More Contradictions From Team Vaxx

Everybody must get vaccinated to end the pandemic.

Being vaccinated does not keep you from becoming a "breakthrough case."

.

The pandemic continues with surges all over the world including the UK, Cuba and Israel, three of the most vaccinated jurisdictions on the planet.

This means that we must get everybody in the US vaccinated, even if through coercion.

.

Vaccine will end the pandemic once everybody gets the treatment.

You will need boosters shots for the rest of your life.

.

Ivermectin is for horses and anybody sick enough to recommend its use must be silenced to save lives.

Well, it does not work all that well. So neener neener neener.
.

=================================
'

I love the rationalizations from Team Vaxx that I have seen lurking on other boards. I have not seen anything this absurd here, but this is an evidence based board.

Anti-vaxxers claim they have a "right" not to join in the fight against Covid. But we have had mandatory vaccinations before for smallpox and polio. If these idiots had their way, those diseases and many others would still be killing people by the zillion!

.

Well, Team Vaxx, your shit does not promise an end to the pandemic. Nor does it promise that you won't get sick and spread the virus.

.

Freedumb loving covidiots would oppose mandatory seat belts.

.

Well, Team Vaxx, in fact there were lots of wingnuts singing the blues about their "right" not to buckle up when seatbelts first become mandatory 40 odd years ago. It was silly then and it is still silly to fret about mandatory seat belt use. Here are some differences: The penalty for not wearing a seatbelt is traffic ticket. My penalty for not getting vaccinated was losing my job as of August 31.

And, although there is some "scientific" research suggesting that seat belts and airbags sometimes do more harm than good, nobody ever seriously suggested that wearing the seatbelt by itself posed any threat to your health and safety. But all vaccines carry the risk of side effects and with this quickly developed wave of therapies it is impossible to know how many and what kinds of side effects will show up.

So there are only goofy reasons to resist seat belts but vaccine "hesitancy" is nothing but skepticism of newly produced therapies spawned by the global health care bureaucracy that is doing such a rotten job of protecting the people of the world. I don't trust anybody in power, and Team Vaxx has painted itself into the Status Quo Corner of corporate power mongers.

.

Final note, based on past experience.

Yes the published data on vaccine results show that the treatments are living up to their only billing -- they reduce the symptoms for people who catch the virus. That is a great accomplishment, and if the corporate overlords would be honest, that would be an excellent component of an overall health strategy.

Instead, the lie goes on -- anybody who does not get vaccinated is a social criminal threatening the lives of our fellow citizens. That is nonsense. Furthermore, that nonsensical rhetoric has no chance of persuading the vaccine "reluctant" to repent and get the jabs. Quite the contrary, this constant insulting of the freedumb loving covidiots is pretty well guaranteed to make most of them dig their heels in much deeper.

Which, I suggest, is the real agenda at work. More and more and more ways to divide and conquer. Or, I should say keep divided and keep under control. Arguing about whether to let Big Brother stick you with a needle is the goal -- not to make you agree to be stuck with a needle.

.

Tags: 
Share
up
10 users have voted.

Comments

Their vaccination program has been dramatically slowed down by the U.S. embargo preventing them from getting syringes.

up
5 users have voted.

@gjohnsit
.

As of this week, the vaccination rate is in fifth place among all the nations of the world with 147 injections per 100 persons within the country.

You are correct that the needle shortage delayed the Cuban campaign. However that is several months in the past.

The surge is going on right now.

Although the death rate overall is still FAR behind the USA and the 21 other countries ahead of us on the fatality chart, 80% of the Cuban deaths have occurred since July 1, 2021. There are probably several rational explanations for why the virus is surging in Cuba.

One of them is not that the vaccine is working.

And, what if anything do you have to say about the UK and Israel?

up
4 users have voted.

I cried when I wrote this song. Sue me if I play too long.

@fire with fire

not get the vaccines at all?

up
3 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02

and I have no advice to give anybody other than to beware of bullshit. Contradictions within the vaccine rationale and substance free insults coming from vaccine advocates are significant clues.

I oppose mandatory vaccination with this particular medical problem for the obvious reason that it is not necessary or even helpful to bring an end to the pandemic's hold on civilization. Let me repeat what I said in the OP:

.

Final note, based on past experience.

Yes the published data on vaccine results show that the treatments are living up to their only billing -- they reduce the symptoms for people who catch the virus. That is a great accomplishment, and if the corporate overlords would be honest, that would be an excellent component of an overall health strategy.

I take strong objection to the premise of your post. Instead of dealing with my argument, you change the subject to what I would do if I ran the zoo. That is the primary Team Vaxx rhetorical strategy -- to shift the burden of proof to the poor sap who just lives in this Corporate Paradise. Unless I can provide a good strategy for ending the pandemic, I should just shut up.

I do not buy the premise.

up
11 users have voted.

I cried when I wrote this song. Sue me if I play too long.

Raggedy Ann's picture

@fire with fire
Many thanks for keeping the focus on the issue.

up
6 users have voted.

"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11

@fire with fire

the divisive description of "teams". What is the point of that? You say you are not providing medical opinions, but you are backing opinions on a side of the issue, so I don't see the difference. You say that you are only trying to make people aware of "bullshit" and yet if there is bullshit coming from the sources you prefer, are you willing to take a look at it?

Are the members of "Team Vaxx" anyone who had the vaccines or anyone who thinks they are helping millions of people?

up

up
2 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@fire with fire
for vaccination rates. I don't know, so I'll grant you that. I only know what I read a couple months ago.

However...
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Cuba ranks #96 in deaths per million by COVID.
#72 in cases per million by COVID

And this is your leading example of... what exactly?
A mishandled COVID response? If only the U.S. had done as good.

up
4 users have voted.

@gjohnsit
.
As of May 31 of this year, there were only 18 injections per hundred Cubans. But the chart for Cuba shows a 719% increase in vaccinations since then. That coincides almost perfectly with the current surge. Yes, as I pointed out in a previous post, Cuba is far behind the USA in Covid deaths, as they had almost nothing going on until this summer.

I do not play the post hoc ergo propter hoc game and I do not claim that the vaccine caused the surge -- like everything else about this unprecedented situation, linking cause to effect is an act of hubris. I cite Cuba, the UK and Israel to show that the vaccines are not necessarily working as intended and they certainly call into serious question the value of these therapies.

Without some serious and trustworthy investigation into each of those three countries' experience this summer, no conclusions should be drawn at all. So who is trustworthy enough to make such investigations?

The mysteries multiply when there is no objectivity. And that is our problem.

.

My big disagreement with you is not about vaccination rates in Cuba. Just like with Fishtroller, I take exception to the premise that I must come up with a better answer than the vaccine.

No I do not and no other mere citizen of this planet is under any obligation to prove anything about the virus. That burden belongs on the backs of those who presume to prescribe medicine for their fellow citizens. And in meeting that burden, avoiding big honking contradictions like I list above is pretty much the whole ball game.

We are on a ship without a rudder or a pilot and we are careening toward nothing good. Forcing people to get vaccinated against their will ain't gonna work.

Just like every other Public Health Measure taken so far. None of it has worked. They might start working tomorrow, but the virus is loose in the world and planes keep flying and surges keep emerging on multiple continents.

This reality is slowly emerging in the form of the word, endemic.

Shots forever.

up
6 users have voted.

I cried when I wrote this song. Sue me if I play too long.

@fire with fire

My big disagreement with you is not about vaccination rates in Cuba. Just like with Fishtroller, I take exception to the premise that I must come up with a better answer than the vaccine.

I don't put that burden on ANYONE here. I don't expect anyone here to be a virologist.
OTOH, if you aren't a virologist then you are simply speculating.

Let me clarify. When we are talking about politics, everyone's opinion matters. Because politics is not a science. At best it's an art (and that's being gracious).
Virology IS a science. There ARE right and wrong answers. And there are right and wrong ways to get those answers.

Now you are more than free to speculate. Hell, I've done a bit of speculating myself.

up
4 users have voted.
CB's picture

@gjohnsit @gjohnsit
But science isn't static. It evolves and morphs and is sometimes flipped on its head (or its ass).

Unfortunately, we do not yet know what the 'science' on SARS-CoV-2 is at this time. The politicization of the issue is making the issue very difficult.

There are too many conflicting interests that have massive financial interests in colouring the 'science'.

Frankly, I'm thinking the current situation is related to The Great Reset. There's too many of us useless proles dirtying up the world. Maybe it's time for a culling?

up
7 users have voted.

@CB

https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/...

https://theconversation.com/coronaviruses-a-brief-history-135506

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00502-w

This one traces the history of studying these viruses since 1965...
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/a-brief-history-of-human-coro...

up
2 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@CB

But science isn't static. It evolves and morphs and is sometimes flipped on its head (or its ass).

That happens extremely rarely.
What is much more common is pseudo-science. That happens all the time.

Unfortunately, we do not yet know what the 'science' on SARS-CoV-2 is at this time.

I don't believe your statement to be true. Or at best is a HUGE exaggeration.
Is there some wiggle room? Sure, there always is. But to say "we don't know what the science is"...It's not something that I'm going to take seriously.

The politicization of the issue is making the issue very difficult.

On this last point we are in agreement.

up
3 users have voted.

@gjohnsit changing more than "extremely rarely" then it really isn't doing its job. But historically I don't think this is true. Discoveries and breakthroughs in thinking occur more frequently than that in the many areas of science (I think of geophysics and archaeology/anthropology in the past 60 yrs).

What does happen often however, sadly, is that the old paradigms are fiercely defended by the old guard, even in the face of clear evidence they are wrong, as too many have too much invested in the old thinking. It can actually get quite nasty as they attack those few brave ones, evidence in hand, who dare to storm the citadel of official truth. Careers are ruined bc all too often conformity in thinking is rewarded while rebels are outcast. The peer review system, despite doing a good job of keeping out junk science, can also keep out good science that happens not to be welcome or acceptable for various reasons. Scientists in the end are just people, all have biases, and all are susceptible to being corrupted.

On Sars-2, the beastiest of any coronavirus ever seen, and likely lab-created, I would think most scientists are still trying to learn about it, particularly its long-term effects. Does it get fully neutralized or "shed" out of the system, or does a portion remain inside the body, in some dormant state waiting to erupt years from now to cause serious illnesses. This is my non-scientific speculation anyway. I make no claims to any expertise whatsoever.

But hey, it's not even certain whether Sars-2 was natural or manmade. And until 6 months or so ago please recall that scientific officialdom insisted for over a year that the idea of it being made in a lab was just a crazy conspiracy theory and even a bit racist. If you speculated it was manmade on FB or ND, your post was removed. A violation of specific rules on Covid discussion. Iirc, there was an early 2020 Open Letter signed by a number of scientists, published in The Lancet, basically warning scientists not to espouse other than a natural origin explanation. It is now safe to speculate about the lab hypothesis. That process of no debating allowed is not true science, it's politics and power. And it was scientists who were leading the charge to shut down debate.

up
8 users have voted.
CB's picture

@gjohnsit @gjohnsit
and they haven't been since shortly after their vaccination program started. But at least Cuba is levelling out and starting to turn unlike the US which is still shooting for the stars.

COVID-19 vaccinations vs. new COVID-19 deaths, Dec 1, 2020 to Sep 15, 2021

I believe the cause is drug companies are depending on vaccines that only use portions of the spike protein. The Cuban vaccine is a conjugate vaccine which also carries only a portion of the spike protein.

India will start manufacturing Corbevax in December, a traditional type of vaccine that can be made for $1.50.

up
6 users have voted.

@CB I'm looking at places like Israel, the UK, Iceland and so forth, places with higher than average vaccination rates where there have been upsurges in Covid cases. Israel in particular is interesting, as it's basically now fully into the 3d booster jab, a country where Pfizer is used almost exclusively.

Iirc, there was recently a leaked audio of a talk given by a top Pfizer exec to the Israeli health officials where the exec noted that Israel would almost be serving as a lab experiment for the vaccines for the rest of the world, esp as to the public reaction. Will they continue to dutifully line up to take jab after jab, and after how many in a short period of time do they begin to rebel. I suspect too that the Pfizer people will want to find out when it's a good time to start talking more publicly about their planned Pfizermectin pill.

up
6 users have voted.
CB's picture

@wokkamile
I had posted about them a couple of days ago.

covid-vaccinations-vs-covid-death-rate-3.png

up
3 users have voted.
CB's picture

@gjohnsit
Unfortunately their death rate has sky rocketed at the VERY same time as they started vaccinating their population.

Cuba statistics Wiki

[view graph showing sky rocketing cases and deaths by date]

Vaccination
...
Widespread vaccination has been limited by a lack of syringes, which the country does not produce, and vaccine doses.[38][33][39] In July 2021, representatives of Global Health Partners announced the successful donation of six million syringes to Cuba for their COVID-19 vaccination campaign, financed by a coalition of American organisations against the American embargo on Cuba.[40] Cuba already received around 380,000 syringes and needles in June 2021, donated by Cuban residents in Argentina and other aid organisations.

up
3 users have voted.
Raggedy Ann's picture

and worth your time to watch. Dr. Peter McCollough is world renowned and is delivering the most informative message.

up
5 users have voted.

"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11

@Raggedy Ann

What he is well known for is not exactly what I would call admirable.

What is your goal in posting videos like this?

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/courts/2021/08/13/baylor-health-sues-cov...

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/lawsuit-former-bayl...

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-08-16/doctors-coronavirus-mi...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_A._McCullough

up
3 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

Raggedy Ann's picture

@Fishtroller 02 @Fishtroller 02
Education. People need to make educated decisions with as much information as possible. Fear is rampant, which is the goal of tptb. Here's also the FLCCC website https://covid19criticalcare.com/ - more education - more information. You can decide for yourself - which I see you have already made your decisions. Others have not, so let them decide.

Edited to add more education for our readers:

up
8 users have voted.

"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11

@Raggedy Ann @fire with fire

the divisive description of "teams". What is the point of that? You say you are not providing medical opinions, but you are backing opinions on a side of the issue, so I don't see the difference. You say that you are only trying to make people aware of "bullshit" and yet if there is bullshit coming from the sources you prefer, are you willing to take a look at it?

Are the members of "Team Vaxx" anyone who had the vaccines or anyone who thinks they are helping millions of people?

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02

the divisive description of "teams". What is the point of that? You say you are not providing medical opinions, but you are backing opinions on a side of the issue, so I don't see the difference.

And everyone should consider this.
I'm not interested in dividing C99P up into teams.
I already had a good friend of mine do that, and I haven't seen him since. I don't know if I ever will.

up
6 users have voted.

@Raggedy Ann

I don't know why it was addressed to you.

up
1 user has voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Raggedy Ann

"education" and which are not?

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

CB's picture

@Fishtroller 02
POLITICAL disagreement with McCullough's ideas? None of them actually show that his science is faulty.

Here's what got McCullough in trouble with TPTB:

“People under 50 who fundamentally have no health risks, there’s no scientific rationale for them to ever become vaccinated,” Dr Peter McCullough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_A._McCullough
...
McCullough testified before a committee of the Texas Senate in March 2021, posted to YouTube by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, in which he made false claims about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines, including that people under 50 years of age and survivors do not need the vaccine and that there is no evidence of asymptomatic spread.
...

Here's the data which actually proves McCullough correct:

Number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths in the U.S. as of September 8, 2021, by age*

CDC Finds that 94% of US COVID-19 Deaths Include Comorbid Factors


Study of Ten Million Finds No Evidence of Asymptomatic COVID Spread

up
9 users have voted.

@CB

McCullough's faulty claims and the science behind why they are wrong, and you have not addressed it yet.

up
2 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

CB's picture

@Fishtroller 02
Nothing in your report has proved that McCullough's claims were actually false.

Claim 1 (Inaccurate):
Claim 2 (Misleading):
Claim 3 (Inaccurate and Misleading):
Claim 4 (Misleading and Unsupported):
Claim 5 (Inaccurate):
Claim 6 (Unsupported):

BTW, you gave absolutely no links whatsoever. I stand by my conviction that your report is from a compromised and biased source.

up
2 users have voted.

@CB

And certainly you would never entertain the possibility that you might be wrong on your assessment. I wouldn't expect anything different from you.

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02 to have more open discussion and debate in this country on the vaccines, mandates, the virus -- so much there to tackle. Yet we don't get any of that of course. Only the one pro-Covid vax side.

I'd love to see McCullough or Ryan Cole or Malone or others well versed in the vaccines go at it publicly with Pfizer or Moderna scientists. I would wager a fair sum that the skeptics would win out in any fair system of debate and scoring. But that's asking too much I suppose in this country of alleged free speech. Those with the power and money control the dialogue, and they aren't about to let these noisy detractors get their nose inside the tent.

up
7 users have voted.

@wokkamile

pulling funds to run first class scientific clinical trials on Ivermectin or whatever else they are promoting instead of spending all their time promoting themselves on You tube video venues, they might have a chance to gain enough respect to be heard. But that is not what they are choosing. They are choosing to sit on the sidelines and throw spitballs at all the hard science while using right wing venues to get people totally confused on these issues.

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02 with anti-vaxxers? He played a major role in the development of the mRNA vaccines. And he's been jabbed by one of these vaccines already, early 2021. Partly for work/travel purposes, partly bc he'd already gotten Covid and thought it might be helpful in reducing some of the severe symptoms he was feeling. On that, he was wrong.

Clinical trials: expensive -- $20m or so for a typical year-long trial. Also immoral and unethical right now as IVM has shown in enough (60) studies and trials (see www.flccc.net) to be safe and effective in treating Covid.

RW media: Malone probably leans conservative, but that's irrelevant. My PCP might be a RW Hindu nationalist of the Modi stripe for all I know, but I don't know and don't care to ask bc her politics have nothing to do with treating me on non-coved matters. Malone also probably goes where he's invited, and as with skeptics on Russiagate, the only venues available for open discussion on the issue are the conservative sites. Jimmy Dore is one exception. Rachel Maddow and the rest on the non-Fox cables -- they all drink from the same corporate-gov't well and so Malone has likely never been invited on Msnbc or CNN. Nor Kory, Marik and the rest. All shut out of non-Fox traditional corp media.

So if the only places they can get out the word on IVM or the dangerous vaccines is on Fox or similar, such is the sorry situation of the media today, and they shouldn't be blamed. Ditto for Glenn Greenwald and a few other similar independent lefty journalists who also don't get lib cable tv invites.

up
3 users have voted.

@wokkamile

spike protein. It doesn't matter that he was vaccinated if he is using his role in mRNA development to write things about that science that are not true.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/08/robert-malone-vaccin...

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

CB's picture

@Fishtroller 02

Comment from J. Patrick Whelan MD PhD

I am a pediatric specialist caring for children with the multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C). I am concerned about the possibility that the new vaccines aimed at creating immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (including the mRNA vaccines of Moderna and Pfizer) have the potential to cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver, and kidneys in a way that does not currently appear to be assessed in safety trials of these potential drugs.

Puntmann et al. (JAMA Cardiol. 2020;5:1265-1273) showed that the prospective study of 100 German patients who were recently recovered from COVID-19 revealed significant cardiac involvement on cardiac MRI scans in 78% of them, an average 2-1/2 months after their recovery from the acute illness.
...

Magro et al. showed that there is complement-mediated damage even in grossly normal skin of coronavirus-infected individuals (Human Pathology 2020:106:106-116). They have also shown (Magro et al. Annals of Diagnostic Pathology 2021:50 in press ) that ACE-2 receptor expression is highest in the microvasculature of the brain and subcutaneous fat, and to a lesser degree in the liver, kidney, and heart.
...

Is it possible the spike protein itself causes the tissue damage associated with Covid-19? Nuovo et al (in press) have shown that in 13/13 brains from patients with fatal COVID-19, pseudovirions (spike, envelope, and membrane proteins) without viral RNA are present in the endothelia of cerebral microvessels.
...

While there are pieces to this puzzle that have yet to be worked out, it appears that the viral spike protein that is the target of the major SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is also one of the key agents causing the damage to distant organs that may include the brain, heart, lung, and kidney.
...

Particular caution will be required with regard to the potential widespread vaccination of children before there are any real data on the safety or effectiveness of these vaccines in pediatric trials that are only now beginning.

up
3 users have voted.

@Raggedy Ann

FULL CLAIM: “In May we have over 4,000 vaccine-related deaths and over 10,000 hospitalizations”; “Every scientist in the world knows that natural immunity is way better than vaccine immunity”; COVID-19 survivors “can't get the virus”, so they don’t need to be vaccinated; “We know that the vaccine technology produces the dangerous spike protein [...] which damages blood vessels and causes blood clotting”; “two months of observational data [...] That has never been done before. We have never just thrown a vaccine at somebody without having any data.”
REVIEW

An interview featuring Peter McCullough, a cardiologist and professor of medicine at Texas A & M University, conducted by writer John Leake on 19 May 2021, was published as a video on Rumble by Fleccas Talks, a channel run by political commentator Austen Fletcher. The video was later shared on social media platforms like Facebook. According to the social media analytics tool CrowdTangle, videos of the interview drew more than 14,000 interactions on Facebook, including more than 7,200 shares.
The video also received a boost from American actor Rob Schneider, who shared the video on Twitter. Schneider’s tweet was retweeted more than 400 times and received more than 1,100 likes.

McCullough was also previously interviewed by Fox News host Tucker Carlson on 7 May 2021, during which he claimed that hydroxychloroquine is effective for treating COVID-19. As previous reviews by Health Feedback showed, there’s no reliable evidence supporting this claim.

During the interview with Leake, McCullough made several claims about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. This review explains below why his claims are inaccurate, misleading and/or unsupported by evidence.

Claim 1 (Inaccurate):
“In May we have over 4,000 vaccine-related deaths and over 10,000 hospitalizations. […] this is far and away the most lethal toxic biologic agent ever injected into a human body in American history.”

McCullough didn’t cite his sources when stating these figures, but the ballpark figure of 4,000 has been cited before in another claim about COVID-19 vaccines. It may correspond to the number of reports of death occurring after a COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database.

VAERS collects reports of adverse events that occur after vaccination. Its purpose is to serve as a surveillance system that allows public health authorities to detect signals that may indicate potential safety problems.

However, VAERS reports have provided fertile ground for COVID-19 vaccine misinformation. VAERS clearly states that reports cannot be used to determine if the vaccine was the cause of an adverse event. But this hasn’t stopped people from claiming that COVID-19 vaccines are unsafe on the basis of VAERS reports alone (see previous reviews here, here, and here). In fact, citing VAERS reports as evidence that vaccines are harmful is a common feature of vaccine misinformation in general.

Furthermore, it is important to consider that the U.S. vaccinated more than 147 million people by early May 2021. In such a large group of people, we need to remember that incidental deaths and illnesses take place. Even in an unvaccinated population, a certain number of deaths are expected. As illustrated in this commentary in Science Translational Medicine:

“We’re talking about treating very, very large populations, which means that you’re going to see the usual run of mortality and morbidity that you see across large samples. Specifically, if you take 10 million people and just wave your hand back and forth over their upper arms, in the next two months you would expect to see about 4,000 heart attacks. About 4,000 strokes. Over 9,000 new diagnoses of cancer. And about 14,000 of that ten million will die, out of usual all-causes mortality. No one would notice. That’s how many people die and get sick anyway.

But if you took those ten million people and gave them a new vaccine instead, there’s a real danger that those heart attacks, cancer diagnoses, and deaths will be attributed to the vaccine. I mean, if you reach a large enough population, you are literally going to have cases where someone gets the vaccine and drops dead the next day (just as they would have if they *didn’t* get the vaccine). It could prove difficult to convince that person’s friends and relatives of that lack of connection, though. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is one of the most powerful fallacies of human logic, and we’re not going to get rid of it any time soon.”

Therefore, it is necessary to compare the rate of the adverse event between the unvaccinated (baseline) and vaccinated groups. Only when the rate is significantly higher in the vaccinated group do researchers have grounds to hypothesize that there is a causal relationship. Indeed, such comparisons are what health authorities and regulatory agencies do when adverse events are reported.

As explained in this Health Feedback review, scientists observed that deaths haven’t occurred at a higher rate in vaccinated people as compared to unvaccinated people. Such an observation doesn’t support McCullough’s claim that COVID-19 vaccines cause death.

Claim 2 (Misleading):
“Every scientist in the world knows that natural immunity is way better than vaccine immunity.”

This claim is misleading, as it fails to provide the reader with enough information that would enable them to accurately compare both the benefits and risks of natural immunity with those of vaccine-induced immunity.

The Vaccine Education Center of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia explained:

“It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines. Whereas immunity from disease often follows a single natural infection, immunity from vaccines usually occurs only after several doses.”

But what McCullough didn’t tell viewers is that acquiring immunity through infection comes with the risks associated with the illness. The relatively low mortality rate of COVID-19 is commonly cited as a reason not to worry about catching the virus. But this focus on mortality rate alone doesn’t account for the fact that the virus is highly contagious, and can therefore still cause many deaths when it spreads widely. To date, more than 590,000 people in the U.S. have died from COVID-19, while COVID-19 deaths worldwide have exceeded 3.6 million.

Furthermore, COVID-19 can lead to other outcomes besides complete recovery and death. For example, a proportion of COVID-19 survivors have persistent health problems even after recovering from the infection. Some of these problems include difficulty breathing, cognitive deficits, joint and muscle pain. This condition is termed long COVID.

There is still a lot that scientists don’t know about long COVID, although work is underway to understand the condition better, as explained in these articles by Nature and Science. Long COVID is unpredictable, as described by Stephanie LaVergne, an infectious diseases researcher at Colorado State University, in this piece for The Conversation. For instance, it can affect the young as well as the elderly. Even those with a mild case of COVID-19 can eventually develop long COVID. The physical and mental toll of this condition can be detrimental to a person’s quality of life.

By contrast, COVID-19 vaccines confer immunity to disease, but aren’t associated with a greater likelihood of death or persistent health problems like the disease is. While the vaccines commonly cause side effects like fever, headache, and muscle aches, these are comparatively mild and short-lived compared to health complications from COVID-19.

Viral vector vaccines, like the AstraZeneca-Oxford and Johnson & Johnson vaccines, are indeed associated with a higher incidence of a rare blood clotting disorder. However, results reported in this preprint (a study not yet peer-reviewed by other scientists) suggest that the risk of blood clots from COVID-19 is several times higher than that observed with the vaccines[1].

Overall, if we compare the risks and benefits of natural immunity with that of vaccine-induced immunity, vaccine-induced immunity is preferable, since it induces protective immunity in a much safer manner than getting the disease.

Claim 3 (Inaccurate and Misleading):
COVID-19 survivors “can’t get the virus”, so they don’t need to be vaccinated.

This claim is inaccurate. As explained above, natural infection does produce protective immunity in most cases, but reinfection can and does happen. This suggests that not all survivors develop protective immunity from infection alone. It’s unclear how many COVID-19 survivors experience reinfection, as there isn’t enough data to make conclusions, although reinfection is thought to be uncommon.

The emergence of variants is a source of uncertainty regarding the protection provided by natural immunity. A study estimated that as many as two-thirds of people in the city of Manaus, Brazil were infected during the first wave of COVID-19[2]. Even though this might have been expected to provide some immunity in the majority of the population, the city suffered a second wave of COVID-19 cases worse than the first one. One potential contributing factor to the more severe second wave could be the Gamma variant, also called P.1 and first detected in Brazil, which may be more transmissible[3].

Vaccination can help enhance COVID-19 survivors’ protective immunity. Firstly, vaccine boosters designed to target variants can further improve the immune system’s ability to respond to an infection by a variant, as Cassandra Berry, a professor of immunology at Murdoch University, explained in this article published by The Conversation.

Secondly, reinfection is difficult to predict, but individual variability in immunity can arise due to factors such as genetic susceptibility, age, and the amount of virus a person was exposed to (also known as infectious dose)[4]. Since vaccines are designed to produce optimal immunity, as Berry explained, vaccination can help to bridge the immunity gap in a survivor that didn’t generate protective immunity from infection alone.

Finally, some research suggests that one dose of vaccine in survivors produces an enhanced immune response strong enough to fight off variants[5,6], reported the New York Times.

In summary, COVID-19 survivors can get COVID-19 again, despite McCullough’s claim, although reinfection is thought to be uncommon. There is evidence demonstrating that vaccination is beneficial even for people who already had COVID-19.

Claim 4 (Misleading and Unsupported):
“We know that the vaccine technology produces the dangerous spike protein […] which damages blood vessels and causes blood clotting”

Vaccines work by exposing a person to a dead or weakened pathogen (disease-causing microorganism), or a part of the pathogen, like one of its proteins. This trains the person’s immune system to be ready to recognize and fight off the actual microorganism in a future encounter.

The claim that the spike protein generated by the COVID-19 vaccines poses a danger to people may be based—incorrectly as we will see—on recently published studies, as documented here by David Gorski, a professor of surgery at Wayne State University and an editor at Science-Based Medicine.

In one study by the Salk Institute, scientists engineered a pseudovirus that carried the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein on its surface[7]. Gorski described pseudoviruses as “a construct that has the external proteins of the virus of interest”. Pseudoviruses don’t contain the actual virus and cannot replicate. This allows scientists to produce models that carry the same external characteristics of the virus they wish to study, without having to run the safety risks associated with studying the virus itself. The study reported that hamsters infected with the pseudovirus had signs of inflammation in the lungs.

But as one of the study’s senior authors Uri Manor pointed out on Twitter, the findings of the study can’t be extrapolated to the spike protein produced by COVID-19 vaccines. This is because the amount of spike protein produced by vaccines is far less than the spike protein present in the hamsters.

Furthermore, as Gorski pointed out, the study itself stated that the findings suggest vaccines would protect people from injury, not cause it:

“[The results suggest] that vaccination-generated antibody […] against [spike] protein not only protects the host from SARS-CoV-2 infectivity but also inhibits [spike] protein imposed endothelial injury.”

Endothelial cells are cells that line the inner walls of blood vessels. This contradicts McCullough’s claim that the spike protein from the vaccines would damage blood vessels.

Another study examined blood samples from people who received the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine and detected spike protein in 11 out of 13 vaccinated people[8]. However, this study also doesn’t provide evidence that the spike protein from vaccines causes damage, since the levels of spike protein detected were infinitesimal. Specifically, they were in the realm of picograms per milliliter. Gorski put this in perspective:

“That’s 10-12 grams/milliliter. What was the concentration used by Manor’s lab again? Oh, yes, 4 micrograms/milliliter. One microgram is 10-6 grams, or one million-fold more than one picogram!”

Overall, McCullough’s claim that vaccine-induced spike protein poses a danger to people isn’t substantiated by evidence. In fact, the available evidence contradicts his claim.

Claim 5 (Inaccurate):
“Two months for COVID, […] two months of observational data. This idea that we could vaccinate people that were not even tested in the trials. That has never been done before. We have never just thrown a vaccine at somebody without having any data.”

This is inaccurate. Both the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines began Phase 3 trials. which assessed efficacy and safety, in July 2020 (see records in ClinicalTrials.gov here and here). Both received emergency use authorization (EUA) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in December 2020 (see here and here), more than four months later.

Phase 3 clinical trials for the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine began in September 2020 and included more than 40,000 volunteers. The vaccine received EUA in February 2021.

Tens of thousands of volunteers were included in each vaccine’s Phase 3 clinical trial. In all cases, authorization was only given after the FDA evaluated the data on the vaccines’ efficacy and safety and concluded that the vaccines’ known and potential benefits outweigh their known and potential risks.

Claim 6 (Unsupported):
“This is what globalists have been waiting for, they’ve been waiting for a way of marking people, that you get in a vaccine, you’re marked in a database and this can be used for trade, for commerce, for behavior modification, all different purposes”

McCullough espoused the conspiracy theory that COVID-19 vaccination campaigns are being used for nefarious purposes to track people. This conspiracy theory gained traction in groups such as QAnon and vaccine-opposing organizations, as reported by BBC and Rolling Stone. The conspiracy theory commonly goes hand in hand with the false claim that the vaccines contain microchips (see fact-checks here and here). At any rate, McCullough didn’t provide any evidence for his claim.

REFERENCES
1 – Taquet et al. (2021) Cerebral venous thrombosis and portal vein thrombosis: a retrospective cohort study of 537,913 COVID-19 cases. OSF. [Note: This is a preprint that has not yet been peer-reviewed or published.]
2 – Buss et al. (2021). Three-quarters attack rate of SARS-CoV-2 in the Brazilian Amazon during a largely unmitigated epidemic. Science.
3 – Faria et al. (2021) Genomics and epidemiology of the P.1 SARS-CoV-2 lineage in Manaus, Brazil. Science.
4 – Rouse and Sehrawat. (2010) Immunity and immunopathology to viruses: what decides the outcome? Nature Reviews Immunology.
5 – Turner et al. (2021) SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans. Nature.
6 – Wang et al. (2021) Vaccination boosts naturally enhanced neutralizing breadth to SARS-CoV-2 one year after infection. bioRxiv. [Note: This is a preprint that has not yet been peer-reviewed or published.]
7 – Lei et al. (2021) SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2. Circulation Research.
8 – Ogata et al. (2021) Circulating SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Antigen Detected in the Plasma of mRNA-1273 Vaccine Recipients. Clinical Infectious Diseases.

up
6 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

CB's picture

@Fishtroller 02
Facebook, TikTok and Google as "fact checker" for restricting information about SARS-CoV-2. It is a member of the WHO-led project Vaccine Safety Net (VSN).

A such, it is NOT a viable, unbiased source of information about the pandemic.

up
7 users have voted.

@CB

We could go back and forth on the legitimacy of your sources and mine and never come to an agreement.

So go to the points about McCullough's claims.

Or you could take the time to read this...

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/22/melbourne-doctors... which contains this information...

"The key reference providing support to this assertion is this article, the lead author of which is Dr Peter McCullough, vice-chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Centre in Dallas, Texas. Zelenko is one of his 56 co-authors.

The article should be taken seriously, says Mathieson, because it is “peer reviewed”. The evidence is “now virtually beyond dispute,” he says.

But a check of the credentials of the journal in which it appeared – Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine – reveals that McCullough himself is the editor-in-chief of the journal in which he has published.

On top of that, the peer review process was astonishingly quick. The paper was submitted on 28 November, accepted after revisions on 15 December and published just a fortnight later.

Baylor Scott and White Health, which runs the medical centre where McCullough holds his position, told me that the article “does not reflect the views of Baylor Scott and White Health”.

The article argues for each of the component parts of the recommended cocktail of drugs in turn.

The main support for the use of hydroxychloroquine is a paragraph that claims “a continuously updated synthesis of studies” showed convincing benefits from hydroxychloroquine, including benefits in 63% of cases when administered in hospital treatment, and benefit in all cases where it had been used in early treatment.

Four other studies are cited in support of this claim. There are problems with at least three of them, and only one talks about early treatment.

The first, an observational study of patients hospitalised with Covid, examined a range of risk factors and concluded that hydroxychloroquine was associated with lower death rates – but this study was sharply criticised in letters to the editor of the journal where it was published. An expert in the field described it as “just not plausible”, methodologically flawed and its conclusions therefore “invalid.

Another of the cited studies was described by a later systematic review as having “a moderate or serious risk of bias”. The authors of this study did not respond to emails seeking comment.

But most shocking of all, yet another of the cited studies concludes the opposite of what McCullough claims it says. Based on a study of 1,438 patients in New York, it found no benefit from hydroxychloroquine. The very small benefits detected were concluded to be statistically insignificant.

The lead author of this study, associate professor Eli Rosenberg of the University at Albany, has confirmed that it is “incorrect to reference our study as supportive of Hydroxychloroquine benefit”.

Since he published that paper, he says, randomised control trials had demonstrated that “hydroxychloroquine has no benefit for reducing Covid-19 outcomes” at any stage of treatment, including people not hospitalised and those at risk of infection. “The sum of the evidence indicates that researchers and providers should spend little energy on this drug, in favour of therapeutics that show actual benefit or promise for benefit.”

Yet on this shaky foundation, McCullough recommended an “urgent pivot” to his recommended regime of drugs, and has promoted this view widely.

McCullough’s article has also been published on the website of the worthy-sounding Association of American Physicians and Surgeons – which is in fact an interest group with links to the Trump administration. The Trump-appointed head of the Department of Health and Human Services, Tom Price, is a member, as was Republican senator Rand Paul. The AAPS is well known for campaigning against President Barack Obama’s affordable care act.

It has previously published articles questioning the safety of the measles vaccine and falsely suggesting that women who have abortions are at a higher risk of breast cancer. The AAPS site currently promotes a booklet that gives a “step by step” guide to home-based Covid treatment as something that could “save your life”, as well as an article by its lawyer suggesting the recent US election was “tainted beyond repair”.

Approached by the Guardian for comment, McCullough said the issue in which his article was published was a special, prompted by the “urgency of the crisis”. It had an independent guest editor and “all papers … underwent peer-review in the full and usual extent and the paper was published after suitable revisions”.

It is true that the relevant issue of the journal had three guest editors – all of them sit with McCullough on the editorial board, and they are experts in exercise and sports medicine. The identity of the peer reviewers is confidential.

As for the doubts about the cited studies, McCullough suggests that is because of bias. He says “studies demonstrating therapeutic benefit have been under heavy criticism by those who espouse therapeutic nihilism, that is, offering no care for high-risk patients with Covid-19 and allowing them to suffer, succumb to hospitalisation and death.”

Asked specifically about his use of the Rosenberg study, he did not respond directly but referred the Guardian to another article, of which he was one of four co-authors, which has not yet been subjected to peer review. This article studied five randomised trials of hydroxychloroquine and concluded there was a 24% reduction in infection, hospitalisation and death. The criteria by which the five studies were selected for review was not described. The lead author declared past consulting work for manufacturers of hydroxychloroquine.

McCullough says: “The larger body of observational data for [hydroxychloroquine] in outpatient use is strongly positive and continues to accrue daily.”

It appears that McCullough has a rather right wing sourcing problem of his own.

up
5 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

CB's picture

@Fishtroller 02
so I'm not going to waste my time reading it. That drug has been politicized since Trump went public using it.

Besides, The Guardian is a biased source that is in the pockets of the UK government. I don't expect it will report honestly about COVID-19 vaccines.

The Guardian proclaims Anthony Fauci as ‘sexiest man alive’

up
4 users have voted.

@CB

My sources are suspect. Yours are not.

You support this doctor, and when it is pointed out that he spent a lot of time as a proponent of a bad treatment, you just dismiss it.

Do you not see how frustrating this is within the context of any conversation?

up
4 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

QMS's picture

@Fishtroller 02

in a world that's constantly changing?

up
3 users have voted.

@Fishtroller 02 it is only a part of a multi-drug protocol for stage 2 of Covid symptoms, not the end-all be-all, not even in IVM's league. Helpful at a certain point yes. This is from doctors like Kory, Marik, McCullough who are actually treating Covid patients and trying to find solutions, unlike the bureaucrats like Fauci, Collins et al, who've never treated a Covid patient in their lives. I'd rather hear from those actively working with Covid patients. Their opinions carry much greater weight.

Trump's embrace of HCQ early in 2020 was a sort of kiss of death for many people looking on from outside, but he put it out there as a magic bullet solution, which is false, typical ignorant Trump. Despite being tarnished by Trump, the proof is in the pudding, and if it shows to be helpful in treating patients along with other drugs, a good doctor would use it and pay no heed to the Trump sideshow.

And thank goodness there are brave, bold doctors out there who've been working the problem, not waiting for a year-long expensive RCT, or peer-reviewed papers, or an official edict from the FDA or Fauci to help their patients get well. First Do No Harm says the Hippocratic oath, and that includes not waiting around until a miracle vaccine is developed months later, months after the patients have died.

Politics? It's one way for the vaccine majority to ad hom the vaccine skeptics and stereotype them as wing nut doctors like Trump's Dr Atlas. I have a good PCP, but it never occurred to me initially or since to ask her about her politics. Totally irrelevant.

up
6 users have voted.

@wokkamile

"And thank goodness there are brave, bold doctors out there who've been working the problem, not waiting for a year-long expensive RCT, or peer-reviewed papers, or an official edict from the FDA or Fauci to help their patients get well. First Do No Harm says the Hippocratic oath, and that includes not waiting around until a miracle vaccine is developed months later, months after the patients have died."

You would put your medical trust in doctors who are skipping clinical trials and scientifically peer reviewed processes? These doctors are not brave and bold. They are dangerous.

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02 We are talking about the Covid context where patients are at least experiencing enough serious symptoms to go see the doctor. Where public health officials have nothing to offer by way of treatment except Wait til you get even sicker, then check yourself into a hospital as the odds against survival begin to go against you.

Yes by all means I'd want a doctor who's acting aggressively, seeking creative solutions and using best judgment, perhaps connecting with a doctor in another state who might be having success in treating such patients. Yes, don't wait. -- it's a time of the essence situation. Don't just do nothing bc there is no clinical trial on the treatment. Doing nothing is violating the Hippocratic oath. Waiting for a clinical trial on a proposed treatment is criminally negligent. The patient will be dead long before such trials are concluded.

All the more so if the proposed new treatment involves a drug that has long been in use and is well known for being as safe as any drug ever made.

up
4 users have voted.

@wokkamile

treating issues related to parasites, not Covid. At least not yet.

If you take out the term "Covid" and insert "Breast Cancer", do you then think it would be OK for doctors to just use their own judgement on treatment with no regard to science?

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02 available at the flccc.net site to consider. I understand it's now over 60 studies and trials showing IVM effectiveness in treating Covid. It's also in the low Covid numbers in areas, such as certain heavily populated areas of India like Delhi and the state of Goa where it's widely used prophylactically vs those Indian states where it is not and they show high Covid #s.

On the science, the practice of medicine involves both science and art. Good doctors are the ones who go beyond just what the CDC or NIH guidelines strictly recommend.

up
4 users have voted.

@wokkamile

FLCCC is not a good source.

“The FLCCC”
Smith’s lawsuit references the work of Dr. Fred A. Wagshul, who is a founding member of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, a group of doctors that are promoting the use of ivermectin for COVID-19 treatment.

The FLCCC is behind the website covid19criticalcare.com, which purports to offer “prevention and treatment protocols for COVID-19.” In addition to the use of ivermectin, which the FLCCC calls its “core” preventative measure, it has indicated that a person can gargle with mouthwash, take vitamins and administer nasal drops containing iodine.

Chief among the FLCCC’s resources on ivermectin is a review published in the American Journal of Therapeutics. It’s co-authored by one member of the alliance and relies to some degree (at least 15.5%, according to academic journal Nature) on a non-peer-reviewed preprint that was withdrawn due to “ethical concerns.”

That paper allegedly studied a large sample size of COVID-19 symptomatic people and found that ivermectin significantly reduced symptoms and deaths. But academics and critics found issues related to plagiarism and data manipulation, Nature reports.
The FLCCC Alliance says “vaccination is part of the solution” for ending the COVID-19 pandemic, although vaccines are not listed in its preventative protocol plan. The group does say people should follow public health authority recommendations, including “vaccinations as appropriate.”

The group’s treatment protocol for hospitalized patients reads: “If administered early, this formula of FDA-approved, safe, inexpensive, and readily available drugs can eliminate the need for ICU beds and mechanical ventilators and return patients to health.”

Nevertheless, the FDA has not approved ivermectin for COVID-19 treatment.

The FLCCC says its information is for educational purposes only and is not a substitute for diagnosis or treatment plans from a licensed medical professional.

The alliance lists a disclaimer on its website, reading: “IF YOU ARE DISSATISFIED WITH ANY OF THE CONTENT OR MATERIALS ON OUR WEBSITE, OR ANY SERVICES OR INFORMATION AVAILABLE THROUGH THE WEBSITE, YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY IS TO DISCONTINUE ACCESSING AND USING OUR WEBSITE.”

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02 dedicated hard-working and fearless doctors trying to help their Covid patients -- the FLCCC doctors -- any day over faceless corporate scientists or gov't public health bureaucrats who have treated no Covid patients and who may have a financial stake in the vaccines.

Beyond that, it's unclear what point you were trying to make with the copy/paste of the final para's, as legal disclaimers are a pretty prudent thing to do, whether for an online site or when talking about these issues on video. Especially these days as gov't and the medical establishment seem to be eager to find any opening to go after these rebel doctors.

up
2 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@Fishtroller 02

ANOTHER government study on ivermectin in case you missed the other one I posted in reply to you.

up
10 users have voted.

In a free country civil liberties are not only for certain groups.
So this is how liberty dies . . . with thunderous applause.
The donor class doesn’t want it, and Americans elect the bribed. So suck it up.

@snoopydawg

I appreciate the effort, but I have given up on arguing about Ivermectin. I will not participate in the practice of trying to convince people that they should take a medication that still has not been confirmed as a viable and safe treatment for Covid 19... especially if it is being promoted as a substitute for vaccination. When and if I see the headlines about massive year long clinical trials demonstrating its medical benefits at exact dosages etc., then I'll give it the attention it has earned.

up
3 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

Lookout's picture

@Fishtroller 02

Once again I'm not trying to convince you. Make up your own mind, but please quit belittling those who see things differently.

up
8 users have voted.

“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

@Lookout still has the police and military patrolling the streets for lockdown miscreants. I was so wrong about the Aussies, who I thought were made of sterner stuff than to allow this gross infringement on their basic freedoms.

Re John Campbell, he's been good on the Covid info all along. I have a feeling he would be even stronger in some of his expressed views if he didn't have to deal with strict YT censors.

up
3 users have voted.

@wokkamile The military patrols. he feels lucky to take a walk around his nearby lake for exercise. He cannot move into his new apartment close to Sydney because the movers cannot go there due to road closures.

up
1 user has voted.

@Lookout

I haven't "belittled" anyone. I have questioned the promotion of what I see as unproven treatments. When you start turning an argument into a false claim that someone is being personally insulted, then it's not a discussion anymore. It is also unproductive to suggest that someone you disagree with move to another country.

I watch Dr. Carpenter. He has been very methodical and informative over the last year. I saw his presentation on Ivermectin. I was a bit sorry he bought into that on the basis of one study and didn't consider how small the sample was and how wobbly the parameters of the study was. He also didn't address all the Ivermectin studies that had to be withdrawn for the same issues.

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02 great time to hold a year-or-two-long RCT to see if a drug has any effectiveness. Sure, a lot of people will die as we all wait for those RCTs, but a small price to pay to do things the right way, the way gov't officials say should be done.

Meanwhile rush through, in a few months, some questionable vaccines, or whatever they are, bc they come with the official approval of official public health officials, even as they aren't really technically fully approved by the usual processes, and even as they don't really do an effective job of stopping virus transmission.

up
8 users have voted.

@wokkamile

So you are saying that because science requires taking the time to make sure that very little or no harm is done is just a real pain in the ass, and that we should just dive into taking any treatment that is recommended by people on the internet?

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02 by science and the gov't to fully test these Covid vaccines? No long-term human studies done, unusual. Rushed to market in months, not the usual 2-5 yr time period.

And where is the harm wrt re-purposing a drug that's long been in use and has a track record for being safer than aspirin? That's called No Risk. Weigh the No Risk side of trying the drug, the IVM, with potential High Benefit of complete cure, versus the High Risk/No Benefit to that patient of doing nothing as the patient gets much worse, even dies, while the doctor waits for a long-term clinical trial. According to my math, the IVM approach wins hands down.

up
4 users have voted.

@wokkamile

using the mRNA delivery system. This system has been tested and used for several years before being applied to today's Covid vaccines.

https://the-dna-universe.com/2021/04/15/the-history-of-mrna-applications/

This is the information that I used to make my decision about whether to have the shots. If you actually take the time to read it, you will see that this is not just a year or two old. In fact, when my husband thought he might be diagnosed with melanoma, I found out that a vaccine to prevent/treat it using mRNA is probably coming to the market soon.

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

CB's picture

@Fishtroller 02
that are now ongoing under EUA. This site is just an advertisement of the potentials of the mRNA vaccines.

Vaccines

In 2009, researchers conducted the first-ever trial on cancer immunotherapy using mRNA-based vaccines in human subjects with metastatic melanoma. The results of the trial showed an increase in the number of vaccine-directed T cells against melanoma (Weide et al., 2009).

In 2020, the FDA approved the first mRNA-based vaccines against an infectious disease SARS-CoV-2. This was only made possible by decades of research on mRNA-based therapeutics.

The cancer immunotherapy is still in development. It is used for cancer patients that have no other recourse.

Note: FDA approved under Emergency Use Authorization. If anything goes wrong you can't hold the manufacturer responsible.

up
3 users have voted.
Cassiodorus's picture

@CB Otherwise some of this would be true:

https://factcheck.afp.com/us-cardiologist-makes-false-claims-about-covid...

up
2 users have voted.

"Freedom is always, and exclusively, freedom for the one who thinks differently.” -- Rosa Luxemburg

CB's picture

@Raggedy Ann
I did learn one think that is personally important to me. I knew that I was at risk for blood clots (especially in heart muscle) from COVID-19 since my ischemic stroke in April. My current prescription was for the 51 mg dose for aspirin so I will update it to a full dose. (They had been giving me the full dose in hospital.)

up
6 users have voted.

Are you then on "Team Anti-Vaxx"?

up
3 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

Raggedy Ann's picture

@Fishtroller 02 . Interesting.

up
4 users have voted.

"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11

@Raggedy Ann

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

Raggedy Ann's picture

up
5 users have voted.

"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11

QMS's picture

Education, dealing with factual information, assessing your best options is something positive we can be doing for each other here. I would suggest the V+ team versus the V- team is contra open discussion. Yeah, this whole damn thing has become politicized. Letting the creeping big brother issues overtake the sorting of sensible choices is just wrong, imo. Look at it from a survival point of view. Saving the world in a mixed-up info frappe doesn't solve much. The rulers care not whether we
sort out the daily new memes. Figure it out for your self.

up
10 users have voted.
Shahryar's picture

but instead make our own minds up. If you don't think vaccines do any good then don't take them. If you think they'll help then get a shot or two.

up
13 users have voted.
CB's picture

@Shahryar

up
3 users have voted.
Pricknick's picture

@Shahryar
This issue has made people act like children on this site.
We all need to grow up.

up
5 users have voted.

Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.

Cassiodorus's picture

@Shahryar that there's some sort of global conspiracy among the world's ICU employees to misinform the public about the proportion of their patients who are unvaccinated (nearly all of them in the last count).

Global conspiracies involving that many people are pretty hard to hide.

up
2 users have voted.

"Freedom is always, and exclusively, freedom for the one who thinks differently.” -- Rosa Luxemburg

mimi's picture

can you all relax and get along?

Please, please ´.

up
4 users have voted.

mimi

@mimi

Have you not been reading all the big long posts and watching all the shared videos promoting the Dr. Malones and the IVM studies etc. etc. that have been gracing the pages here lately?

I just thought it was my turn to speak.

I guess not-eh?

up
3 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

mimi's picture

@Fishtroller 02
and I am in the team anti-shmacks.

hallo there, I want a little fun and relax. I hope you don't mind, talk along, talk more. I think I posted this in the wrong diary.

Nothing for Ungood.

up
3 users have voted.

mimi

@mimi

was visiting me in disguise!

Allsgood.

up
0 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

QMS's picture

@Fishtroller 02

free range ideas and all that
try to leave an opening for contrary views
glad you can speak your mind here
others may bristle at whatever goes against
their beliefs, for one I find it enlightening
almost surprisingly delightful
like a gin-n-tonix with just a hint of lime

up
6 users have voted.
CB's picture

@QMS
It's like a rum and coke. But at least we can agree on the hint of lime!

up
6 users have voted.
QMS's picture

@CB

we all know things go better with coke
ginning up the limes is no worse than a
cupa libra. to each their own
I'll take mine with a side of truth serum
thank you very much

up
5 users have voted.
Lookout's picture

@QMS

by the coca cola cartel. They push high fructose corn sugar, and obviously YOU are addicted. It is all according to plan.

up
2 users have voted.

“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

CB's picture

@Lookout
I only buy my coke with the YELLOW caps. Dirol

up
1 user has voted.