"While the Australian corporate media and political establishment present the pandemic as a thing of the past, COVID infections and hospitalisations are continuing to increase. With all safety measures having been overturned, governments have created the..." https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/12/10/tahp-d10.html So, what's more important: profit or... Meer "details"...?!?
A never-ending story Dear members of Akasha Community: For 20 years, my scientific research has been focused on trying to answer 'why do individuals get sick?'. The thing about 'why' questions in science is that they are too broad to answer; For this reason, my most grounded research questions focus on trying to understand what are the factors that influence the fact that in a given population, some individuals become ill and others do not. To study this, I draw on natural populations of wild animals, such as the California sea lion, northern elephant seal, blue whale, and more recently, the Antillean manatee and Guadalupe fur seal. And the diseases that I study are varied, from cancer to diseases caused by intoxication and viral, bacterial and fungal infectious processes. It is fascinating work (at least for me and my group, it is), which allows us to go to places of incomparable beauty, to remember silence and nature, to learn so much from what animals can teach us, and, also, to It allows us to put our training in immunology, molecular genetics, epidemiology, microbiology, and multivariate analysis into practice. It really is a gift to be able to do this job that I love to do so much. But, what is the point of all this?, some may think. Well, to the fact that if I have learned anything in these two decades of conducting research, it is that 1) not all individuals are the same, 2) many microorganisms that are normally attributed as 'the cause' of diseases, actually play a role Secondary (for example, we have found DNA from a gamaherpesvirus in many sea lions that some researchers consider to be the cause of urogenital cancer in this species, but their genital epithelia are clean and healthy, with no evidence of cellular transformation. Does this mean that gamaherpesvirus does not play a role in the development of sea lion urogenital cancer? No! but it means that the disease is due to the interaction with many - many - factors, and that many sea lions may have the virus in their cells and not have any problem. Like COVID! (You see how good it is to know about sea lions to understand the reason why there are so many people who "come out positive" in the test eba, never developed any symptoms, and this even taking into account the fact that the diagnostic tests used have such a poor positive predictive value as they are done, and that it was never validated with a gold standard of clinical relevance). So, I was saying, many other factors play a role in the development of the disease. And do you know which is the most important? the proper functioning of the immune system. Be careful, I did not say 'maximum performance'. I said 'good working'. It's not the same thing as optimal, although many doctors and some dentists think it is (perhaps they would not only do well to go back to study immunology, but brush up on their vocabulary). The immune system, which has been present in all cellular organisms since the appearance of bacteria approximately 3,800,000,000 years ago, is what allows us to differentiate what we are from what we are not, including the presence of our molecules that are changed ( as occurs during many types of cancer). It really is wonderful. But the point is that it can be deregulated (for example, with exposure to toxic agents) and it can be limited in its functioning if, for example, there is poor nutrition, or if too many energy resources are being invested in other processes, or if we deplete it. with repetitive stimulation against the same thing (an example came to mind?). So, in the context of the global humanitarian insanity that, for reasons I still don't understand, we choose to experience, it is important to keep in mind that the most important thing is, precisely, to take care of our immune system. I don't know if you already know, but it turns out that the pseudo-sisters of charity of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the WHO and Johns Hopkins University, decided to carry out, on October 23, 2022, a preparation 'exercise' catastrophic pandemic (I'm not using superlatives, that's what they called it: https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/exercises/2022-catastrophic-contagion/) In their 'exercise' they simulated what would happen, and what their response would be, if cases of Severe Epidemic Enteric and Respiratory Syndrome (SEERS... no, no kidding) unexpectedly appeared. In his 'exercise', which takes place in 2025, there are more than 50 cases in two South American countries (in Brazil and Guyana, I think) and from there it spreads rapidly to the entire planet, with 1,000 million cases in a few months. . Terrible! and even worse, because the virus (which, from the image they posted, would seem to be a flavivirus - it looks a bit like the cartoon they put on the Dengue virus), affects children and young people in an unusual way. Well, but is it that these self-sacrificing, generous and charitable (yes, it's sarcasm) gentlemen never rest? It was not enough to carry out their prophetic exercise on October 18, 2019 (https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/exercises/event201/) in which with almost surgical precision that Nostradamus would have envy, they predicted what would later they themselves declared a few months later. They couldn't get enough of your exercise on the 'emergency' of monkey pox (or monkeypox, or whatever you want to call it; https://www.nti.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/NTI_Paper_BIO-TTX_Final.pdf) a few months before the cases appeared and that led to the declaration of another emergency situation by the WHO, despite the fact that at that time there was not a single death. It seems to me that we should already consider building a space to house these brand new 21st century fortune tellers, and start asking them other questions, because their predictive capacity is unusual. Given the correlation between his 'exercises' and his emergency declarations months later, I wouldn't be one bit surprised if the same thing happened this time, and that before long the media started talking about strange cases of enteric-respiratory syndrome. If that happens, I think there will be a lot of hustlers and goofballs who will buy it all, there will be dudes who want to please their bosses, their colleagues, their pharmacists, and they'll 'jump on the SEERS boat in a heartbeat', but in I really hope that many others do not do it, that they question themselves, that they do not fall into fear; and that, regardless of the existence or not of a virus (today fictitious, but these gentlemen are very ingenious), from now on they do everything necessary so that their immune system is optimal (many things have already been shared here with medical protocols in this regard ), that they sleep well, that they do moderate exercise, that they have enough exposure to the sun, that they eat healthy products and that they have a good supply of micronutrients, that they find ways to calm their minds... that promote their health, well. And the same applies to children and young people! I greet you and wish you well, Karina AW https://t.me/akashacomunidad/2291
Seriously ....... what was the point in posting that ? What do you ' think ' it says ? What relevance do you ' think ' it has ? I dont mean to be rude but its obvious that your english isnt good enough to be able to understand whats written there . That whole article is verbal and mental acrobatics .
(This study adds scientific evidence to my personal impressions). "Discriminatory Attitudes Against the Unvaccinated During a Global Pandemic" This is BOLD!!! As drug-addicts and ex-convicts!!! And finally page 56..'who' is it! Those are the 'higher' educated and those who are 'not' poor! We also can say those who think that they are better than the others and cry that out loudest. It is one direction. The vaxxed discriminate the unvaxxed. (There is negative affection at Germany and US coming from the unvacced towards the vaxxed, but no discrimination). "There is an absence of evidence that unvaccinated individuals display discriminatory attitudes towards vaccinated people, except for the presence of negative affect in Germany and United States" I personally want to add...education and wealth does NOT correlate to how we treat our fellow human beings and how we respect others who have had a different POV on a special subject! It's rather the opposite those classified here as education 'higher' and 'not poor' are worse. In this regard some here should ask themselves if one took part at discriminating 'the unvaccinated'. If you would ask me I say yes...all those who are / were pro vaxx and posted here DID verbally discriminate people who did say no to the vaccine..sorry! Great study, published at "Nature" Discriminatory Attitudes Against the Unvaccinated During a Global Pandemic | Nature
It's a Popper question: "Do you tolerate the intolerant?" If you do - they eventually get to power and abolish the idea of tolerance. Absolute tolerance abolishes itself. It is indicative that AfD and similar right-wingers have been trying to undermine the measures etc. The intolerant wanted to be tolerated. If this doesn't make one think - nothing will...
This study is not designed about if the intolerant wanted to be tolerated. It illustrated objectively 'who' acted towards whom and that at several countries, so it cannot be reasoned by 'AfD' or what-wingers alone. It's simply about a question to respect an own medical decision to take or not to take an experimental vaccine related to an own personal risk benefit assessment! Contrary to that you have to evaluate what the responsible ones did by their politics and also MSM. The personal reasons why the vaxxed took the vaccine. Was it as it should be a medical / epidemiological reason....politics based on proper science OR social and political pressure based on twisted facts. AKA they have been manipulated at their decision making! Most of the vaxxed did NOT take the vaccines because of proper medical / epidemiological reasons, they took them because they wanted to get back what we call 'normal life'. All that because of a false promise made by the politicians, namely twisted attributes of the vaccines....AKA they would stop the pandemic / you cannot become infected anymore / they have no severe side effects. There was never a proper informed consent which must be mandatory! Many people did not know that the vaccines did not get a full approval. Either way. The proper question here for me is "Who participated most in separation of the societies by their behaviour?" And the vaxxed did far more separate societies than the unvaxxed. No matter what 'wing' they belong to. This is at least the result of that study.
I dont see a difference between fanatics and fanatics ? Between ignorant trouble makers and ignorant trouble makers . ............ from both ' sides ' .
What is a non-expert to do but listen to the people who do know in these highly specialised areas with highly technical issues? Civilised societies must function partly on trust. Trust, of course, in open societies, is earned and constantly re-evaluated. We shall see how it will develop but no country can do without trust in a civilised society. Otherwise a helluva lot of force must be used - Stalinism or Nazism... I want to see a completely open debate - without "patents" BS!
Hey wow !!! gorski just woke up ? And realised the hes backed himself up into a corner by talking s**t in circles . Your a philosopher ........ you have knowledge of philosophy ........ and through that a bit of psychology , history , law makeing , social building . You should have learnt how to think , neutral , objective , analytic ......... what facts are , what proofs are ........ clear , unbiased thinking ....... what it is and how to do it . >What is a non-expert to do but listen to the people who do know in these highly specialised areas with highly technical issues? Civilised societies must function partly on trust. Trust, of course, in open societies, is earned and constantly re-evaluated. We shall see how it will develop but no country can do without trust in a civilised society. Otherwise a helluva lot of force must be used - Stalinism or Nazism... I want to see a completely open debate - without "patents" BS! Exactly !!!! ......... Wich means that YOU should stop talking s**t ......... you should stop manipulating .......... you should stop twisting issues ......... and use the education we payed for to do responsible things ......... for example ........ explain things in terms other people can understand ........ with your expertiese ......... or at least shut the f**k up and stop makeing things even more confused . In a free society we should put all issues on the table ........ where everyone has a place .......... and get expert advice ........ and then discuss and decide ........ and have plans A , B and C ........ and try things and be honest . WE need to decide what experts are , who experts are ........ and who arent .......... and then people like x who cause trouble , distort things , make conmfused and idiotic claims would soon be thrown off the table ......... and their idiotic s**t publicly disqualifyed . Example ......... x ........ deliberately trying to confuse and cause trouble ......... hes not the only one ......... and if you look at his last post you'll see that its the same s**t again , again , again ......... that hes posted in diferent versions ........ from the same few people pretending to be experts ........... telling the same few confused storys in circles ......... with the same few pseudo facts and idiotic claims . That and this thread have nothing to do with anything positive , helpfull , socialy responsible , healing ?
Change your meds again... Errrr... I mean drugs! Yeah, yeah, those drugs that make your brain into mush...
Is the blood and organs of those vaxxed safe? Dear members of Akasha Community: I know that there have been many questions among members of the community regarding the safety (or lack thereof) of the blood and organs of inoculated people, especially with products based on synthetic mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) or vectored (AstraZeneca, Janssen, Cansino, Sputnik). I understand the concern, and for a long time my answer has been: 'it is not known if they are safe', but it seems to me that there is more and more evidence that, indeed, they are not, or at least, that it would be the most sensible thing to assume They are not safe until we have more information about it. Regarding the reception of organs from inoculated donors, an article was published earlier this year in the journal Transplantation (https://journals.lww.com/transplant...0/Outcome_After_Organ_Transplantation_From.42). The article, written by van Bruchem et al., is titled (translated from English) “Outcome after organ transplantation of brain-dead donors following brain insult following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination within the Eurotransplantation region.” (I know, the title is scary). In that note to the editor, the authors begin the paper by acknowledging the fact that strokes can occur secondary to inoculations, and that since people with these incidents eventually die of the condition, they become candidates to be organ donors for transplants. They retrospectively evaluated people who, between March and June 2021, were used as organ donors after their death. They first identified which had died from inoculation-associated thrombocytopenic thrombosis (VITT) that had occurred within 30 days of receiving the inoculation. During the three months of the study, 511 donors (deceased) had been reported to the European Transplant system. In 60 of them, there was information on the receipt of at least one dose of the inoculation in the period of one month prior to their death and organ donation. Six people (three women and three men) were identified as donors whose probable cause of death was VITT, with an average of 48 years. All of them had received the AstraZeneca or Janssen inoculations on average 14 days before being admitted to the ICU for the cerebrovascular problem. The six people donated 20 organs to 17 patients. The authors indicate that after a median follow-up of 43 days, all the patients were alive, and 19 of the transplanted organs were functioning well. However, two patients developed complications due to thrombosis (one in the kidneys – he developed thrombotic microangiopathy, from which he recovered, and another in the liver, with severe thrombosis and necrosis that required urgent retransplantation). The authors acknowledge that since there is no systematic collection of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status in the European transplant system, the analysis is probably an underestimate of what is occurring. They also had no information on the presence of anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibodies in the donors (this is extremely important, since their presence can precisely cause thrombosis, and these antibodies have been observed in inoculated people). They conclude by saying that, despite the fact that their limited analysis does not seem to detect a problem, it is urgent to be careful with these donors, and that the acceptance of each organ to be transplanted is determined individually for each patient. and these antibodies have been observed in inoculated people). They conclude by saying that, despite the fact that their limited analysis does not seem to detect a problem, it is urgent to be careful with these donors, and that the acceptance of each organ to be transplanted is determined individually for each patient. and these antibodies have been observed in inoculated people). They conclude by saying that, despite the fact that their limited analysis does not seem to detect a problem, it is urgent to be careful with these donors, and that the acceptance of each organ to be transplanted is determined individually for each patient. At the very least, it would be a good idea to do a search for anti-PF4 antibodies and anti-HLA-I antibodies in donor tissues (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36089469/). The point is that van Bruchem's article contrasts with others, which did find an evident risk of VITT in people who received organs from donors inoculated against SARS-CoV-2 (see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8441635/ and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34115658/; and see the case review at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajt.16802). Precisely, that shows that science is not static, and a study does not constitute evidence; rather it adds up and accommodates in understanding, like a puzzle. Now, as far as peer-reviewed scientific studies have examined the negative effects of blood transfusions from SARS-CoV-2 inoculated to non-inoculated, I was unable to find them. If anyone knows of one, I would appreciate it if you could send it to me. What there is is a growing list of studies that show blood alterations in inoculated subjects, of which I share 35 publications: 1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33945605/ 2. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33945618/ 3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34171649/ 4. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34258873/ 5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34312842/ 6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34312992/ 7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34402057/ 8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34591186/ 9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34624910/ 10. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34820240/ 11. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34835275/ 12. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34980554/ 13. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35218512/ 14. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35359002/ 15. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35486845/ 16. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35668275/ 17. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35821156/ 18. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35848629/ 19. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35902184/ 20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35941885/ 21. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36030503/ 22. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36146514/ 23. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36212090/ 24. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36267879/ 25. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36309629/ 26. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36316859/ 27. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36352844/ 28. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36267879/ 29. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35770253/ 30. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35640881/ 31. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36107725/ 32. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36314944/ 33. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36483810/ 34. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36055265/ 35. https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/47 On the other hand, as I've mentioned in some talks and writings, the Spike protein doesn't just interact with ACE2 by cleaving its S1 and S2 subunits (this is the argument several doctors and scientists have made to say 'of course it doesn't do anything'). damage the vaccinal Spike, because its subunits are stable in a pre-fusion state'). No, actually, Spike interacts with other proteins in the cell's membranes, so it doesn't matter if the protein is 'stable' or not in its pre-fusion state; all this stability does is prevent the virus from entering through its membrane fusion with the cell membrane after interacting with ACE2. By interacting with ACE2 of platelets, for example, even if it cannot carry out fusion and enter these cells, it can cause thrombosis (https://jhoonline.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13045-020-00954-7) It is important to take into account the fact that beyond ACE2, interaction has been reported between the RBD region of the Spike protein (present intact in the protein generated by people inoculated with Pfizer, Moderna, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Cansino and Sputnik) and a protein called CD147 (also called basisiginin or extracellular matrix metalloproteinase inducer), which is in the cell membrane of many cells (see: https://www.proteinatlas.org/ENSG00000172270-BSG/single cell type). It turns out that the Spike protein – a whole molecular chip – from SARS-CoV-2 or the one produced in inoculated people, manages to enter cells via CD147 (for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35343395/, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36424379/), and when Spike interacts with red blood cells (which also express CD147), Spike also interacts with sialic acid, which is present in many cells, as it is an important molecule for cell-to-cell communication (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7153325). The problem is that red blood cells can clump together by phenomena involving sialic acid, and that clumping or clumping together (known as hemagglutination) is a terrible idea for a person's health. The agglutination of erythrocytes by sialic acid can be given, very infrequently, by the production of agglutinins after exposure to severe cold (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36485161/), or by some viral infections (for example, it can occur with Epstein-Barr herpesvirus, or in some bacterial infections; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35288286/), and it is just what happens when a person with blood of a certain type (say type A) receives blood from someone with a different blood (say type B). Antibodies are produced against type B and it will weigh them down. In all cases it leads to hemolytic anemia. Well, it turns out that the SARS-CoV-2 Spike binds to sialic acid in cells (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35269703/, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35700214/), and if this occurs in erythrocytes it leads to their agglutination. A “cold blood agglutination” type presentation has even been reported in people diagnosed as COVID cases (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32645300/). Of course, not everyone exposed, either by infection or by injection, to Spike will do this (remember? We're not math equations). For it to happen, first the protein (with or without the associated virus) has to reach the blood, which in infections is very, very rare (see https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33283055/) . In the case of injections, given what we now know about the biodistribution of adenoviral vectors and mRNA-containing nanolipid particles, we know that it does have the potential to enter cells that would expose the produced Spike to the blood. There also need to be things that lower the erythrocyte membrane potential, such as various nutritional problems, heavy metal contamination, and other factors (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34769355/). In the case of injections, given what we now know about the biodistribution of adenoviral vectors and mRNA-containing nanolipid particles, we know that it does have the potential to enter cells that would expose the produced Spike to the blood. There also need to be things that lower the erythrocyte membrane potential, such as various nutritional problems, heavy metal contamination, and other factors (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34769355/). In the case of injections, given what we now know about the biodistribution of adenoviral vectors and mRNA-containing nanolipid particles, we know that it does have the potential to enter cells that would expose the produced Spike to the blood. There also need to be things that lower the erythrocyte membrane potential, such as various nutritional problems, heavy metal contamination, and other factors (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34769355/). There is still a lot – a lot – of research to know if the endogenous production (that is, by the inoculated cells) of Spike and its release in endosomal vesicles into the blood could lead to hemagglutination. We don't know how much Spike they produce, nor for how long (remember that the only study to date stopped at 60 days, so we can say that someone inoculated with Pfizer has viable synthetic mRNA and produces Spike in the cells they entered synthetic mRNA for at least 60 days), but we don't know how much is produced, how much is released into the blood, at what rate the released protein is degraded. We just don't know, but the proposed mechanism is plausible, and could explain why there are so many blood abnormalities in inoculates, as the links I shared above demonstrate, in particular this one: https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/47. That is why I agree with Dr. Ryan Cole, a pathologist from the United States, who answers the question "Is the blood of those inoculated safe for transfusions?" with the answer “We don't know” (https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/dr-ryan-cole-on-whether-the-blood). Exact! We do not know, but we do know that there are many blood disorders in those inoculated, and that, in addition, anti-platelet factor 4 antibodies can be generated. If whole blood or plasma transfusions are carried out, and they contain these autoantibodies, it is not unreasonable consider that they can increase the chances of phenomena such as VITT. On the other hand, it is possible that the blood of those inoculated with Pfizer or Moderna contains synthetic mRNA and Spike protein (the latter with amyloidogenic properties, that is, that it has prion-like properties, which can trigger degenerative problems; see https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jacs.2c03925, and look for the texts I have written about it in the channel). According to Dr. Cole, he has detected clots in uninoculated people who died after receiving transfusions, but blood banks are not keeping records of inoculation. Perhaps the blood of those inoculated is not a problem, but perhaps it is; study is needed, and under the precautionary principle of medicine, the sensible thing, in order to protect people's health, is to act as if that blood were dangerous until it is determined otherwise. According to Dr. Cole, he has detected clots in uninoculated people who died after receiving transfusions, but blood banks are not keeping records of inoculation. Perhaps the blood of those inoculated is not a problem, but perhaps it is; study is needed, and under the precautionary principle of medicine, the sensible thing, in order to protect people's health, is to act as if that blood were dangerous until it is determined otherwise. According to Dr. Cole, he has detected clots in uninoculated people who died after receiving transfusions, but blood banks are not keeping records of inoculation. Perhaps the blood of those inoculated is not a problem, but perhaps it is; study is needed, and under the precautionary principle of medicine, the sensible thing, in order to protect people's health, is to act as if that blood were dangerous until it is determined otherwise. The case of baby Will, from New Zealand (https://t.me/akashacomunidad/2284), made it clear that we have a major and serious human rights problem on us, which impacts the right to choose what one wishes for oneself yourself or your children and that you consider healthy or less risky. Just as it would not be correct to prohibit a person from receiving one, two, three or whatever doses they choose of deltoid insufflations if, even having been informed of the adverse events and possible consequences (some probable), they choose to do so, it is also not correct to force someone to accept donated blood from inoculated people when they don't want to. At this moment, it seems to me that the central question is the following: given that we know that there are problems in the blood of a percentage of those inoculated, and that the mechanisms that lead to this damage are known, are the blood banks keeping a record? the vaccination status of those who donate? And also, do you carry out tests to detect elements that would increase the risk of hypercoagulability blood pathologies, as well as the presence of synthetic mRNA and Spike in the blood of donors? I guess the answer is a resounding 'no' to both questions, but I'm not comfortable with that answer. In the first case, that information would have to be required, and in the second, they would have to be required to carry out those tests, as well as carry out (or should carry out) the rigorous tests to identify if the Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, HIV, syphilis, etc. virus is present, before accepting that blood in a donor bank. Also, it is not impossible to do these tests. There are many tests that can be done, such as the EIA immunoassay to detect anti-PF4 antibodies (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35609563/), while the presence of Spike could be performed using Western Blot (https ://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-15562-9) in donor blood, and the presence of synthetic mRNA can be achieved by extracting mRNA from blood samples and performing RT- PCR specific to a fragment of the sequence. What would this be expensive? Yes; But how much does a person's life cost? I wonder. Also, The governments of almost all countries have not seemed to have any qualms about 'giving' their inhabitants COVID diagnostic tests and repeated doses of products that, in the best of scenarios, are useless, and in the worst, put them at risk the person's health. Perhaps, then, they could put a budget to carry out tests that are needed and that would help take care of the health of their citizens, which is supposed to be what the government cares about (read sarcastically or not, as you choose). ). Well, I hope this is useful to you, Karina AW PS For those who prefer something brief (although, honestly, they miss out on the opportunity to understand this important topic in a deeper way), here is the summary in 60 words: We do not know if it is safe to receive organs, tissues or blood from inoculated people , but there is some evidence in clinical cases that it might not be. The mechanisms that explain the damage to the blood of the inoculated are varied, but we still do not have unequivocal scientific evidence that they could cause the same thing in someone who receives blood from an inoculated. Are you very busy and want it shorter? OK, I'm trying to tell you in 19 words: We don't know if the blood and organs from inoculations are safe, but the available evidence suggests that it is not. https://t.me/akashacomunidad/2286
It would be plain entertainment....if the story behind it wouldn't be true. Anyway had a sort of fun watching him. Love it! Enjoy!
Ahem, ahem... Tories/conservatives: "Helen Whately Dec 15 We're putting an end to compulsory mask wearing in care homes in time for Christmas. I hope this means thousands more people in care will get to see a smile this winter: https://gov.uk/government/news/mask-and-outbreak-guidance-updated-in-care-settings." So, Monbiot responds with "And thousands may end up on a respirator"... But profit is way more important for the conservatives, obviously... https://www.democracynow.org/2022/1...ndreds_of_millions_and_lead_to_500_000_deaths "In China, public health officials warn COVID-19 cases are spreading rapidly and show no sign of slowing down, after officials in Beijing abandoned their long-standing “zero COVID” policy. Researchers estimate some 800 million people in China — or about one-tenth of humanity — could become infected by the coronavirus over the next 90 days. Several models predict more than a half-million people could die. China’s population remains especially vulnerable to a winter surge because few people have been exposed to the coronavirus. There are also concerns about the effectiveness of China’s domestically produced vaccines, which rely on inactivated forms of the virus. It’s a technology that’s proven to be less protective than the mRNA vaccines widely used elsewhere." Monbiot got it 3 times now and here is what he says: George Monbiot There's no limit to how nasty and stupid some people can be.
Another perspective, not exactly "business oriented "... You can catch Covid multiple times. Reinfections are common, not rare. Breakthrough infections are common. Covid can kill you months after you recover. It can cause brain damage. It can cause blood clots and heart attacks. It doesn’t spare children. Vaccines help, but only some. Masks work. "Everyone should know about these studies. I’ve linked to the original articles. I’ve tried to summarize them in clear language. I’ve also linked to summaries written by journalists who still care about the truth. Here they are: “Long-term neurologic outcomes of COVID-19,” Nature Medicine, 2022. Researchers at Washington University built a giant data set of veterans to look at the long-term impact of Covid on people’s nervous systems. They found that anyone who gets Covid can develop problems with memory, concentration, depression, migraines, and even strokes. They’re not temporary. Some people slowly get better. A lot of them don’t. Catching the virus elevates your risk of memory problems by 77 percent. It elevates your risk of stroke by 55 percent. It elevates your risk of seizures by 80 percent. That’s because Covid attacks the lining of your blood vessels, and it attacks your brain cells. Worse, the researchers can’t predict risk factors. That means it can happen to anyone, even if you had a mild case. As the head researcher has explained, “We’re seeing brain problems in previously healthy individuals and those who have had mild infections…It doesn’t matter if you are young or old, female or male, or what your race is. It doesn’t matter if you smoked or not, or if you had other unhealthy habits or conditions.” Key takeaway: Anyone can get Long Covid. You don’t want it. “Long COVID after breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection,” Nature Medicine, 2022 The same researchers from Washington University tried to find out exactly how much vaccines help prevent Long Covid. In general, vaccines reduce your risk by about 15 percent. So, not much. On the bright side, vaccines lower your risk of lung problems by 49 percent, and they lower your risk of blood clots by 56 percent. By vaccinated, they mean two doses of vaccine. The study doesn’t talk about boosters, but it stands to reason that getting a third or fourth shot can provide more protection. If nothing else, it should help protect you from waning immunity. It doesn’t mean we should abandon masks. The head of the research team says Covid isn’t going anywhere, and our current approach is going to have a big impact on our way of life. As he says, “This will not only affect people’s health, but their ability to work, life expectancy, economic productivity and societal well-being. We need to have a candid national conversation about the consequences of our current approach.” Key takeaway: Vaccines help, but not as much as everyone thinks. It’s better not to keep getting Covid. “SARS-CoV-2 promotes microglial synapse elimination in human brain organoids,” Molecular Psychiatry, 2022. Medical researchers from Sweden and Boston teamed up to find out what Covid does to your synapses, the internet connection between your brain cells that allows them to exchange information. They grew tiny brains called organoids. They saw a major reduction in synapses after a Covid infection. Fortunately, Fortune ran a good summary of this story, explaining how normal brains “get rid of a certain amount of inactive synapses…but the infected mini brains showed unnecessarily and inordinate levels of the clean-up process, similar to the level seen in neurological disorders like schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’s disease.” In other words, your brain starts killing off those internet connections that help your brain cells communicate. That’s why a third of people who get Covid wind up having problems thinking and concentrating later. Key takeaway: Covid eats your brain. Don’t catch it. “Excess risk for acute myocardial infarction mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Journal of Medical Virology, 2022. Researchers at the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and Jiaotong University looked at the effect Covid has on heart attacks. They found a huge 34 percent increase in young people (25-44 years old), caused by Covid. These were previously healthy people with no preexisting conditions. Even if some of them had an undocumented condition, this is a big, serious spike. It includes “mild” Omicron infections. The authors admit it’s like nothing anyone has seen before. Key takeaway: Covid can kill healthy young people. It’s giving them heart attacks. “Immunological dysfunction persists for 8 months following initial mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection,” Nature Immunology, 2022. Researchers at the University of New South Wales teamed up with the St. Vincent’s Hospital in Australia to look at how Covid impacts our immune systems. They compared blood samples from healthy patients to ones with Long Covid. The Long Covid patients all had deficits in T and B Cells. In fact, they were missing T cells completely. Basically, Covid can deplete your immune system’s long-term memory. A Nobel-prize winning immunologist named Peter Doherty discusses this study, saying it explains a lot—and that it’s troublesome. Key takeaway: Covid attacks your immune system. You don’t develop immunity. You lose it. “ACE2-independent infection of T lymphocytes by SARS-CoV-2,” Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 2022. Chinese researchers from several labs and academies teamed up to look at the same question about Covid’s impact on our immune systems. They found the same troubling outcome: The virus can exhaust your T Cells, either killing them or making them go haywire. As they say, “T lymphocytes from COVID-19 patients underwent pronounced apoptosis compared to those from the healthy donors, showing a more than tenfold increase of apoptotic cells.” In case you’re wondering, apoptosis means cell death. Those T Cells also helped carry the virus to other parts of the body, acting like a subway for Covid. Key takeaway: Covid kills T Cells. It makes you more vulnerable to other diseases. You don’t want that. “Distinguishing features of Long COVID identified through immune profiling,” Preprint/Yale, 2022. Researchers at Yale took up the same question as the previous two studies, since it’s a pretty controversial idea. They found the same thing. Covid can damage your T Cells and trigger autoimmune disorders. Writing for The Tyee, Andrew Nikiforuk sums it up this way: “exhausted T cells that suggested the patients were fighting an active chronic infection.” Although this study is a preprint, I think we can trust a team of researchers from Yale, especially since they’re confirming what other researchers have already started to find out. By the way, I would read that Nikiforuk piece. It provides a really good breakdown of Covid myths. Key takeaway: Every Covid infection runs a risk of weakening your immune system. It can even reactivate old viral infections. Avoid it at all costs. “Immune boosting by B.1.1.529 (Omicron) depends on previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure,” Science, 2022. Researchers at Imperial College in London studied triple-vaccinated healthcare workers in Britain to see how often they got infected by Covid. They “found some unexpected immune-damping effects...” Basically, their findings shoot down the popular myth spread by mainstream media that getting Omicron would provide some kind of long-lasting immunity. It doesn’t. As they say, “Omicron infections and reinfections likely reflects considerable subversion of immune recognition at both the B and T cell, antibody binding, and nAb level, although with considerable differential modulation through immune imprinting.” In short, catching Covid just makes you more likely to catch a later variant. There’s a good discussion of this study in The Guardian. The researchers explain what’s happening. Covid doesn’t just evade your immune system. “It’s actually worse than that, because the adaptations that the spike [protein] has now are actually inducing a kind of regulation or shutdown of immune response.” Like other studies are showing, we’re not building herd immunity. Key Takeaway: One Covid infection sets up another. We’re not building immunity. “COVID-19 and Acute Neurologic Complications in Children,” Pediatrics, 2022. Researchers at the Children’s Hospital of Vanderbilt looked at the impact of Covid on children, from infants to teenagers. They found that 7-8 percent of hospitalized kids went on to develop severe neurological problems, including seizures. In short, these kids all wound up with major brain damage. As the authors explain in a good Forbes piece, this isn’t temporary. It’s going to stay with them for years, and it’s probably going to haunt them for the rest of their lives. Key takeaway: Children aren’t safe from Covid. They need protection. “Post–COVID-19 Conditions Among Children 90 Days After SARS-CoV-2 Infection,” Pediatrics, 2022. Researchers at children’s hospitals from across the U.S. and Canada teamed up to look at Long Covid in hospitalized children. They found that up to 9.8 percent of them went on to experience chronic symptoms like severe fatigue and weakness, similar to what adults go through. There’s a good summary here. Studies like these further disprove the popular myth that children are somehow safe from Covid. They’re not. In fact, the researchers describe the risk as “consistent with studies in adults.” Key takeaway: See above. “Long-COVID in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analyses,” Nature Scientific Reports, 2022. Researchers from several prominent universities teamed up to review 21 studies on Long Covid in children. They found that 25 percent of children experience chronic symptoms that include mood and sleep disorders, along with fatigue. Once again, kids aren’t immune to Covid. They get just as sick as adults. It didn’t look or feel that way because we were protecting them. Key takeaway: See above. “Post-COVID-19-associated morbidity in children, adolescents, and adults: A matched cohort study including more than 157,000 individuals with COVID-19 in Germany” PLOS Medicine, 2022. Researchers in Germany compared the rates of Long Covid in children and adults. They found something troubling. About a third of children who get Covid go on to develop long-term symptoms like the ones we see in adults. Children don’t die as often, but they experience some of the same chronic symptoms—especially fatigue and sleep disorders. The only silver lining here is that kids tend to recover better after their infection. Of course, we don’t know what repeat infections will do to their immune systems over the years. There’s a good summary at the University of Minnesota. Key takeaway: Covid isn’t like a cold. Children shouldn’t catch it. “Lifting Universal Masking in Schools — Covid-19 Incidence among Students and Staff,” The New England Journal of Medicine, 2022. Researchers from around the northeast looked at what happened in Massachusetts schools when they lifted mask mandates. That resulted in 29.4 percent more cases in the 15 weeks after the decision. The authors conclude that masks work. Masks reduce transmission, especially in older schools with bigger class sizes and poor ventilation. They might work even better if people wore N95 masks, and wore them the way you’re supposed to, not under their noses. Key takeaway: Masks work. Wear them. “Acute and postacute sequelae associated with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection,” Nature Medicine, 2022. Once again, Ziyad Al-Aly at Washington University worked with Veteran Affairs to look at what happens when you get infected with Covid over and over. They found “cumulative risks and burdens of repeat infection increased according to the number of infections.” As the other studies in this list show, catching Covid doesn’t boost your immunity. It just increases your risk of death, hospitalization, brain damage, mental illness, strokes, and heart attacks. Reuters gives a good summary of the study, saying “Reinfected patients had a more than doubled risk of death and a more than tripled risk of hospitalization compared with those who were infected with COVID just once.” They’re also three times more likely to develop lung problems, and 60 percent more likely to develop neurological disorders—basically brain damage. Key takeaway: If you got Covid once, you’re not in the clear. It’s not over. Biggest takeaway: the media lied to us. The evidence is overwhelming now. Last winter, the media made a concerted effort to convince Americans that Covid had become mild. They said catching Omicron would protect us from future variants, and that we could ditch our masks. Newspapers were filled with op-eds basically telling us to go out and shop, celebrate, and get infected. They blanketed the internet with stories about the “relief” people felt catching Covid. Anyone who disagreed got labeled a doomsayer. The optimists were all wrong. There was no evidence to support any of these myths, just arrogant assertions from the same handful of pundits. The actual studies tell the truth. You don’t want to catch Covid once. You certainly don’t want to catch it multiple times. We should be getting boosted. We should be wearing masks. We should be protecting our children. There’s only one alternative, and that’s catching Covid over and over until it destroys our immune systems, along with our hearts and minds. Nobody wants that."
Simple example 20 people in the canteen ate cucumbers of these, 3 people were poisoned by cucumbers! Are cucumbers dangerous for all people? Or 3 people just can't stand cucumbers?
Mr.x reborn ? As copy and pasteski ? Where did you copy and paste that crap from ? What is the point of that list ? What do you want it to say ? Its crap in circles again . Whats the problem ? / what position are we in ? / Why are we there ? / What can we do about it ? ............ instead of being a clever dick tryinmg to look intelligent spreading sensationalist blah blah .......... what about solutuons ......... and not jjust trying to shoot other people down ? I think you and x and people like you are far worse than corona ....... and far more dangerous . Corona kills a few old people , and the unemployed that dont want to work now all have ' Long covid ' , But what your doing f**ks a whole society . f**ks a whole planet .
Vladnil, so solidarity with all those who can and do get affected is a dirty word, is it? How generous a spirit you are, any mother would want you as a son-in-law, I am sure... C-S, change your meds, FFS! You have the sources for studies, Jeez...
Finally sources at which one can work now. "Long COVID risk falls only slightly after vaccination, huge study shows" https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01453-0 How is the risk and what could the vaccines do: (How to categorize "anyone"). So if we take 7% (even lower at those who were not hospitalized) and it gets reduced by 15% we have 7% and after vaccination 5.95%. So the little influence is -1.05% Again here 'they' work with RRR instead of ARR which is 1.05%! So anyone means 7% if you are hospitalized, lower if you are not, still 5.95% if you are vaxxed. This study does not consider if those have been vaxxed or not. It's a overall comparison during the pandemic. Here it's about what the vaccines are contributing! "SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and increased myocarditis mortality risk: A population based comparative study in Japan" https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.13.22281036v1 "Cardiovascular Effects of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Adolescents" https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202208.0151/v1 "Myocarditis Cases Reported After mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination in the US From December 2020 to August 2021" https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2788346 Myocarditis expected (age 12-15 years): 0.53 / million doses. Reality 70.73! after 2nd dose!! This is 133 times more. Age 16-17. Expected: 1.34 / Million doses, reality: 105.86 after 2nd dose!!! This is 79 times more. (Booster is not even considered yet.)... (Table 2). Coming from COVID or the vaccinations?!?!?! "Atypical B cells and impaired SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation following booster vaccination in the elderly" https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.13.22281024v1 "Frequent Boosters Spur Warning on Immune Response" https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...shots-risk-overloading-immune-system-ema-says "EU Drug Regulator Warns Against Overuse of COVID Booster Shots " https://www.voanews.com/a/eu-drug-r...t-overuse-of-covid-booster-shots/6395174.html BS. We do for sure, otherwise the pandemic hadn't become endemic! "Risk of reinfection and disease after SARS-CoV-2 primary infection: Meta-analysis " https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35904405/ "Protection of SARS-CoV-2 natural infection against reinfection with the Omicron BA.4 or BA.5 subvariants" https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.07.11.22277448v1 This study found something different.....and it's older where SARS-COV-2 was far more pathogenic than today. "Illness duration and symptom profile in symptomatic UK school-aged children tested for SARS-CoV-2" https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2352-4642(21)00198-X What's really the point ATM concerning kids: “This Is Our COVID”—What Physicians Need to Know About the Pediatric RSV Surge"" https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2798785 Anything else posted....yes it can. So you can be hit by a roof tile when there is a storm... BTW: I did not post those references to 'disprove' something. I added them to complete what's out there. So the readers can evaluate on their own.