This is a long vid and a review of most of what has already been posted in the dose but has some interesting info about vaccine passports (bait and switch?), digital ID rollout, potential adverse effects of masking for children, recent document dump on the vax, (no gene-toxicity studies and potential long term disability from vax), cumulative analysis of post vax adverse events (which you've posted multiple times), interview with Tess Laurie MD, PhD on the fraudulent studies for early treatment meds.
This is a long vid and a review of most of what has already been posted in the dose but has some interesting info about vaccine passports (bait and switch?), digital ID rollout, potential adverse effects of masking for children, recent document dump on the vax, (no gene-toxicity studies and potential long term disability from vax), cumulative analysis of post vax adverse events (which you've posted multiple times), interview with Tess Laurie MD, PhD on the fraudulent studies for early treatment meds.
The American Medical Association last week warned against the Biden administration’s “test-to-treat” plan that bypasses physicians and lets pharmacists dispense Pfizer, Merck COVID-19 antivirals directly to patients, saying the approach “flaunts patient safety and risks significant negative health outcomes.”
The American Medical Association (AMA), in a press release on March 4, warned against the Biden administration’s test-to-treat plan saying the approach “flaunts patient safety and risks significant negative health outcomes.”
“The AMA is pleased the administration is ramping up supply of antivirals so in the near future they will be broadly available,” the organization said. “But, in the meantime, establishing pharmacy-based clinics as one-stop shopping for COVID-19 testing and treatments is extremely risky.”
The AMA said the plan was “well-intentioned” but claimed it oversimplified challenging prescribing decisions by “omitting knowledge of a patient’s medical history, the complexity of drug interactions and managing possible negative reactions.”
The AMA noted for example, that Pfizer’s Paxlovid — a COVID antiviral pill Biden would make available through the test-to-treat plan — is 88% effective at preventing hospitalization and death.
However, Pfizer’s drug also has six pages of drug interactions, including interactions that “may require a patient to hold, change or reduce doses of other medications.
Molnupiravir, Merck’s COVID pill has use restrictions, the AMA said. “It is not authorized for people under 18 because it can affect bone cartilage growth, and it should not be used during pregnancy or while breastfeeding.”
The AMA continued:
“Pharmacy-based clinics typically treat simple illnesses such as strep throat. Yet, COVID-19 is a complex disease and there are many issues to consider when prescribing COVID-19 antiviral medications. Leaving prescribing decisions this complex in the hands of people without knowledge of a patient’s medical history is dangerous in practice and precedent.
Despite the erosion of trust the public has for the medical system, people still trust doctors’ opinions more than the bureaucrats who are openly colluding with Big Pharma,” Setty said. “This plan will backfire in our government’s face for all to see.”
The FDA acknowledged in documents made available before the meeting that molnupiravir may increase the rate of changes in the virus’s spike protein, “which, in theory, could enhance SARS-CoV-2 spike protein evolution.”
Multiple studies have shown the safety and efficacy of inexpensive drugs, such as oral HCQ and povidone-iodine throat spray and ivermectin and doxycycline monotherapy, for treating COVID.
Yet the government is cracking down on physicians who prescribe these drugs for their patients while prioritizing expensive experimental drugs like Paxlovid and molnupiravir — allowing people to get “investigational drugs” at “one-stop-shops” without any physician oversight.
I get my prescriptions from 2 different pharmacies so neither knows what other drugs I’m on or if I’m prescribed one that would be contraindicated because of the other ones I’m on. I know enough to ask the pharmacist if it is, but how many others are aware that they should ask that. I have had lots of weird side effects from many drugs and would a busy pharmacist have the time to listen to me describing them? Luckily for me both my doctors do. But it’s in private too. I hate others hearing about what drug I’m getting or other parts of the discussion because they are standing right behind me. This just sets a bad precedent.
But what is even more dangerous is the government is finding ways to cut doctors out of people’s health care. Video conferences are not how people should get health care. How can doctors investigate the lump in our bodies over the phone? Is it hard, squishy, have defined edges, etc? We are now seeing stories about people dying from just cancer that might have been treatable if caught in time, but now they are in stage 4. Heart disease and tons of others have cut years off people’s lives. Feature or a bug?
But hey it’s good to see the AMA pushing for early treatment. Too bad that they sat on their buttocks whilst ivermectin and other drugs could have saved many of those lives that they are decrying about here.
Make sure you read how many people in the FDA questioned whether the drugs are safe or if they actually do what big pharma says they do. Walensky is now surprised that the mRNA shots didn’t actually protect people from getting infected. Big surprise…not for those of us who were paying attention and screaming to high heaven that they didn’t. Omicron exposed that fallacy.
VAERS has reported over a million vax injuries. Do we need to injure more people with these drugs that have been rushed to market? Merck’s has already shown that it can cause cancer and birth defects. Another win for big pharma.
up
10 users have voted.
—
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
LIMITATIONS OF AUTHORIZED USE
• PAXLOVID is not authorized for initiation of treatment in patients requiring hospitalization due to severe or critical COVID-19.
• PAXLOVID is not authorized for pre-exposure or post-exposure prophylaxis for prevention of COVID-19.
• PAXLOVID is not authorized for use longer than 5 consecutive days.
PAXLOVID may only be prescribed for an individual patient by physicians, advanced practice registered nurses, and physician assistants that are licensed or authorized under state law to prescribe drugs in the therapeutic class to which PAXLOVID belongs (i.e., anti- infectives).
PAXLOVID is not approved for any use, including for use as treatment of COVID-19. (1)
PAXLOVID is authorized only for the duration of the declaration that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of the emergency use of PAXLOVID under section 564(b)(1) of the Act, 21 U.S.C.
§ 360bbb-3(b)(1), unless the authorization is terminated or revoked sooner.
PAXLOVID is not approved for any use, including for use for the treatment of COVID-19
Justification for Emergency Use of Drugs During the COVID-19 Pandemic
There are no approved alternatives to PAXLOVID for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in adults and pediatric patients (12 years of age and older weighing at least 40 kg) with positive results of direct SARS-CoV-2 viral testing, and who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19, including hospitalization or death.
WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS
There are limited clinical data available for PAXLOVID. Serious and unexpected adverse events may occur that have not been previously reported with PAXLOVID use.
Emergency use for Paxlovid should not have been given because there are other drugs that have been proven affective. This is fraud by our government health agencies and they know it. But it’s also why there is the push against doctors prescribing ivermectin and the other ones. My hope is that when the information is exposed there will be a huge outcry from those who have been deceived. There is one lawsuit happening by a whistleblower that judge refused to throw out. Of course the media is ignoring it just like it has been ignoring the Pfizer dumps, but I’m hopeful that the truth will eventually get out.
Thanks rand for posting the video on ivermectin. It’s good to see this in the news again.
Edited to add
up
7 users have voted.
—
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
There was an article by Mercola quoted in part yesterday that read, in part, as follows:
Moderna Patented Key COVID Spike Protein Sequence in 2016
March 07, 2022
Story at-a-glance
A study published February 21, 2022, in Frontiers in Virology claims to have discovered that a sequence of the virus’ spike protein is a 100% match to a modified messenger RNA (mmRNA) sequence patented by Moderna in 2016
That is incorrect. What was patented mirrored a segment of the spike protein, or matched it when read in reverse. The Mercola article also cited a probability which I find lacking in relevance without comparables.
So I'd like to run over some info, especially the study reported in virology and misreported by Mercola.
Back when the furin cleavage site issue was first raised, the popular assertion about it was so overbroad as to be horribly unlikely, so I peeked at the info available and quickly discerned that, as presented, it was a crock. I'd like to start with the basics.
I would not do more than skim them. In the first, the authors introduce the "furin recognition motif" as being RXXR. This is a pattern, into which nucleotides are to be substituted generating such codes as PRRA (Covid 19). They then researched a ton of bacteria and viruses for which we had genome data and discovered that great numbers of pathogens had such sites and that there was a lot of variability in the substitutions. They further looked at "clades" of such pathogens (think families) and found that many showed a clear lineage as to such substitutions but that there were also sports and irregularities.
The next important information comes out, IIRC, in the second one, that the RXXR pattern is actually a fraction of a larger fragment running, per memory, from 12 to as many at 19 letters. A lot of similar digging as was done regarding RXXR was done using larger fragments with more or less similar findings.
A BLAST search for the 12-nucleotide insertion led us to a 100% reverse match in a proprietary sequence (SEQ ID11652, nt 2751-2733) found in the US patent 9,587,003 filed on Feb. 4, 2016 (10) (Figure 1). Examination of SEQ ID11652 revealed that the match extends beyond the 12-nucleotide insertion to a 19-nucleotide sequence: 5′-CTACGTGCCCGCCGAGGAG-3′ (nt 2733-2751 of SEQ ID11652), such that the resulting mRNA would have 3′- GAUGCACGGGCGGCUCCUC-5′, or equivalently 5′- CU CCU CGG CGG GCA CGU AG-3′ (nucleotides 23547-23565 in the SARS-CoV-2 genome, in which the four bold codons yield PRRA, amino acids 681–684 of its spike protein). This is very rare in the NCBI BLAST database.
["Reverse" here means reverse or opposite nucleotide, not literally backwards]
The correlation between this SARS-CoV-2 sequence and the reverse complement of a proprietary mRNA sequence is of uncertain origin. Conventional biostatistical analysis indicates that the probability of this sequence randomly being present in a 30,000-nucleotide viral genome is 3.21 ×10−11 (Figure 2).
[I dislike this as I will go into at length later because there are no comparisons to judge it by. Finding any specific nucleotide by nucleotide seguence of length 19 in a specific nucleotide by nucleotide genome of length 30,000 is almost certain to be preposterously small. They should maybe present the same computed result for the cleavage site for the common cold virus as a comparable.]
A criticism of this hypothesis is that the identified sequence is on the opposite strand of the open reading frame in SEQ ID11652. However, cells transfected with MSH3, which induce mismatch repair deficiency could have targeted double-stranded cDNA encoding SEQ ID11652. Such cells co-transfected with a SARS-like virus expressing RdRp could attach to this 19-nucleotide sequence (15) and permit integration of a fragment from the negative strand into the viral genome, including the FCS, despite being on the opposite strand of the open reading frame. Mismatch repair mechanisms have enabled integration of short fragments from antisense strands in experimental models (20, 21). Microhomology can direct recombination between the MSH3 and a SARS-like virus, which could take place at the 19-nucleotide sequence of interest.
[there is a hypothetical mechanism, by which this could happen. They then assert that this is definitely worthy of further examination and study, which is, i think, obvious]
Probability is a gawdawful can of worms. Take 26 3 x 5 cards and write a single letter, a through z, on each. The odds of drawing a letter from the deck is 100%, while the odds of drawing a p is only 1 out of 26. The specificity of the result is very important and makes any result less likely. Drawing both a p and a q with two draws is way less likely and drawing them in that exact order is less likely yet. Thus the number of specific nucleotides (19) in a specific order is already big trouble. [factorals come into play here and 19 factoral, by itself is already 1.216451 times 10 to the 17th, a seriously big ass number. A better illustration is probably select poker hands:
The odds against being dealt a royal flush is 649,739 to one
The odds against being dealt a straight flush is 72,192 to one
The odds against being dealt a flush is 693 to one
simply specifying that the cards in the flush be in sequence increases the odds 100 fold and specifying that the lowest card in such a sequence be a ten increases the odds another 10 fold. In actuality, specificity is the key, the odds of getting 3,5,7,9,J of one suit is the same as the odds of a royal flush.
Cutting to the chase, they use "biostatistical analysis" to derive their probability estimate. Were it not for the fact that some sequences are impossible, the odds of any specific 19 unit string would be 3.6379788 e-12, roughly one whole power of ten less than they compute, which would hold for every sequence that is naturally derived as well as those which aren't.
Similarly, each of has a specific genome which is far, far less likely than anything under consideration here, and yet here we are. Hence, I really considere that number irrelevant without comparables.
be well and have a good one
up
5 users have voted.
—
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
There was an article by Mercola quoted in part yesterday that read, in part, as follows:
Moderna Patented Key COVID Spike Protein Sequence in 2016
March 07, 2022
Story at-a-glance
A study published February 21, 2022, in Frontiers in Virology claims to have discovered that a sequence of the virus’ spike protein is a 100% match to a modified messenger RNA (mmRNA) sequence patented by Moderna in 2016
That is incorrect. What was patented mirrored a segment of the spike protein, or matched it when read in reverse. The Mercola article also cited a probability which I find lacking in relevance without comparables.
So I'd like to run over some info, especially the study reported in virology and misreported by Mercola.
Back when the furin cleavage site issue was first raised, the popular assertion about it was so overbroad as to be horribly unlikely, so I peeked at the info available and quickly discerned that, as presented, it was a crock. I'd like to start with the basics.
I would not do more than skim them. In the first, the authors introduce the "furin recognition motif" as being RXXR. This is a pattern, into which nucleotides are to be substituted generating such codes as PRRA (Covid 19). They then researched a ton of bacteria and viruses for which we had genome data and discovered that great numbers of pathogens had such sites and that there was a lot of variability in the substitutions. They further looked at "clades" of such pathogens (think families) and found that many showed a clear lineage as to such substitutions but that there were also sports and irregularities.
The next important information comes out, IIRC, in the second one, that the RXXR pattern is actually a fraction of a larger fragment running, per memory, from 12 to as many at 19 letters. A lot of similar digging as was done regarding RXXR was done using larger fragments with more or less similar findings.
A BLAST search for the 12-nucleotide insertion led us to a 100% reverse match in a proprietary sequence (SEQ ID11652, nt 2751-2733) found in the US patent 9,587,003 filed on Feb. 4, 2016 (10) (Figure 1). Examination of SEQ ID11652 revealed that the match extends beyond the 12-nucleotide insertion to a 19-nucleotide sequence: 5′-CTACGTGCCCGCCGAGGAG-3′ (nt 2733-2751 of SEQ ID11652), such that the resulting mRNA would have 3′- GAUGCACGGGCGGCUCCUC-5′, or equivalently 5′- CU CCU CGG CGG GCA CGU AG-3′ (nucleotides 23547-23565 in the SARS-CoV-2 genome, in which the four bold codons yield PRRA, amino acids 681–684 of its spike protein). This is very rare in the NCBI BLAST database.
["Reverse" here means reverse or opposite nucleotide, not literally backwards]
The correlation between this SARS-CoV-2 sequence and the reverse complement of a proprietary mRNA sequence is of uncertain origin. Conventional biostatistical analysis indicates that the probability of this sequence randomly being present in a 30,000-nucleotide viral genome is 3.21 ×10−11 (Figure 2).
[I dislike this as I will go into at length later because there are no comparisons to judge it by. Finding any specific nucleotide by nucleotide seguence of length 19 in a specific nucleotide by nucleotide genome of length 30,000 is almost certain to be preposterously small. They should maybe present the same computed result for the cleavage site for the common cold virus as a comparable.]
A criticism of this hypothesis is that the identified sequence is on the opposite strand of the open reading frame in SEQ ID11652. However, cells transfected with MSH3, which induce mismatch repair deficiency could have targeted double-stranded cDNA encoding SEQ ID11652. Such cells co-transfected with a SARS-like virus expressing RdRp could attach to this 19-nucleotide sequence (15) and permit integration of a fragment from the negative strand into the viral genome, including the FCS, despite being on the opposite strand of the open reading frame. Mismatch repair mechanisms have enabled integration of short fragments from antisense strands in experimental models (20, 21). Microhomology can direct recombination between the MSH3 and a SARS-like virus, which could take place at the 19-nucleotide sequence of interest.
[there is a hypothetical mechanism, by which this could happen. They then assert that this is definitely worthy of further examination and study, which is, i think, obvious]
Probability is a gawdawful can of worms. Take 26 3 x 5 cards and write a single letter, a through z, on each. The odds of drawing a letter from the deck is 100%, while the odds of drawing a p is only 1 out of 26. The specificity of the result is very important and makes any result less likely. Drawing both a p and a q with two draws is way less likely and drawing them in that exact order is less likely yet. Thus the number of specific nucleotides (19) in a specific order is already big trouble. [factorals come into play here and 19 factoral, by itself is already 1.216451 times 10 to the 17th, a seriously big ass number. A better illustration is probably select poker hands:
The odds against being dealt a royal flush is 649,739 to one
The odds against being dealt a straight flush is 72,192 to one
The odds against being dealt a flush is 693 to one
simply specifying that the cards in the flush be in sequence increases the odds 100 fold and specifying that the lowest card in such a sequence be a ten increases the odds another 10 fold. In actuality, specificity is the key, the odds of getting 3,5,7,9,J of one suit is the same as the odds of a royal flush.
Cutting to the chase, they use "biostatistical analysis" to derive their probability estimate. Were it not for the fact that some sequences are impossible, the odds of any specific 19 unit string would be 3.6379788 e-12, roughly one whole power of ten less than they compute, which would hold for every sequence that is naturally derived as well as those which aren't.
Similarly, each of has a specific genome which is far, far less likely than anything under consideration here, and yet here we are. Hence, I really considere that number irrelevant without comparables.
be well and have a good one
up
3 users have voted.
—
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
details than I do. What I do understand though is that the site providing the "information" is Mercola, which makes it pretty much a place to be very wary of in the first place.
There was an article by Mercola quoted in part yesterday that read, in part, as follows:
Moderna Patented Key COVID Spike Protein Sequence in 2016
March 07, 2022
Story at-a-glance
A study published February 21, 2022, in Frontiers in Virology claims to have discovered that a sequence of the virus’ spike protein is a 100% match to a modified messenger RNA (mmRNA) sequence patented by Moderna in 2016
That is incorrect. What was patented mirrored a segment of the spike protein, or matched it when read in reverse. The Mercola article also cited a probability which I find lacking in relevance without comparables.
So I'd like to run over some info, especially the study reported in virology and misreported by Mercola.
Back when the furin cleavage site issue was first raised, the popular assertion about it was so overbroad as to be horribly unlikely, so I peeked at the info available and quickly discerned that, as presented, it was a crock. I'd like to start with the basics.
I would not do more than skim them. In the first, the authors introduce the "furin recognition motif" as being RXXR. This is a pattern, into which nucleotides are to be substituted generating such codes as PRRA (Covid 19). They then researched a ton of bacteria and viruses for which we had genome data and discovered that great numbers of pathogens had such sites and that there was a lot of variability in the substitutions. They further looked at "clades" of such pathogens (think families) and found that many showed a clear lineage as to such substitutions but that there were also sports and irregularities.
The next important information comes out, IIRC, in the second one, that the RXXR pattern is actually a fraction of a larger fragment running, per memory, from 12 to as many at 19 letters. A lot of similar digging as was done regarding RXXR was done using larger fragments with more or less similar findings.
A BLAST search for the 12-nucleotide insertion led us to a 100% reverse match in a proprietary sequence (SEQ ID11652, nt 2751-2733) found in the US patent 9,587,003 filed on Feb. 4, 2016 (10) (Figure 1). Examination of SEQ ID11652 revealed that the match extends beyond the 12-nucleotide insertion to a 19-nucleotide sequence: 5′-CTACGTGCCCGCCGAGGAG-3′ (nt 2733-2751 of SEQ ID11652), such that the resulting mRNA would have 3′- GAUGCACGGGCGGCUCCUC-5′, or equivalently 5′- CU CCU CGG CGG GCA CGU AG-3′ (nucleotides 23547-23565 in the SARS-CoV-2 genome, in which the four bold codons yield PRRA, amino acids 681–684 of its spike protein). This is very rare in the NCBI BLAST database.
["Reverse" here means reverse or opposite nucleotide, not literally backwards]
The correlation between this SARS-CoV-2 sequence and the reverse complement of a proprietary mRNA sequence is of uncertain origin. Conventional biostatistical analysis indicates that the probability of this sequence randomly being present in a 30,000-nucleotide viral genome is 3.21 ×10−11 (Figure 2).
[I dislike this as I will go into at length later because there are no comparisons to judge it by. Finding any specific nucleotide by nucleotide seguence of length 19 in a specific nucleotide by nucleotide genome of length 30,000 is almost certain to be preposterously small. They should maybe present the same computed result for the cleavage site for the common cold virus as a comparable.]
A criticism of this hypothesis is that the identified sequence is on the opposite strand of the open reading frame in SEQ ID11652. However, cells transfected with MSH3, which induce mismatch repair deficiency could have targeted double-stranded cDNA encoding SEQ ID11652. Such cells co-transfected with a SARS-like virus expressing RdRp could attach to this 19-nucleotide sequence (15) and permit integration of a fragment from the negative strand into the viral genome, including the FCS, despite being on the opposite strand of the open reading frame. Mismatch repair mechanisms have enabled integration of short fragments from antisense strands in experimental models (20, 21). Microhomology can direct recombination between the MSH3 and a SARS-like virus, which could take place at the 19-nucleotide sequence of interest.
[there is a hypothetical mechanism, by which this could happen. They then assert that this is definitely worthy of further examination and study, which is, i think, obvious]
Probability is a gawdawful can of worms. Take 26 3 x 5 cards and write a single letter, a through z, on each. The odds of drawing a letter from the deck is 100%, while the odds of drawing a p is only 1 out of 26. The specificity of the result is very important and makes any result less likely. Drawing both a p and a q with two draws is way less likely and drawing them in that exact order is less likely yet. Thus the number of specific nucleotides (19) in a specific order is already big trouble. [factorals come into play here and 19 factoral, by itself is already 1.216451 times 10 to the 17th, a seriously big ass number. A better illustration is probably select poker hands:
The odds against being dealt a royal flush is 649,739 to one
The odds against being dealt a straight flush is 72,192 to one
The odds against being dealt a flush is 693 to one
simply specifying that the cards in the flush be in sequence increases the odds 100 fold and specifying that the lowest card in such a sequence be a ten increases the odds another 10 fold. In actuality, specificity is the key, the odds of getting 3,5,7,9,J of one suit is the same as the odds of a royal flush.
Cutting to the chase, they use "biostatistical analysis" to derive their probability estimate. Were it not for the fact that some sequences are impossible, the odds of any specific 19 unit string would be 3.6379788 e-12, roughly one whole power of ten less than they compute, which would hold for every sequence that is naturally derived as well as those which aren't.
Similarly, each of has a specific genome which is far, far less likely than anything under consideration here, and yet here we are. Hence, I really considere that number irrelevant without comparables.
be well and have a good one
up
0 users have voted.
—
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
go with primary sources when possible, and since the virology article was out there, I went with it and pretty much immediately saw that the Mercola summry was in error, hence my post.
details than I do. What I do understand though is that the site providing the "information" is Mercola, which makes it pretty much a place to be very wary of in the first place.
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
for health instead of prescription meds, I learned to do my research carefully. Mercola has long been known as untrustworthy. He did make a lot of money on tanning beds though!
go with primary sources when possible, and since the virology article was out there, I went with it and pretty much immediately saw that the Mercola summry was in error, hence my post.
be well and have a good one
up
0 users have voted.
—
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
"endemic"
Started my day off with squared shoulders and a sly grin.
We are healthy in this house, hope the same for yours.
I just interviewed several nurses in the last week. Here, in East Texas, COVID is pretty much gone.
Surprisingly, lots of people are getting the flu, and are being successfully treated. So, my good endemic news.
up
7 users have voted.
—
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
Comments
Our local school has changed its masking policy
It is now a parental discretion rather than mandated.
question everything
Thanks QMS
This is a long vid and a review of most of what has already been posted in the dose but has some interesting info about vaccine passports (bait and switch?), digital ID rollout, potential adverse effects of masking for children, recent document dump on the vax, (no gene-toxicity studies and potential long term disability from vax), cumulative analysis of post vax adverse events (which you've posted multiple times), interview with Tess Laurie MD, PhD on the fraudulent studies for early treatment meds.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/xAhg4fdJVu8b/
edited for spelling
Wow! That is a treasure trove of info.
I still strongly recommend building a Corsi-Rosenthal box filter.
Very easy to make with readily available materials - about $100.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/homemade-air-purifier-thats-be...
question everything
I agree
, and it can be helpful for those with allergies as well.
I mentioned this last week
Good to see that the AMA has found its stones again.
I get my prescriptions from 2 different pharmacies so neither knows what other drugs I’m on or if I’m prescribed one that would be contraindicated because of the other ones I’m on. I know enough to ask the pharmacist if it is, but how many others are aware that they should ask that. I have had lots of weird side effects from many drugs and would a busy pharmacist have the time to listen to me describing them? Luckily for me both my doctors do. But it’s in private too. I hate others hearing about what drug I’m getting or other parts of the discussion because they are standing right behind me. This just sets a bad precedent.
But what is even more dangerous is the government is finding ways to cut doctors out of people’s health care. Video conferences are not how people should get health care. How can doctors investigate the lump in our bodies over the phone? Is it hard, squishy, have defined edges, etc? We are now seeing stories about people dying from just cancer that might have been treatable if caught in time, but now they are in stage 4. Heart disease and tons of others have cut years off people’s lives. Feature or a bug?
But hey it’s good to see the AMA pushing for early treatment. Too bad that they sat on their buttocks whilst ivermectin and other drugs could have saved many of those lives that they are decrying about here.
Make sure you read how many people in the FDA questioned whether the drugs are safe or if they actually do what big pharma says they do. Walensky is now surprised that the mRNA shots didn’t actually protect people from getting infected. Big surprise…not for those of us who were paying attention and screaming to high heaven that they didn’t. Omicron exposed that fallacy.
VAERS has reported over a million vax injuries. Do we need to injure more people with these drugs that have been rushed to market? Merck’s has already shown that it can cause cancer and birth defects. Another win for big pharma.
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
Fact sheet on Paxlovid
Emergency use for Paxlovid should not have been given because there are other drugs that have been proven affective. This is fraud by our government health agencies and they know it. But it’s also why there is the push against doctors prescribing ivermectin and the other ones. My hope is that when the information is exposed there will be a huge outcry from those who have been deceived. There is one lawsuit happening by a whistleblower that judge refused to throw out. Of course the media is ignoring it just like it has been ignoring the Pfizer dumps, but I’m hopeful that the truth will eventually get out.
Thanks rand for posting the video on ivermectin. It’s good to see this in the news again.
Edited to add
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
About that furin cleavage site:
There was an article by Mercola quoted in part yesterday that read, in part, as follows:
That is incorrect. What was patented mirrored a segment of the spike protein, or matched it when read in reverse. The Mercola article also cited a probability which I find lacking in relevance without comparables.
So I'd like to run over some info, especially the study reported in virology and misreported by Mercola.
Back when the furin cleavage site issue was first raised, the popular assertion about it was so overbroad as to be horribly unlikely, so I peeked at the info available and quickly discerned that, as presented, it was a crock. I'd like to start with the basics.
It is best to skim these 4 articles:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1873506120304165
Furin cleavage sites naturally occur in coronaviruses
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep00261
Computational prediction of furin cleavage sites by a hybrid method and understanding mechanism underlying diseases
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352771421000720
Furin cleavage sites in the spike proteins of bat and rodent coronaviruses: Implications for virus evolution and zoonotic transfer from rodent species
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00174-9/fulltext#:~:text=Furin%20has%20a%20well%20known,as%20a%20viral%20virulence%20factor.
SARS-CoV-2 spike and its adaptable furin cleavage site
I would not do more than skim them. In the first, the authors introduce the "furin recognition motif" as being RXXR. This is a pattern, into which nucleotides are to be substituted generating such codes as PRRA (Covid 19). They then researched a ton of bacteria and viruses for which we had genome data and discovered that great numbers of pathogens had such sites and that there was a lot of variability in the substitutions. They further looked at "clades" of such pathogens (think families) and found that many showed a clear lineage as to such substitutions but that there were also sports and irregularities.
The next important information comes out, IIRC, in the second one, that the RXXR pattern is actually a fraction of a larger fragment running, per memory, from 12 to as many at 19 letters. A lot of similar digging as was done regarding RXXR was done using larger fragments with more or less similar findings.
NOW, the virology article - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fviro.2022.834808/full
MSH3 Homology and Potential Recombination Link to SARS-CoV-2 Furin Cleavage Site
key points, my emphasis in all cases:
["Reverse" here means reverse or opposite nucleotide, not literally backwards]
[I dislike this as I will go into at length later because there are no comparisons to judge it by. Finding any specific nucleotide by nucleotide seguence of length 19 in a specific nucleotide by nucleotide genome of length 30,000 is almost certain to be preposterously small. They should maybe present the same computed result for the cleavage site for the common cold virus as a comparable.]
[there is a hypothetical mechanism, by which this could happen. They then assert that this is definitely worthy of further examination and study, which is, i think, obvious]
Probability is a gawdawful can of worms. Take 26 3 x 5 cards and write a single letter, a through z, on each. The odds of drawing a letter from the deck is 100%, while the odds of drawing a p is only 1 out of 26. The specificity of the result is very important and makes any result less likely. Drawing both a p and a q with two draws is way less likely and drawing them in that exact order is less likely yet. Thus the number of specific nucleotides (19) in a specific order is already big trouble. [factorals come into play here and 19 factoral, by itself is already 1.216451 times 10 to the 17th, a seriously big ass number. A better illustration is probably select poker hands:
The odds against being dealt a royal flush is 649,739 to one
The odds against being dealt a straight flush is 72,192 to one
The odds against being dealt a flush is 693 to one
simply specifying that the cards in the flush be in sequence increases the odds 100 fold and specifying that the lowest card in such a sequence be a ten increases the odds another 10 fold. In actuality, specificity is the key, the odds of getting 3,5,7,9,J of one suit is the same as the odds of a royal flush.
Cutting to the chase, they use "biostatistical analysis" to derive their probability estimate. Were it not for the fact that some sequences are impossible, the odds of any specific 19 unit string would be 3.6379788 e-12, roughly one whole power of ten less than they compute, which would hold for every sequence that is naturally derived as well as those which aren't.
Similarly, each of has a specific genome which is far, far less likely than anything under consideration here, and yet here we are. Hence, I really considere that number irrelevant without comparables.
be well and have a good one
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
Please ignore the information on factorals, they don't
come into play here using the information given.
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
You certainly understand far more of the biological/virological
details than I do. What I do understand though is that the site providing the "information" is Mercola, which makes it pretty much a place to be very wary of in the first place.
https://www.npr.org/2021/08/08/1025845675/one-of-the-most-influential-vo...
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
Thanks for the tip on Mercola. I learned ages ago to
go with primary sources when possible, and since the virology article was out there, I went with it and pretty much immediately saw that the Mercola summry was in error, hence my post.
be well and have a good one
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
Being someone who takes several supplements
for health instead of prescription meds, I learned to do my research carefully. Mercola has long been known as untrustworthy. He did make a lot of money on tanning beds though!
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
I saw what you did there, Mr. QMS
"endemic"
Started my day off with squared shoulders and a sly grin.
We are healthy in this house, hope the same for yours.
I just interviewed several nurses in the last week. Here, in East Texas, COVID is pretty much gone.
Surprisingly, lots of people are getting the flu, and are being successfully treated. So, my good endemic news.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981