Coronavirus | Discussion

Lol are you kidding me? From where?!? Israel or UK?

To the topic "knowing current level of the vaccines protection"....

You should know me. I always look at the sources not at 'articles' from somewhere.
If you would do that as well you notice there is a huge difference in results. (UK study compared to Israel).

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891?query=featured_home

And here original Israel data (even in Hebrew) tables are sort of English, too.
https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/repor...ications_corona_two-dose-vaccination-data.pdf
Last page of the pdf..very interesting..!!!

Israel finds that the Pfizer vaccine is declining in effectiveness whereas the NEJM study from UK results in a robust effectiveness after 2nd vaccination.
Even the mainstream newspaper are picking up this discrepancy.

https://www.jpost.com/ israel-pfizer-news/is-israel-or-the-uk-right-when-it-comes-to-covid-19-vaccine-effectiveness-674766

Oh and btw.....the wallstreet journal has picked up the IVM story.
The article is not free, but actually enough....

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fda-iv...s-anti-science-11627482393?mod=article_inline

"Why Is the FDA Attacking a Safe, Effective Drug?
Ivermectin is a promising Covid treatment and prophylaxis, but the agency is denigrating it."

gorski, you are clearly on the wrong side saying there is no safe drug which can keep pace with the vaccines....truth will unveil...but sadly slowly on the costs of people's life.

And the data about the vaccines are not sufficient and that much inconsistent to say something about the vaccine's approach to fight the pandemic.
Since fatality rate of COVID-19 is low either way it can even turn out that the vaccines don't add some noticeable absolute benefit.
When only 10% get severe, it doesn't matter if the effectiveness is 86 (January blue bars) or 91% (all fully vaccinated)

But I am glad that you have a clear idea about the vaccines; I don't have that.

 

The PCR method to detect 'infections' has got EUA even though it was never validated. It is based on the so called Corman / Drosten paper.
This is the very core of the imaging of the pandemic. We here are familiar with PCR tests. I had discussed the Corman paper with some colleagues. It has serious flaws at its methodology.
I wrote:

In other words. People still can get at one lab positive and at another lab with the very same sample negative.
There is still no standardized method all the labs are following. It's a joke and no science at all.

The CDC asks now the FDA for withdrawal of this EUA of their CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, applying a general validation and new methods. They also want to go for a multiplex method at which they also can detect other viruses in order to save money and to detect multi infections.

The preferred method 'PCR' still remains I suspect. But they generally speak of molecular in vitro diagnostic (IVD) assays.
This is way overdue. It will result to a far clearer image of the pandemic.
It's like buying new validated and calibrated scales, re-do weighing and getting new data about people's weigh above 100 kg (my example to illustrate)...

It's nice to make a statement about me, the person.
But to get a progress for yourself do that about the data I am posting.
I did that already and came to an conclusion according to my profession.
This does not apply to the IVM data alone. This also applies to the vaccine related data as well.

My assertion before the mass experiment has started.

Today we know. Sterilizing ABs at vaccines are an exception.
All those vaccines against SARS-COV-2 do not have it.

 

I don't know how I can be more consistent as I was already at this post 05.12.2020

https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/coronavirus-discussion.81224/page-83#post-1634249

The challenge is on your side. To understand the data.
And never forget. Those vaccine study's participants of 20,000+ ...it doesn't matter how many participated.

Not even 200 of those got infected to determine 90%+ efficacy. This weak dataset lead to EUA already!
A IVM study which includes 200+ infected people is already superior with regard to the dataset (n).

Choose your own https://c19ivermectin.com/
Current database : 104 studies, 67 peer reviewed, 60 with results comparing treatment and control groups

You should rather think about if the public health authorities can afford to be wrong with IVM at all and not granting EUA!!! Irresponsible is that!
Even if its efficacy shouldn't be great (what's not true) it is one of the safest drug we have got.

[Dr. Robert Malone Talks Censorship | Interview
He also talks about IVM.
If you don't want to make efforts to read studies at least hear him.
It's part of history of medical censorship. Talked about by the inventor of mRNA tech himself!
Wake up!

 

Interesting approach

 

I quoted that once, but only to quote something of myself from a previous post (predicting that covid vaccines won't be sterilizing).
Now referring directly to the content.

"If you do not shed it the potential path of the viral life-cycle for that particular infection ends with you and thus you cannot pass on or cause a mutation."

That is right, but it does not mean that the virus does not mutate anymore. To mutate it needs a susceptible host, yes. But the mutation rate is a natural attribute of the virus, too.

If the covid vaccines would be sterilizing you would force it to mutate in unvaxxed persons. The original variant would extinct, the mutations escape. You cannot vaccinate all people on earth and we are speaking about a zoonosis.
Remember those minks they have killed?
The virus would hide in animals, mutate there and jump back on humans as soon as it has escaped sterility. The reason (major reason IMHO) why you have a lifetime protection at measles, mumps and rubella is that they do not mutate.
For instance the surface proteins that the measles virus uses to enter cells are ineffective if they suffer any mutation, meaning that any changes to the virus come at a major cost.

Either way..at covid vaccines we have this situation:

When you get vaccinated you usually (except immunocompromised people) have full peak AB levels after 2 weeks after the second shot. The AB levels then start declining since the body does not encounter any virus / antigen again.
Within this period you have immediate protection, but no 100% protection.

Later then when you have got relatively low AB levels and the virus arrives your memory T and B cells have to wake up. This usually takes 1-2 days. Within THIS period you can shed the virus, you get infected and you get damage.
Since delta is more contagious it can do more harm within those 1-2 days of latency.
More detailed: Delta has a higher affinity to ACE2. It enters a human cell much faster, but its replication rate in a cell is still the same.

This reasons the lower efficacy percentage when it comes to infection, but the still high percentage when it comes to more severe symptoms.

BUT this does not mean that delta is escaping the vaccines. I am still convinced it can last for years....
You cannot force the body to wake up faster. This is nature of the memory t and b cells, period.
The advantage of the vaccine is to have those memory cells already cultivated.

An unvaxxed person with no cross-immunity needs up to 2 weeks to have sufficient AB levels and cytotoxic T cells at hand.....
In other words you are buying time by vaccines.

When you boost your body you provoke a wake up in advance, THIS benefit lasts only a few months.
It makes no sense to give booster to have AB levels up. The immune system sooner or later will behave strange if provoked again and again.
The vaccine makers of course are pushing people to have a look at AB levels and reason their decline to get boosters.

 

You could be a politician.
You assign a sort of consciousness to 'the situation' as if it would be able to call for something per se.
In fact it's people who call for vaccination.

I don't think you could justify it for many reasons.
It should be clear now that a covid vaccine is made for pure self-protection. You still can infect others, it's no act of solidarity.

Physical integrity is a human right, you should know and not give up to realize a measure which success and long term harm is still unknown.
All the more not because there are alternatives to the vaccine.