Your arguments are not wrong and actually no counterarguments to my post. (OK the last 'assumption' is pointless.) I always pleaded for: -An individual risk / benefit consideration -To vaccinate the vulnerable people. (and yes this IS saving lives). You can read that back. I also have posted that the waning rate of Pfizer (AB levels) is 40% per month. And I talked about booster. Maybe the last bit about higher efficacy severe /death is now clearer OK. If you say.... But look, My last post is about 2 completely different things: (read your post again and tell me where it is related to what I had posted). - Vaccines won't stop the pandemic. https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/coronavirus-discussion.81224/page-157#post-1686898 - Mass vaccination into a pandemic is a bad idea. (Also reasoned this statement and compared to the flu where we always vaccinate ahead of the upcoming season). I neither said vaccines are useless nor I said they do not safe lives. I argued against your saying "unvaxxinated morons" and the way you are spotting 'guilty ones'. A moron in this regard is somebody who miscalculated his risk benefit evaluation but NOT the unvaxxed in general. You seem to forget that at 80% of all COVID is asymptomatic / mild / moderate. When somebody does a proper individual benefit risk analysis and the result is no vaccine THEN it would safe NO life. A proper risk benefit evaluation tends to a good / harmless progress when getting infected with SARS-COV-2 REGARDLESS of being vaxxed or unvaxxed. It is the purpose of a proper risk / benefit analyses. To minimize risk to maximize benefit. So there is a part left. Vaccination is voluntarily in most nations. By that each individual can take own risk and say no. And no is also a valid result of a proper risk / benefit analyses than yes. (This does not mean the analyses has left some uncertainness in both ways.) The job of the public health ends here. And it is not unusual, they allow smoking, they allow you to get obese, drink alcohol. In other words they allow you to get risks for your health. If public health should regulate more there is another topic.They even get taxes and earn from people risking their health. Do you know how many people die from alcohol each year alone?
Have you ever thought why? The basic of epidemiology has a perfect explanation. Some people say the virus does mutate more in vaxxed than in unvaxxed. This is not right. It actually does mutate there most where it replicates most since each replication is a chance for mutation. BUT: Variants are benefited in vaxxed! The people who are vaccinated against the original spike cause a beneficial spread of them! Why? A naive immune system (of the uninfected and unvaxxed) fights the pathogen as a completely unknown pathogen. Slower than the vaxxed, yes. A vaxxed person fights the original variant BETTER than the VOCs. The farther away it has mutated from the original variant, the more different it is, the lesser it gets fought. Mutations are nothing but probabilities of creating new sequences. There is no intelligence behind that. The law here is the law of probability of survival. And in the vaxxed there is this rule: The closer the new VOC is to that variant you got vaccinated against, the lesser the chance of survival. Ergo: The more it has mutated away the greater the chance of spreading. This is called escape pressure. And this can happen when you mass vaccinate into an ongoing pandemic where the virus can mutate.
You miscalculated with 1) NHS/public health services NOT becoming overwhelmed when vaccinations are given (thereby freeing the PH services to resume services to everybody else) and 2) deaths and heavy cases/serious suffering seriously reduced! That kills your argument! There is a serious difference! P.S. Not to mention the economy... P.P.S. You also miscalculated with human irrationality and/or (spiritual) laziness - the MEASURES are still a MUST!
@gorski Look what your country-friend saying about your arguments: https://rumble.com/vg4inv-michael-yeadon-full-interview-planet-lockdown.html
On Ivermectin my (Medicare) Anthem Formulary for 2022 has the 3MG tabs listed I noticed. Also the https://ivmmeta.com/ was updated yesterday.
Eh, what? Even because the vaccines are globally limited if you would only vaccinate the vulnerable people you could even vaccinate more vulnerable people and by that safe more lives, keep medical capacities unoccupied. Shouldn't be that hard to get. If there would be real and world wide solidarity those nations who got tons of vaccines already would have said...OK we have vaxxed our vulnerable people the rest of the jabs is for you until all vulnerable people are vaxxed worldwide. I am not able to calculate irrationality, therefore there can't be miscalculation. I cannot calculate it since there are lots of different of irrationality For instance staying obese while clearly knowing that obesity is risk factor number one, not having balanced nutrition, vit levels, or smoking or not relying on repurposed drugs, etc,etc... Mass vaccination is a big mistake. And time will tell if my arguments come true or not. There are studies supporting that, better said I got my arguments based on those. If you continue to exert escape pressure by mass vaccination you always push the virus away from current vaccines. And if their effectiveness become low enough to the recent VOC the probably to get severe will raise one day as well.
Oh, boy.... You have no idea just how irrational you can be... On the other hand, look at all your u-turns and... maybe... Although...
Look at the latest Luc Antoine Montagnier He said that by the middle of the 21st century, humanity would be gone. The reason for the contaminated slurry of vaccines and tests! ITALIAN PRIME MINISTER REVEALS EUROPE'S PLANS FOR 2026! THE MICROCHIP ECOSYSTEM. Look it up in Italian sources. You will have an epiphany! https://thecovidblog.com/2021/10/24...-span-after-vaxx-mandates-in-cuyahoga-county/ Three Ohio judges “die unexpectedly” in nine-day span after vaxx mandate in Cuyahoga County "Coronavirs, Deaths. 50,365 total deaths in Great Britain. Small print: Death from any cause within 28 days of a positive covid test."
This world has to many experts that give their opinion's that contradict each other and confuse the public ! its hard to sift through the BS to get real facts !
Then the public should start thinking and use common sense. This common sense should lead the public to ask: 1. Why authorities and doctors are pushing mass vaccination. 2. Why other experts say, in reputable scientific papers, these new covid vaccines have extremely dangerous side effects. 3. Why authorities and other experts don't publish scientific papers supporting claimed vaccine's safety and efficacy. 4. Confusion arise, alright then apply precaution principle. Don't get vaccinated for the time being. Vaccines are substances that are going to get in my precious body. That's a BIG DEAL. 5. Need to get informed in depth about what's going on with this pandemic before I put anything into my sacred body.
https://rumble.com/veb8ij-covid-19-reality-check.html https://rumble.com/veb8ij-covid-19-reality-check.html https://principia-scientific.com/pr...-people-will-start-dying-after-covid-vaccine/ https://rumble.com/ven3fd-moderna-chief-medical-officer-explains-mrna-information-therapy.html
"Deaths in Children and Young People in England following SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first pandemic year: a national study using linked mandatory child death reporting data" 2/Million comorbidities included. https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-689684/v1 Picked up by MSM:https://www.bbc.com/news/health-57766717 Compare risk of myocarditis in Israel due to Pfizer vaccine: "Myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine against Covid-19 in Israel" https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2109730 If you are male and between 16-19 years 13.6 / 100,000, means 136 per million Deaths (CYP): 2/ Million The probability to get myocarditis due to Pfizer vaccine is 68 times greater than to die from COVID when you are male and 16-19 years.... The only difference is that this compares 2 different cohorts (Israel to England) and CYP is generally <18 years. Also to be considered: Administration of the vaccine = 100%, chance to get infected is unknown pecentage.
See how grave this is all you people reading? Especially to one pink speck of dust floating around here?
Non-neutralizing cross-reactivity of antibodies against Spike and HIV Dear members of Akasha Community: A few months ago in a couple of talks I explained the relationship that vectorized vaccines (against SARS-CoV-2) that were based on human Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) could have towards the increase in the risk of contracting HIV whether there was exposure to the virus, particularly in homosexual men or in risk groups. This risk has been known for years, and in the talks I presented the references and explanation about it (for example, to name just one: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32156-5/fulltext). Little has been said about this, actually because most of the vectorized vaccines targeted other adenoviruses, and did not use Ad5. For example, Astrazeneca used a chimpanzee adenovirus, Johnson & Johnson used human adenovirus 26 (Ad26), Sputnik used Ad26 in the first dose and Ad5 in the second. Only Cansino used Ad5 (there are several as yet unauthorized vaccine candidates that are based on Ad5). The point is that it is not known if the fact that they use Ad26 as a vector (or adenovirus from non-human primates) does not cause the same increase in the risk of becoming infected with HIV when exposed. It is an area of study that is still little explored. This time I share with you the link to a recent study (it was published in September 2021) that reported non-neutralizing cross-reactivity between the antibodies generated against Spike of SARS-CoV-2 and an envelope protein of HIV-1 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC8479463/). This cross-reactivity occurs due to the amino acid similarity in some regions of both proteins (Spike from SARS-CoV-2 and gp41 from HIV-1). The problem is that the antibodies are not neutralizing. This means (something the authors omit in the discussion, but should not be ignored by those who know about immunology) that it cannot be ruled out that the presence of said antibodies against Spike, in people infected with HIV-1, could increase infection within the body of such people, since by not neutralizing the HIV-1 virus, then they can lead to a phenomenon known as ADE (antibody-mediated or dependent increase). It is a possibility, and the responsible thing is to study it - especially considering the number of people who are having antibodies against Spike given the vaccination - and investigate if it is possible that this phenomenon occurs, directed towards the increase in the infection of cells by the HIV virus -1 in already infected people. The generation of non-neutralizing antibodies is not trivial. There are many viral diseases for which the occurrence of ADE has been detected due to these non-neutralizing antibodies (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19022319/). In this case, if it occurs, it would be an ADE caused by anti-Spike antibodies that also recognize (and therefore bind) an HIV-1 protein, but do not neutralize the virus. I try to summarize the relevance and implication of this study: if what they found in their animal model occurs in humans, there would be a high risk of increased HIV-1 viral load in infected people due to those antibodies against Spike. It may not happen, but given the results of this study, it would be responsible to study it in the human population. I hope this information is useful to you and I send you my regards, Karina AW https://t.me/akashacomunidad/677
Yahoo News: Cheap antidepressant shows promise treating early COVID-19. https://news.yahoo.com/cheap-antidepressant-shows-promise-treating-223735055.html
Thanks for that. The link to the Lancet study there is https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(21)00448-4/fulltext Fluvoxamine belongs to my 3 favorite repurposed drugs I have handy myself at home. Fluvoxamine is (besides of other SSRIs such as Fluoxetine) a sigma-1 receptor agonist which is the assumed mechanism that helps at COVID. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28315270/ Happy to see my choice gets more and more confirmation. IVM, Fluvoxamine, Budesonide. IVM: Early treatment until full recovery. Fluvoxamine: In addition to IVM if neurological issues occur (also tinntus and loss of smell) Budesonide (lung inflammation / inflammatory state).
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3949410 Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccination Against Risk of Symptomatic Infection, Hospitalization, and Death Up to 9 Months: A Swedish Total-Population Cohort Study https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.19.21262139v1 Predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California
Novavax News: https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/novavax-files-covid-19-vaccines-uk-authorization-2021-10-27/
Scientist Whose Wife Was Injured by COVID-19 Vaccine Tells FDA: "Please Do Not Give This to Kids" @COVID19Up: The U.S. FDA advisory committee on Tuesday (Oct. 26) endorsed Pfizer’s COVID vaccine for children ages 5 to 11, despite strong objections raised during the meeting by multiple scientists and physicians. Brian Dressen, Ph.D., is one of the scientists who testified during the 8-hour hearing. Dressen is also the husband of Brianne Dressen, who developed a severe neurological injury during the Utah-based portion of the U.S. AstraZeneca COVID vaccine trial in 2020. After being injured by the first dose, Brianne withdrew from the trial. During his 3-minute testimony, Dressen told the FDA advisory panel Pfizer’s vaccine “failed any reasonable risk-benefit calculus in connection with children.” Dressen said: “Your decision is being rushed, based on incomplete data from underpowered trials, insufficient to predict rates of severe and long-lasting adverse reactions. I urge the committee to reject the EUA [Emergency Use Authorization] modification and direct Pfizer to perform trials that will decisively demonstrate that the benefits outweigh the risks for children. I understand firsthand the impact that you will or will not have with the decision you’re going to make today.” https://t.me/COVID19Up/11353