Denmark suspends use of AstraZeneca COVID vaccine https://m.dw.com/en/denmark-suspends-use-of-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine/a-56835406 Good move. Only bastardized sods could welcome death to run in their people's veins.
Jep, it should vanish forever. J&J is the same. With one exception. Similar issues already occurred in the phase III study. But anyway it has got emergency approval. I doubt sanity of the authorities. And another thing they have in common. AstraZeneca AND J&J studies were both temporarily paused / halted. And people never should forget: Placebo is not water only!!! Placebo "I shall be pleasing." Means anything can be included except the active thing "verum" the real thing, that should be tested against. So you read: 15 versus 10. It could be that the other ingredients already caused 10 and with the active DNA vector in it another plus 5. Why? Because water alone does not cause thromboembolic events for sure!
EU drug regulator investigating 30 reports of blood-clotting linked to AstraZeneca jab as states halt rollout of Covid vaccine https://www.rt.com/news/517858-eu-investigating-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine/
Italy bans AstraZeneca batch and Norway suspends jab’s rollout over concerns it caused fatal blood clots https://www.rt.com/news/517843-astrazeneca-covid-norway-italy-batch/
Confirming news to my thoughts about AstraZeneca. Time to have a look if other current data evolved that way that they might confirm what I previously thought (and I got criticized for it because it's not conform to mainstream). For the AstraZeneca vaccine it looks like I was right with being very sceptical. And I do not forget the neighbour of my workmate's parents got pulmonary embolism after the shot and almost died. For J&J I predict the same amount of trouble. I also said: "The evolution of SARS-Cov-2 will be that way that fatality drops and contagion raises. It will become common cold. 30% more lethality at variants is for the fools and scaremongering ppl or people watching too many Hollywood movies." And "It is highly probable that vaccination does not lead to sterilizing antibodies and therefore the mass vaccination approach is doubtful to stop the pandemic" Lets have a look where the variants spread. First UK for UK variant. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ Wow. Anything is dropping. Active cases maximum 01/02 since then dropping Total deaths 20/1 maximum since then dropping Where is the UK variant being a killer / monster? I was right. Deaths dropped drastically. OK you might want to say vaccination also helped. That's a point, too. So let's go to SA. To the SA variant there is low vaccination and AstraZeneca even did not work anymore and others lost efficacy a lot. WTF? https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-africa/ Anything is dropping even more!!!! Active cases max 11/1 since then drastically dropping Daily deaths max 19/01 since then drastically dropping Where is the propagated killer attribute of the new SA variant here?! And was it the vaccinations? Definitely not in SA. OK now to the masters of vaccination Israel (they should be at nearly at ending of the pandemic according to the vaccine adherents): https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/israel/ Hmmm. Active cases stagnating since 22/02. Actually plateau-ing. Daily deaths: Dropped, but not on the lowest level they had without vaccination in last summer. Does their vaccination seem to stop the pandemic? No. Their slope of dropping is even less than those of SA and UK which have to deal with 'killer' variants LOL. So it seems it's not wrong what I have predicted (at least current data are supporting my stance) ...compare yourself. Edit: I do not want to conceal Brazil: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/brazil/ The P1 variant's higher contagion and bad management / health care there can lead to raising numbers. Both are important anyway. But it does neither disqualify the long term assessment of evolution of SARS-Cov-2 (less fatality, higher contagion) nor the assessment (doubt) of mass vaccination being a measure alone to be able to stop the pandemic.
Oh, FCOL, Yen: why didn't you ask the same questions in Brazil's case? I'll tell you why: 'cause the answers would blow your argument right out of the water... And it's obviously not "just" the vaccination but the MEASURES, man, THE MEASURES!!!! And Brazil was NOT strong on measures!!! You can't have it both ways! If you were arguing that they were "hurting" the economy and poor people (especially if they do not live in a state that will take good enough care about them - and rightly so!!!), then you have to be consistent and remember you were bitching about the measures as "over the top", at least for your understanding of the issues (which I think was wrong on so many levels!). So, now you have NO RIGHT to "suddenly forget" that THE MEASURES YOU OPPOSED HAD A HUGE IMPACT ON THE ISSUES!!! It's called "convenient loss of memory to advance one's argument" and it's DEAD WRONG!!! No consistency or coherence in your stance and "arguments"!!! Yes, there is a price to be paid, especially thanx to bad management in some countries - but the price was paid to save lives! Now that they have been successfully combined, of course, with vaccinations and improvement in our understanding of the illness and how to treat it, plus how the general measures work - NOW IS THE TIME FOR YOU TO SAY THAT ONLY CONSCIENTIOUS COLLECTIVE EFFORT BEATS THIS!!!! NOT TO BITCH THAT PANDEMIC NEVER EXISTED!!! Look at the numbers of not only dead people but also people crippled by the disease! Then come and tell me the same thing! GO ON, I DARE YOU!!!!
Read this and understand how the Big Pharma companies have manipulated the vaccine data to convince the average person that the vaccine is 95% effective. https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/12/95-effective-may-not-mean-what-you-think-it-means.html This post is from December of last year when the Pfizer announcement came out. Nobody in the MSM picked Pfizer's mathematical nonsense and none questioned the result. Attached file is something I've sent to everybody in my contact list, and sent to every major media outlet in the surrounding area. None of the MSM has replied and very few of my contacts believe the article even when the mathematics are perfectly explained to them. That's how effective this vaccine propaganda has been. And to think that airlines and other large companies are considering restrictions on whether you have had the vaccine that is at best less than 2% effective in preventing infection. Side effects are real. A good friend of mine got the Pfizer vaccine and was sicker than a dog for almost a week. He had a severe reaction to it. Vomit, diarrhea so bad he had to cancel a seminar he was scheduled to give the next day. Granted it's only one person, but I expect more like it to surface as more people get the jab. He paid a high price for so little protection. .
Nothing wrong with what I and you have posted! I solely referred to 2 special standpoints. UK and SE variants are no killers. (Referred to current data of UK and SE.) Mass vaccination approach alone does not stop pandemic (Referred to Israel's current data). P1 variant is of more of concerns (due to high contagion, the biological fact that it contains both mutations and bad politics / management / heath care). You need to get infected before you can appear in the fatality stats, right? So higher amount of contagion means higher absolutes at fatalities, especially when politics and health care there is really bad. But it does not mean that it is has a bigger rate of lethality compared to the original variant since it is always related to the amount of infections. Lethality rate is solely reasoned by its (of P1) biological attributes. AstraZeneca's vaccine has to be withdrawn due to lack of safety. J&J does not look better. Nothing more from my side posted above. Ah one more: Best vaccines for those who want to get vaccinated are still Moderna followed by Pfizer. (Although their side effects are far above average of any other vaccines against other diseases!!!) I myself prefer inactivated virus (Sinopharm, Covacin, inactivated virus by beta-Propiolactone). And I am curious about Novavax which uses the antigen directly. All my assumptions are personally, but based on what I know. I am neither a fool nor an anti-vaxxer. I am waiting for my IVM until my preferred vaccines are turning out to be safe in my eyes. And when this time won't come I am getting no COVID vaccine. I also have illustrated how those 95% were calculated and pointed out the weak data references. (Cases: 170 [162/8] means 95.06% 'efficacy') And I pointed out that there won't be highly probably no sterilizing immunity and explained why (IgA is last at class-switching). https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/coronavirus-discussion.81224/page-86#post-1636635 https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/coronavirus-discussion.81224/page-108#post-1648192
FACT CHECK – Face Coverings are unsafe and ineffective – Here’s all the evidence… https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/03/04/face-coverings-are-unsafe-and-ineffective-evidence/
BS FactCheck > Fake news Stupid news made for sheep Aren't you a tiger? All illnesses are maliciously tagged as Covid-19, is this so hard to understand?
This weekend I want to go through the JAMA study in which Ivermectin did show no significant benefit at mild COVID in young adults. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389 It is remarkable in 2 ways. It is an exceptional result. (At other studies Ivermectin works significantly). It's been published in JAMA, a scientific 'medical mainstream' journal. JAMA is cited most and the result perfectly matches the ideology of vaccine makers and authorities (FDA, CDA) pushing the vaccines. This study attracts also attention at all 'mainstream' MDs. Is there an intent? How to realize the mentioned art of science? Usually it's best one has scientific knowledge which is sufficient and one can study the paper on its own. To go through a study usually takes time, often more than an hour. I just wanted to do that, but then I found a video from the whiteboard doctor. I couldn't have made it better. An objective and close look at it. So if somebody with scientific interest wants to have a close look at the JAMA Ivermectin study here is the video. (These are BTW the similar efforts I'd have when I go through other studies as well to evaluate drug actions in clinical trials). @drew84 It's probably something for you as well. (You pointed to that study).
Yen: I listened to the whole video and a few things stood out to me. 1.) There were only a few hundred people in the final study in each group. 2.) Both the groups were young, healthy, and with an average age 35. 3.) The control group mistakenly was given Ivermectin. Based on just those three things, the study should be disregarded. You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. https://www.heritage.org/data-visualizations/public-health/covid-19-deaths-by-age/ .
Look how many dislikes this video has showing this American criminal performing vaccine propaganda to his people. This narrative was predicted by us conspiraloonies.
Yen: Just picked up a 50ml bottle of Ivermectin from the local feed store for $40 US. It went without incident. The cashier rang it up, no questions asked. I expected a little push back but there was none. They also had the paste and unlike the salami log I saw before these were small syringe like things, maybe 6 grams each for like $10 US. I took a look at the Safety Data Sheet and there were 3 items listed for the filling, all supposed trade secrets and there was no telling what the 98% of the compound was mixed in with the 1.87% Ivermectin, so I passed on the paste and got the 50ml 1% solution figuring that it was just mixed with a saline solution. I have no need for it right away, but I figured it would be better to have it if I ever need it. I'd follow the FLCCC guidelines to the letter if I ever need to use it. One question I have is that all the formulas are given in mL and all the syringes that I have are in CC's. I looked up some on line conversion tables and they say 1mL = 1CC. Seems too easy to me. Just want to confirm it one way or the other. Thanks for all your help, and great information. . The guidelines on the label and data sheet, all say 1mL per 100# which pretty much is exactly what you had suggested.
I did not post an own summary of the JAMA study in advance to avoid that people here might argue it comes with own bias. Instead of I asked to watch the video. You hit the nail perfectly. This is a study I would consider as study with major issues. Before you make a study you have to clearly declare an outcome, a goal in advance. This is common sense not to cherry-pick those data later that might match one's idea. This outcome has been changed during the study. First point. To be able to obtain any significance at mild progresses at younger people you need to recruit a huge bunch of people. Second point. The placebo group accidentally got the real stuff. Third point. They administered their own preparation of IVM, gave it to the people for home use (self-administering). As 'proof' they asked for the empty bottles. The half-life of IVM and active metabolites is 3 days. The condition to participate in the study was 5 days minimum without IVM use before.(Was there any rest activity, though?) Yes it is that simple. 1CC cubic centimeter (1 cm^3) = 1 mL mililiter 1 dm^3 cubic decimeter = 1 L liter. Yes keep it in a dry dark place. Just in case of. I'll do the same with my Iverheal pills should they arrive through the customs. It only contains saline as assumed. It's the better choice over horse paste. "The guidelines on the label and data sheet, all say 1mL per 100# which pretty much is exactly what you had suggested." Please recheck this. Not sure what you wanted to type actually by #!!!! IVM 1% solution Each CC means 10 milligrams of IVM. If you are 70 kg and therefore need 70*0.2mg upper dose according to FLCCC = 14 mg you need 1.4 CC = 1.4 mL. This is the result you also get using the provided formula at post #2182. Make sure to recheck FLCCC site from time to time if they are updating their recommendation. Another point (just for the picky ones). Percent actually means (if not stated otherwise) mass by mass! But at injection solutions (I asked a paramedic) it means mass by volume. 1% means one gram of IVM in 100 mL. It actually is not much of difference since the density of water or diluted aqueous solutions is around 1. Means one milliliter is around one gram.