated that many investigators and collaborative groups are rethinking, from the ground up, all of our past assumptions and approaches to preventing important respiratory viral diseases and working to find bold new paths forward."

 

Interesting admissions, in light of the fact that many of vaccines were administered under mandates.

 

 

[william7]

Here’s another interesting article from Dr. Mercola that should concern all if accurate. Like to hear other opinions on this.

https://media.mercol...-health-pdf.pdf

 

WHO Puts Mad Scientist in Charge of Global Health

 Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola  Fact Checked

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

February 08, 2023

 December 13, 2022, the World Health Organization named Dr. Jeremy Farrar as its new chief scientist for global health

 Farrar, while director for the Wellcome Trust, was complicit in the coverup of SARS-CoV- 2’s origin

 The Wellcome Trust, which Farrar led from 2013 until February 2023, is part of the technocratic globalist network and the modern eugenics movement

 Farrar has been on the forefront pushing the envelope on vaccine development, such that experimental gene therapy is now used as a preventive for viral infection. When COVID broke out, Farrar founded Wellcome Leap, which is basically the DARPA of global public health. Its focus is wholly on transhumanist research to usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution

 Farrar and WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus are part of a small and tight-knit but global network that is working behind the scenes to influence global health, finance and governance

 

If the WHO's Pandemic Treaty gets signed this year (and there's every reason to suspect it will be), then Farrar will wield unprecedented power and influence, as member nations will have no choice but to adhere to his medical recommendations. What's so concerning about that is his willingness to embrace reckless science and transhumanist pie-in-the-sky ideals.

 

As noted by Webb, Farrar has been on the forefront pushing the envelope on vaccine development, such that experimental gene therapy is now used as a preventive for viral infection. When COVID broke out, Farrar founded Wellcome Leap, an organization that "builds bold, unconventional programs" that "aim to deliver ... seemingly impossible results on seemingly impossible timelines."4

 

The CEO of Wellcome Leap, Regina Dugan,5 worked at the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) from 1996 until 2012. Between 2009 and 2012, she served as its first female director. In 2012, Dugan left DARPA to create a DARPA equivalent for Google called Advanced Technology and Projects (ATAP). She later took on a similar project at Facebook, called Building 8.

 

DARPA, of course, is heavily invested in transhumanist technologies for the use in soldiers, including brain-machine interfaces and other even more extreme ideas. Wellcome Leap is basically the DARPA of global public health, with all the transhumanist connotations that brings, and this is the kind of mindset Farrar brings to his position as chief scientist at the WHO. What could go wrong?

 

 

 

[Daniel Cooper]

Here’s another interesting article from Dr. Mercola that should concern all if accurate. Like to hear other opinions on this.

https://media.mercol...-health-pdf.pdf
 
WHO Puts Mad Scientist in Charge of Global Health
 Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola  Fact Checked
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
February 08, 2023
 December 13, 2022, the World Health Organization named Dr. Jeremy Farrar as its new chief scientist for global health
 Farrar, while director for the Wellcome Trust, was complicit in the coverup of SARS-CoV- 2’s origin
 The Wellcome Trust, which Farrar led from 2013 until February 2023, is part of the technocratic globalist network and the modern eugenics movement
 Farrar has been on the forefront pushing the envelope on vaccine development, such that experimental gene therapy is now used as a preventive for viral infection. When COVID broke out, Farrar founded Wellcome Leap, which is basically the DARPA of global public health. Its focus is wholly on transhumanist research to usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution

 Farrar and WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus are part of a small and tight-knit but global network that is working behind the scenes to influence global health, finance and governance

 
 
So on this article at the top there is a big blue "Fact Checked" mark.
 

 
Who fact checked it and what is their background? Who pays their salary?

 

I'm highly skeptical of "fact check" marks on articles. I don't trust them when Facebook does them, and I'm not impressed when someone self publishes an article on their website and claims it is "fact checked".

 

 

 

 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 09 February 2023 - 03:46 PM.

[Hip]

As an example, statements like those bolded above will not be allowed going forward.

 

I'm trying to let you guys know where the boundaries are. Going forward something like that will generate a temporary suspension. If someone persists after being warned the suspension will become lengthy up to and including becoming permanent. 

 

So please let's everyone try to exercise a little self control.

 

If you have any questions feel free to ask.

 

Can we make critical comments about the statements people make without it being considered ad hominem? 

 

For example, instead of saying "you win the Quack of Year award for that one", is it acceptable to say "the statement that the COVID vaccines have killed 217,000 Americans and seriously injured 33 million is utter quackery"? That targets the statement, not the person. 

 

Or for example, is it acceptable to say "the idea that Cannabis is the universal panacea for all diseases is demented and deranged"? Again, that targets the statement, not the person. 

 

And if someone posts a nutty conspiracy theory, is it acceptable to say that "conspiracy theories like that are often the product of people with the mental health problem of schizotypy". That is a factual piece of information, and targets the conspiracy theory, not the person posting it.

 

 

 

My emotional responses on these threads are just a result of shock and exasperation when such scientific falsehood, misinformation, propaganda, conspiracy theory, pseudoscience, quackery and misrepresentation are continually posted on these Longecity threads.

 

People are posting absurd nonsense here, yet it usually goes unchallenged. 

 

Mind for example has claimed that the mRNA vaccines are gene therapy, which is total nonsense, but this misinformation often goes unchallenged by others here. And he has claimed that the COVID vaccines are not actually vaccines at all, which again is ludicrous misinformation, and shows a complete lack of knowledge regarding antigen presentation, but it goes unchallenged. 

 

Now William7 has joined this festival of absurdity, claiming that Cannabis can treat all diseases, and that the scientific method is totally wrong, and people should just get stoned out of their heads, rather than do mechanistic medical research. He says such laughable stuff, but nobody challenges him. 

 

You have to let people who are clueless about science know that they are clueless. If you let them keep posting nonsense, the discussion goes downhill, as it has done on these COVID threads. 

 

It's not possible to keep providing long explanations as to why the stuff posted here is nonsense and quackery, because of the deluge of misinformation posted daily. It only takes a second to post some misinformation, but it takes a lot of work to politely and scientifically explain why the misinformation is wrong. 

 

It is too easy to post nonsense, but it takes a lot of work to counter that nonsense.

 

In the end, exasperation sets in.