2089 replies to this topic

[Gal220]

"It's incredible that these things need to be spelled out"

 

So true..

 

Cars of full of safety measures like breaks, windows, air bags, blind side sensors, rear cameras

People choose to drive agressively or defensively, I personally avoid interstate traffic around cities

 

 

Their all kinds of safety signals for these covid vaccines, for a virus that was killing people whose average age was above life expectancy.  Even less so now with Omicron variants

 

Now the covid vaccine is killing/disabling working ages at far higher rate than other vaccines, close your eyes if you want

 

"Last month, German Health Minister and renowned virus pest Karl Lauterbach gave a remarkable interview in which he denounced “exorbitant” pharmaceutical profits, deplored “dismaying” vaccine injuries, and called for the manufacturers to set aside funds for those who have been harmed. He did so amid a growing wave of reporting on vaccine injuries in the German press – a wave which his statements have now turned into a tsunami. In the weeks since, vaccine injuries and side effects have become the dominant theme of German press coverage on the jabs, from local papers to national media.” – Eugyppius

[Mind]

"It's incredible that these things need to be spelled out"

 

So true..

 

Cars of full of safety measures like breaks, windows, air bags, blind side sensors, rear cameras

People choose to drive agressively or defensively, I personally avoid interstate traffic around cities

 

 

Their all kinds of safety signals for these covid vaccines, for a virus that was killing people whose average age was above life expectancy.  Even less so now with Omicron variants

 

Now the covid vaccine is killing/disabling working ages at far higher rate than other vaccines, close your eyes if you want

 

"Last month, German Health Minister and renowned virus pest Karl Lauterbach gave a remarkable interview in which he denounced “exorbitant” pharmaceutical profits, deplored “dismaying” vaccine injuries, and called for the manufacturers to set aside funds for those who have been harmed. He did so amid a growing wave of reporting on vaccine injuries in the German press – a wave which his statements have now turned into a tsunami. In the weeks since, vaccine injuries and side effects have become the dominant theme of German press coverage on the jabs, from local papers to national media.” – Eugyppius

 

In addition, the German government is considering NOT paying out damages for vaccine injuries. Their disturbing rationale behind this possible action is that it does not matter how many people are killed or injured by the COVID injections, as long as they calculate that there was a net societal benefit of the injection campaign. This is the rationale behind some of the most grotesque and massive violations of human rights, leading to some of the worst genocides in human history. When your government says you as an individual are expendable - time to run.

[Hip]

Now the covid vaccine is killing/disabling working ages at far higher rate than other vaccines, close your eyes if you want

 

Let me explain about etiquette in discussion: in a rational debate, it is wrong to make statements without evidence, as you have done. 

 

The whole debate falls apart if people do this, if you present something as the truth when there is no evidence for it. You can hold a hypothesis, but statements should reflect what is know.

 

 

Your personal hypothesis, which you have been pushing for years on this forum, is that the COVID vaccines are killing millions if not billions of people around the world. There is no evidence for this, and why you can up with such a wild and crazy hypothesis, God only knows, but you will not be the first person to make such outlandish claims about vaccines.

 

 

After all, 20 years ago the uneducated public (including Robert Effing Kennedy Jr) were claiming it was the mercury in vaccines that caused autism. They were sure mercury was the culprit. After massive public pressure, the mercury was taken out of vaccines.

 

Once the mercury was removed from vaccines, it was found that child autism rates continued to increase even higher. So the whole autism-mercury hypothesis was proven totally wrong. Robert got egg on his face, and so did much of the antivax community.

 

Robert, with egg still running down his face, then quietly changed the name of his antivax organisation from the World Mercury Project, to its current name, Children's Health Defense.

 

But we see no apologies from Robert the egg face, we see no admitting he got it totally wrong about mercury. He just ploughs ahead with the next crazy hypothesis or conspiracy theory. 

Edited by Hip, 11 July 2023 - 08:09 PM.

[Hip]

In addition, the German government is considering NOT paying out damages for vaccine injuries. Their disturbing rationale behind this possible action is that it does not matter how many people are killed or injured by the COVID injections, as long as they calculate that there was a net societal benefit of the injection campaign. This is the rationale behind some of the most grotesque and massive violations of human rights, leading to some of the worst genocides in human history. When your government says you as an individual are expendable - time to run.

 

Let's try to think through your argument, Mind. 

 

Your article refers to an eye stroke which appeared after a COVID vaccine. 

 

The question is, how do you prove with reasonable certainty that the vaccine caused the eye stroke?

 

Google tells me that the yearly incidence of such eye strokes is about 1 in 10,000.

 

That means that in any given year in Germany, population 83 million, there will be 8300 eye strokes. 

 

 

 

So these eye strokes are not uncommon. How do you prove that an eye stroke was caused by the vaccine, and did not just occur by chance anyway?

 

We are waiting to hear your thoughts, Mind, on this question.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 12 July 2023 - 02:35 PM.

[Hip]

By the way, Mind, can you please issue some bans on these people who keep marking my posts in red.

 

You banned me for doing that, but there are far worse culprits here who are far more deserving of a ban.

 

Otherwise we may start to think that moderation here is biased in favour of certain parties. 

 

 

 

And do please explain what you believe would be the appropriate policy for dealing with people who claim compensation for the medical issues they believe were caused by a vaccine?

 

Should everyone with an eye stroke get compensation? Hand out $100,000 compensation to everyone who had a COVID vaccination and an eye stroke?

 

Please let us know what YOUR policy would be. Your carefully considered opinion.

 

Criticising others is something anyone can do; however coming up with an intelligent policy yourself requires some thought. 

Edited by Hip, 11 July 2023 - 08:28 PM.

[Gal220]

Let me explain about etiquette in discussion: in a rational debate, it is wrong to make statements without evidence, as you have done. 

 

I have provided several links throughout this thread, BUT it is not my job to prove they are safe...

 

Health agencies are supposed to prove they are safe, there were more than enough entries in VAERs to pull them the first month, along with Yellow Card/Eudra Vigilance

 

Autopsies and analysis have been done by individuals/groups, none of it good    

Health agencies have chosen to remain ignorant, despite more current excess death than the pandemic

 

 

The onus is on them though, not me.

Edited by Gal220, 11 July 2023 - 09:02 PM.

[gamesguru]

Concerning Germany, I agree vaccination was likely a net good. But they should still compensate victims. Although I understand the hesitancy to do so, economically and philosophically. If a victim lost vision in an eye due to COVID or the flu, it's unlikely the government would compensate them beyond any impact in their ability to physically work. There's an unsympathetic nature to the system—and there is an argument that perhaps it does not have to be this way, that it is also decrepit.

 

Vaccination was compulsory in Germany for many diseases as early as 1874. The infringement on personal liberties is a contentious issue. While theoretically I agree with less authoritarian regulation, in practice people will find ways to act destructively when left to their devices—this presents difficulties, and requires to my mind some degree of minimal regulation. Of course there is no issue about which humans are not divided, and so there will always be some who oppose the decisions made by those in power.

 

Concerning "excess deaths", it's misleading to label the entire planet that way. Some countries are reporting more, others less mortality than pre-pandemic. Variance is expected. Additionally, no strong arguments have been made definitively linking the countries with excess deaths to the vaccine. Instead we have wildly unsubstantiated claims that the openVAERS database is underestimating things by a factor of 10. How do you know that...? How do you know any reports of excess deaths in 2022 weren't due primarily to other factors?

[Gal220]

"Concerning "excess deaths", it's misleading to label the entire planet that way"

 

New medications are not given the benefit of the doubt, until proven otherwise, it was the covid vaccine.  

There are no govt investigations into it, they are not going to slit their own throat and have to take the blame for mismanaging the pandemic

 

Unless their hand is forced, no one wants to do an embarrassing interview like this one - the health minister had to come clean.

His trust is completely shot

 

[Mind]

Let's try to think through your argument, Mind. 

 

Your article refers to an eye stroke which appeared after a COVID vaccine. 

 

The question is, how do you prove with reasonable certainty that the vaccine caused the eye stroke?

 

Google tells me that the yearly incidence of such eye strokes is about 1 in 10,000.

 

That means that in any given year in Germany, population 83 million, there will be 8300 eye strokes. 

 

 

 

So these eye strokes are not uncommon. How do you prove that an eye stroke was caused by the vaccine, and did not just occur by chance anyway?

 

We are waiting to hear your thoughts, Mind, on this question.

 

A temporal association with the administration of the COVID injection is a starting point...and usually good enough to move most medical lawsuits forward.

 

In addition ocular problems were indicated in the trials and in multiple follow-up studies. There is more than enough evidence to implicate the COVID injections. Here is a video summarizing just a small amount of the widely available evidence.

[Hip]

A temporal association with the administration of the COVID injection is a starting point.

 

It is a starting point, I agree. But on its own it has problems. 

 

In order to prevent dishonesty, or just plain error, temporal association alone is not a adequate safeguard. Serious medical events like heart attack, strokes, aneurisms etc happen all the time. There are 13,500 heart attacks each week in the US, for example.

 

So if your medical event happens to occur in the week or two after a COVID vaccine, irrespective of whether the vaccine actually caused it, you might think you've just won the lottery. If temporal association alone is used to imply causation, there would be millions of people who could claim compensation. 

 

It's the taxpayer who would have to fund all these medical lottery wins. That's you and me.

 

 

 

What I think you need to do is look whether a given vaccine is causing specific medical events: is there a general increase in a specific medical event after a given vaccine, and this is found across the general population, then we know that vaccine can sometimes cause that specific medical event. 

 

Then, if someone suffers that specific medical event just after a vaccination, there may be a good chance the vaccine caused it, so compensation would be in order. 

Edited by Hip, 12 July 2023 - 07:47 PM.

[gamesguru]

"Concerning "excess deaths", it's misleading to label the entire planet that way"

 

New medications are not given the benefit of the doubt, until proven otherwise, it was the covid vaccine.  

There are no govt investigations into it, they are not going to slit their own throat and have to take the blame for mismanaging the pandemic

 

Unless their hand is forced, no one wants to do an embarrassing interview like this one - the health minister had to come clean.

His trust is completely shot

 

Regarding the tweet, she claims it is waves of "young people" which the vaccine is sending to the hospital. But then she fails to provide statistics based on age bracket, instead again appealing to the excess death curve and claiming an association with vaccines. She seems to imply that since 7,000 young adults were sent to the hospital, that obviously older people were killed in swaths by the millions. But according to an age-based analysis, younger people are surprisingly the ones more at risk of an extreme immune response[1].

 

I would like to see her analysis substantiated by additional research, documentation, data. The death or incapacitation of "young people" is a relatively serious event which is not likely to be grossly underrepresented by published statistics (e.g. openVAERS, analysis of death certificates, and data from other collection agencies/bureaus). I find it more likely there were not such huge waves of young people who died from the vaccine, and the excess deaths reported in some countries are mostly occurring in older people and can be explained by COVID itself as well as mortality displacement from previous years.

 

The health minister even explains severe reactions to the vaccine are "relatively" rare. But deaths are exceedingly so.

 

But I should also point out, just so I don’t leave a false impression: severe vaccine injuries happen in less than 1 in 10,000 vaccinations, according to the Paul Ehrlich Institute or the European licensing authorities. So it’s not that common. But because our understanding of these injuries is getting clearer and clearer, it should also be possible in future to identify those who are affected more quickly, so that we can get them quicker help.

 

References

 

[1] https://www.waff.com...-covid-vaccine/

[Gal220]

"I would like to see her analysis substantiated by additional research, documentation, data."

 

Wouldn't we all, but until that happens, it was the vaccine...

 

 

The German Health minister is relying on a passive reporting system, 1 in 10,000 serious adverse events per dose.  

So at least 1 in 5,000 if you only took the original 2 doses, hardly rare, much higher than any other vaccine.  How many took 1 or 2 more boosters after that?

[gamesguru]

The German Health minister is relying on a passive reporting system, 1 in 10,000 serious adverse events per dose.  

So at least 1 in 5,000 if you only took the original 2 doses, hardly rare, much higher than any other vaccine.  How many took 1 or 2 more boosters after that?

 

It's an active reporting system, which may include false positives too (e.g. adverse events happening after vaccination, but which doctors believe are attributable to pre-existing conditions).

 

Active monitoring of adverse reactions following COVID-19 and other vaccinations: a feasibility study as part of the CoVaKo project
2022 July
https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/35780172/

The Corona-Vakzin-Konsortium project (CoVaKo) analyses the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in a real-world setting, as well as breakthrough infections in Bavaria, Germany.

A subproject of CoVaKo aims to identify adverse reactions of the COVID-19 vaccine and compare these to adverse reactions of other vaccines in an online survey. In a preceding feasibility study, the study materials were tested for comprehensibility, visual design, and motivation to participate, as well as for their ability to be implemented and carried out in primary care practices and vaccination centres.

Our study indicated that identifying and documenting adverse reactions following vaccinations using an online survey is feasible. Testing materials and surveys provided valuable insight, enabling subsequent improvements. Participation from health professionals proved essential in ensuring the practicality of procedures.



Active Surveillance of Adverse Events After COVID-19 and Other Vaccinations: a Feasibility Study as Part of the CoVaKo Project
October 2021
https://www.research..._CoVaKo_Project

Participants (strongly) agreed that the registration process was easy to understand, that all relevant information was provided, the completion time was reasonable and technical framework manageable. Physicians and heads of the vaccination centres perceived the study as easy to integrate into their workflow and most of them were willing to participate in the main study.

 

 

Most young people experienced side effects on the first shot, while older people due to a stunted immune system were more likely to experience side effects on the second dose.

 

If someone hadn't experienced serious side effects from the 2nd dose, a booster months down the road was very unlikely to elicit problems.

 

It's important to accurately analyze statistics and the likelihood of individual outcomes, otherwise you can end up doubling, quadrupling things unfairly. I recommend reading about expected values and Bayesian inference. The probability that B happens is not always the same as the probability of B happening, given that A has happened.

[Mind]

If someone hadn't experienced serious side effects from the 2nd dose, a booster months down the road was very unlikely to elicit problems.

 

 

 

Except that the Cleveland Clinic study showed that with every shot, people were more likely to get COVID. People who got 5 doses were the most likely to get COVID. This would at least imply that the injections are having a negative effect on immune response. Thus it is not unreasonable to assume that other side effects might get worse with each additional dose. A mechanism of action that has been suggested is that the spike protein is toxic  - and thus additional injections would create more insults to all your organ systems.

[Hip]

Except that the Cleveland Clinic study showed that with every shot, people were more likely to get COVID. People who got 5 doses were the most likely to get COVID. This would at least imply that the injections are having a negative effect on immune response.

 

Articles such as :text=In%20summary%2C%20the%20claim%20that,to%20evaluate%20bivalent%20vaccine%20effectiveness.' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>this one and this one explain how there were several uncontrolled factors in the Cleveland Clinic study, so such conclusions cannot be so easily drawn.

 

 

 

As an aside, I wonder whether it may just appear that the highly vaccinated got more COVID infections, simply because the vaccine boosted their immune response to the infection.

 

Many COVID infections are so mild that people do not notice them. But if the vaccine boosts the immune response, a mild infection may now become more fierce, due to the more intense immune response, so that they are noticed.

 

In this way, perhaps boosted immunity give the appearance of having more infections, when this may not actually be the case.

[Hip]

The onus is on them though, not me.

 

If you are making statements that the COVID vaccines are killing millions of people, the onus is indeed on you to provide supporting evidence for your belief. If anyone makes a statement of any kind, the onus is on them to back their statement up with facts.

 

Until you back it up with facts, it remains just your personal hypothesis or fantasy.

 

 

As I have pointed out to you before, excess death data from New Zealand demonstrates that there were no excess deaths from the COVID vaccines. In NZ, they had no COVID until recently, and so they rolled out the COVID vaccines in a COVID-free environment. This allows us to study the effects of the vaccines alone, without the confounding variable of COVID itself, which obviously killed a lot of people. NZ showed no excess deaths in the year the vaccines were rolled out.

 

 

Edited by Hip, 13 July 2023 - 10:50 PM.

[Gal220]

If you are making statements that the COVID vaccines are killing millions of people, the onus is indeed on you to provide supporting evidence for your belief. If anyone makes a statement of any kind, the onus is on them to back their statement up with facts.

 

Until you back it up with facts, it remains just your personal hypothesis or fantasy.

 

Doesn't matter, until they do the autopsies, the associated vaccine deaths are just that, vaccine deaths

You don't assume the best, you assume the worst

 

 

More info out of Australia

 

 

John Campbell from the video

"If I had known this prior, there is no way I would have accepted this vaccine. These rates of adverse reactions is way too high, for me, and for any sensible-thinking person"

[gamesguru]

As an aside, I wonder whether it may just appear that the highly vaccinated got more COVID infections, simply because the vaccine boosted their immune response to the infection.

 

Many COVID infections are so mild that people do not notice them. But if the vaccine boosts the immune response, a mild infection may now become more fierce, due to the more intense immune response, so that they are noticed.

 

Thanks for drawing attention to potential sources of error in the Cleveland Clinic study. It's good to hang a question mark on findings which go against the vast majority of other available data.

 

It's true, these studies need to differentiate between PCR tests for the virus and antigen tests for antibodies. Antibodies will surely be observed in recently vaccinated individuals. We would need to validate that this database only includes PCR tests, otherwise the association will be unscrupulous.

 

I would challenge the idea  that the vaccine is doing damage over time, and that COVID itself is the lesser of two evils. The majority of academic research points to the contrary. The two provide essentially the same spike protein. But the vaccine does so in a more controlled manner; COVID infections can multiply out of control in vulnerable hosts.

 

It's definitely wrong to assume everyone who died after vaccination was killed by the vaccine. It could have been a car crash, pre-existing cancer. This kind of blanket association is pure sloppiness.

 

Concerning John Campbell's video, it is only comparing COVID vaccines events to previous background data (mostly flu vaccines). He admits COVID vaccines were administered in large, unprecedented numbers with a large volume (> 50% population) within 12 months. What he doesn't explain is that COVID spike proteins inherently are more troublesome for the immune system, and that the vaccine is expected to have a higher incidence of adverse events than the more mild flu vaccine.

 

As Hip points out, data from New Zealand confirm the safety profile of the vaccine relative to the disease itself. And this holds true for most age brackets, except ironically younger ones who are seeing unexpectedly high rates of adverse events. Possibly the mRNA dose needs to be lowered for younger groups. But to denounce it entirely and label it as unredeemable seems hasty.

[Hip]

You don't assume the best, you assume the worst

 

If that is your philosophy, can you explain why when it comes to the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself, you consistently assume the best, rather than the worst?

 

 

For example, there is a lot of evidence indicating that in addition to the immediate deaths caused by COVID, people are also mysteriously dying several months after they apparently got over a COVID infection. Lots of data shows you have double the risk of dying in the year after catching COVID.

 

So this suggests COVID has a delay action fatal effect in many people. But when I've pointed such facts out to you before, you have discounted them. That's not assuming the worst, it's assuming the best.

 

Thus it seems your philosophy is selective: assume the worst when it comes to the vaccine, and assume the best when it comes to the COVID virus itself.

[gamesguru]

If that is your philosophy, can you explain why when it comes to the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself, you consistently assume the best, rather than the worst?

 

Thus it seems your philosophy is selective: assume the worst when it comes to the vaccine, and assume the best when it comes to the COVID virus itself.

 

Some individuals became convinced very early on that this virus was less lethal than influenza, and became critical of any sources claiming the opposite.

The open-mindedness is not the strongest with them, but they would likely argue the same of us, and that's fine. We should not be afraid to be wrong. Any good thinker adjusts his ideas as he gains experience and external information. I was surprised to learn of the relatively high risk of myocarditis in the youth, but that's the beauty of science—being able to change and react to incoming data and refine your approach as you go. At least that's how it's supposed to work—whether or not policy makers and agencies are actively scientific in their decisions and presentation, it's much harder to enforce.

Interestingly, I find that believing in one speculative theory makes you more likely to believe in more of them (e.g. lab leak, COVID deaths are inflated or due to the vaccine, ivermectin and the deep state), but that this tendency doesn't correlate with lack of intelligence—many of the people holding these positions are actually very intelligent, reasonable people. So it's worth engaging them, the dialogue process can only help us both.

It's fine to ask why we and they believe different things, and to analyze some tendencies in thinking. But I think the language needs to remain as neutral as possible, and the bulk of our posts should be centered around scientific debate rather than personal philosophy.

[Mind]

There are several problems with the "studies" that show the COVID injection effectiveness which have been discussed (and ignored) throughout this thread. First and foremost is that the vast majority of those studies did not test for prior infection. We know from multiple peer reviewed studies that natural immunity to COVID is much much stronger, durable, and long-lasting than the injections. People who had COVID and then got the injections should be excluded from those studies.

 

In addition, no one should automatically believe data/studies/summaries coming out of the CDC or other UK/US health bureaucracies. Sorry to say, but they have acted unethically and have publicly lied on several occasions about COVID cases and vaccine safety data. There is additional concern that the CDC is altering death certificates. In addition, COVID cases/deaths were wildly overcounted in the US. Recall that in the early stages of the COVID panic, people were just assumed to have COVID if they had some sort respiratory illness, so comparative studies from before and after the COVID injections should be used with caution.

[Gal220]

Some individuals became convinced very early on that this virus was less lethal than influenza, and became critical of any sources claiming the opposite.

 

If you check this forum, I have 2 threads on prevention and treatment.  When I had symptoms, pretty certain I did more than you and most people to insure my health

My doctor also set me up with mono-antibodies, but I was already recovered by the time I had an appointment

Unfortunately most people don't visit this board which imo did have the best discussion for Covid treatment

 

 

I am aware of all the excess mortality data, and I know the claims that natural immunity faded and that covid myocarditis was worse than the vaccine were outright lies

 

 

I know deaths/covid cases after initial vaccination were mysteriously not studied or attributed to covid instead of the vaccine

The recent autopsy investigation after vaccination found 74% were from the vaccine, most happening within a week of vaccination. 

 

However it wasnt necessary to wait for their findings, the VAERs data(for those who you know, care about their health) showed similar results within several months of rollout  

 

Just like the German study on adverse events per dose, an insurance analysis showed the same thing months prior

New data from Australia continues to show it was the vaccine(Just need to watch the first 14 seconds), John Campbell discusses in the above video

 

 

A recent article looks at possible causes for deaths through the Pandemic

Edited by Gal220, 14 July 2023 - 08:39 PM.

[Hip]

We know from multiple peer reviewed studies that natural immunity to COVID is much much stronger, durable, and long-lasting than the injections.

 

If you develop the life-destroying disease of long COVID in your attempt to acquire natural immunity from COVID infection, you may then take a different view on the wisdom of preferring natural immunity to vaccination immunity.
 
You stated erroneously in this post that "the cases of long COVID are very few."

 

In fact there are at least 65 million people with long COVID.

 

You don't have to be a mathematical genius to work out from that 65M figure that your chances of getting long COVID are about 1 in 100.

 

So while COVID infection may give you some immunity, the risk of long COVID is very high.

 

 

You might like to read some of the many Reddit forums where long COVID patients post: 

 

https://www.reddit.c...ovidlonghaulers

https://www.reddit.com/r/LongCovid

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 14 July 2023 - 08:52 PM.

[Dorian Grey]

If you develop the life-destroying disease of long COVID in your attempt to acquire natural immunity from COVID infection, you may then take a different view on the wisdom of preferring natural immunity to vaccination immunity.
 
You stated erroneously in this post that "the cases of long COVID are very few."

 

In fact there are at least 65 million people with long COVID.

 

You don't have to be a mathematical genius to work out from that 65M figure that your chances of getting long COVID are about 1 in 100.

 

So while COVID infection may give you some immunity, the risk of long COVID is very high.

 

 

You might like to read some of the many Reddit forums where long COVID patients post: 

 

https://www.reddit.c...ovidlonghaulers

https://www.reddit.com/r/LongCovid

 

Are we living in the past with the life-destroying COVID disease?  Or are we talking about the 2023, post omicron invasion world?  

 

My 2 cents would be: Proper treatment likely would have helped many avoid long COVID back in the bad old days.  We had research on SARS Coronavirus treatments before COVID even arrived: “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread” (PMID: 16115318) peer reviewed & published in 2005.

 

Is omicron still destroying lives today?  Who?  Anybody we might know?  

 

When considering risk vs reward of vaccination, its important to consider the relative danger of what we are pondering vaccinating against.  

[Hip]

Is omicron still destroying lives today?  Who?  Anybody we might know?  

 

Why don't you search the long COVID Reddit forums I linked to for the term "omicron".  

 

You will find plenty of info about omicron's ability to cause long COVID. It's less likely to cause LC than previous COVID variants; but that is offset by the fact that omicron is more transmissible, so there are more infections.

 

And as for prior natural immunity protecting you: there are plenty of LC patients who developed LC from their second COVID infection, or whose LC got worse after a second infection.

 

 

Long COVID patients were initially hopeful that science would soon rescue them from their plight. Congress actually gave a massive $4 billion for long COVID research, and these LC patients believed that this money would find a cure or effective treatment.

 

But $1 billion of that money has already been spent on studies, and we are none the wiser about the nature of LC, nor did we find any treatments. 

[Empiricus]

If you develop the life-destroying disease of long COVID in your attempt to acquire natural immunity from COVID infection, you may then take a different view on the wisdom of preferring natural immunity to vaccination immunity.
 
You stated erroneously in this post that "the cases of long COVID are very few."

 

In fact there are at least 65 million people with long COVID.

 

You don't have to be a mathematical genius to work out from that 65M figure that your chances of getting long COVID are about 1 in 100.

 

So while COVID infection may give you some immunity, the risk of long COVID is very high.

 

 

You might like to read some of the many Reddit forums where long COVID patients post: 

 

https://www.reddit.c...ovidlonghaulers

https://www.reddit.com/r/LongCovid

 

Having suffered for months from long COVID and made a full recovery, I don't think its accurate to characterize it as a "life destroying" condition.  

 

Sadly, many people suffering from long COVID were persuaded to get mRNA vaccinations which they clearly did not need (on account of having acquired natural immunity), and their recovery from long COVID was either impeded or the vaccines injured them in other ways.  

 

Hence today, even though the vaccines are very likely responsible for their lack of recovery, today their illness is misleadingly labeled "long COVID."  

 

All those who advised persons suffering from chronic immune related disorders (whether CFS, long COVID, cancer, etc.) to take the experimental mRNA vaccines that had not been studied for safety for persons with these disorders was extremely reckless. Anyone who advised people with natural immunity to COVID that they would benefit from the experimental mRNA shots was engaged in the medical malpractice.  

Edited by Empiricus, 15 July 2023 - 07:44 AM.

[gamesguru]

Having suffered for months from long COVID and made a full recovery, I don't think its accurate to characterize it as a "life destroying" condition.  

 

Sadly, many people suffering from long COVID were persuaded to get mRNA vaccinations which they clearly did not need (on account of having acquired natural immunity), and their recovery from long COVID was either impeded or the vaccines injured them in other ways. 

 

I am glad that you made a relatively full recovery from long COVID. Many others however did not. Some are still suffering, or have been afflicted with permanent damages and won't be making a full recovery. It's also important to appeal to published statistics when making associations or generalizations.

 

Long COVID is not a single syndrome, but a constellation of possible complications. The variation in individual response to the virus needs to be recognized, we cannot underestimate this. Some individuals show no signs of upper respiratory infection[2], suggesting the virus is affecting them more systemically[1]. Some people continue to have symptoms despite viral clearance (see Yale quote below). The vaccine is not expected to cure cases where the virus has been long cleared and where post-immune inflammation is the primary culprit—but it should help prevent long COVID in the first place[3]. In this regard it is similar to other vaccines. The rabies vaccine has a very short window (1-2 days) after a suspected bite or scratch, after which point it becomes ineffective at stopping the virus' march toward the spinal cord & brain, and death follows invariably. So giving the COVID vaccine long after is likely not going to help, and it could make things worse. The vaccine use needs to be carefully mediated going forward, it's clear if we force it on everyone at exactly the same dose, it can have unwanted effects.

 

The article I am quoting is here, on the Yale medical blog: https://medicine.yal...ogy-long-covid/

 

Long COVID refers to the long-term health and cognition effects that some people experience following infection with COVID-19. Patients have reported unrelenting fatigue, brain fog, dysautonomia, shortness of breath, and digestive problems, among over 200 symptoms — in some cases requiring frequent or even long-term hospitalization. The Iwasaki Lab is interested in exploring the biological mechanisms underlying these phenotypes — and how future research can harness this knowledge to engineer more effective and specific biomarkers for long COVID.

As researchers continue to examine how such patterns can provide information indicative of long COVID, Iwasaki proposes four possible hypotheses for the condition’s initiation and progression. They are:

1. Persistent viral loads or remnants hidden away in tissue and causing chronic inflammation. These viruses may not be measurable via nasopharyngeal swabs because they might be “hiding” in other internal organs, such as the gut.
2. Our body’s own disease-fighting B and T cells triggering an immune response — and subsequent inflammation — in a process called autoimmunity. The problem is: the stimulus that triggers autoimmunity in response to an acute infection is oftentimes occurring continuously in the body, making it difficult to pinpoint and shut down.
3. Dormant viruses reactivating, and/or dysbiosis of microbiome disturbing our body’s homeostasis. Humans live with trillions of bacteria and a number of viruses that are latent. When acute infection disturbs the host, these bacteria lose its composition balance and dormant viruses can become reactivated. These viruses and microbes can cause inflammation and throw off body’s homeostasis.
4. Macroscopic and microscopic tissue damage resulting from the initial infection. COVID-19 impacts parts of our body that we don’t commonly think about. Whether it’s our lungs or our brains or the endothelial tissue lining our blood vessels and supporting oxygen change, the virus — and the medication used to treat it — can lead to clotting or scarring in places that are difficult to reach and repair. In addition, inflammation that occurs in one tissue can trigger damage in other tissues.

In reality, long COVID is not a single disease. There are likely multiple endotypes of the disease. We are conducting human studies and developing animal models to understand the underlying pathogenesis of long COVID.

 

References

 

[1] Chrzan, R., Popiela, T., Małecki, M., Skupień, J., Bryll, A., & Grochowska, A. (2021). COVID-19 Infection Negative in Nasopharyngeal Swabs but Suspected in Computed Tomography and Confirmed in Bronchoalveolar Lavage Material. Case reports in infectious diseases, 2021, 6627207. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6627207

 

[2] Beneš, J., Džupová, O., Poláková, A., & Sojková, N. (2021). Repeatedly negative PCR results in patients with COVID-19 symptoms: Do they have SARS-CoV-2 infection or not?. Opakovaně negativní PCR u pacientů s projevy covid-19: Mají či nemají infekci SARS-CoV-2?. Epidemiologie, mikrobiologie, imunologie : casopis Spolecnosti pro epidemiologii a mikrobiologii Ceske lekarske spolecnosti J.E. Purkyne, 70(1), 3–9. https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/33853332/

 

[3] Watanabe, A., Iwagami, M., Yasuhara, J., Takagi, H., & Kuno, T. (2023). Protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination against long COVID syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Vaccine, 41(11), 1783–1790. https://doi.org/10.1...ine.2023.02.008

[Hip]

Having suffered for months from long COVID and made a full recovery, I don't think its accurate to characterize it as a "life destroying" condition.

 
That's a rather parochial statement!

 

"This happened to me, so therefore the same applies to everyone in the world".

 

There is a wider world out there. There are more people than just you. Why don't you read about it? You can start by reading the following:

 
 
 
Lots of people do recovery naturally from long COVID after about 6 months to a year or so. But many do not. 
 
This is well-understood: many viruses can cause a condition known as post-viral fatigue, where after you recover from the initial acute viral infection, you still feel incredibly fatigue for 6 months to a year, or longer. That is PVF.

 

With post-viral fatigue, you may be so tired that you have to stay in bed all day and night. 
 
Post-viral fatigue occurs with COVID, but is nothing specifically to do with COVID, it can occur with many viruses.
 
Lots of cases of post-viral fatigue clear up on their own, and people recover after many months. For example, you can get PVF after mononucleosis (glandular fever), which is usually caused by Epstein-Barr virus. 
 
But other cases of post-viral fatigue become permanent, and turn in to what is called myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). Once your PVF fails to clear up and turns into ME/CFS, it becomes a long term condition that may keep you bedbound for the rest of your life. ME/CFS and PVF have the same symptoms, it's just that ME/CFS is usually permanent.

 

Long COVID (of the ME/CFS type) appears to be just regular ME/CFS, but caused by SARS-CoV-2, rather than other viruses like Epstein-Barr virus.
 

Nobody knows why some cases of PVF clear up, but others turn into permanent ME/CFS.

 

 

 

 

Hence today, even though the vaccines are very likely responsible for their lack of recovery, today their illness is misleadingly labeled "long COVID."

 

Post viral fatigue and ME/CFS have been around for over a 100 years, long before any mRNA vaccines appeared. 

 

If you knew more about the background story with PVF and ME/CFS, it would be conducive to more germane discussion. 

 

 

You dodged a bullet, by recovering from LC/ME/CFS. 

 

But lots of people are not so lucky. 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 15 July 2023 - 02:45 PM.

[Hip]

All those who advised persons suffering from chronic immune related disorders (whether CFS, long COVID, cancer, etc.) to take the experimental mRNA vaccines that had not been studied for safety for persons with these disorders was extremely reckless. 

 

That's a Luddite perspective. 

 

But a fact check is in order here. You might like to read:

 

Vaccination after SARS-CoV-2 infection linked to a decrease in long covid symptoms. 

Edited by Hip, 15 July 2023 - 02:44 PM.

[Empiricus]

Researchers studying long COVID have every reason to believe they won't get published if they don't take a supportive stance toward the COVID vaccine program.  That means not taking into consideration the mounting data about vaccine side effects when it comes to the design of their long COVID studies.

 

Where researchers are constrained from asking the questions that most need to be asked, their studies aren't worth much.

Edited by Empiricus, 15 July 2023 - 03:21 PM.