Doc Robinson
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
chooch: “Is there any validity to this caveat in your opinion?”
I’m not a statistician, and I just skimmed part of that article, but IMHO there is some validity to the caveats:
For many reasons, there will be differences, possibly quite large ones, between the group of people who are vaccinated and the group who are not vaccinated, apart from the difference in vaccination status. So any difference in the rate of testing positive in the two groups could, in whole or in part, be caused by those other differences and not the vaccines at all…
…and those caveats also apply to conclusions about how wonderfully effective the vaccines are (for keeping people out of the hospital, etc.), as reported in countless media articles. “Funny” how the caveats are being brought to the forefront now that the vaccine effectiveness isn’t looking so good.
maryballon: “the source of the quote”
One source:
https://me582.wordpress.com/2021/10/26/what-financial-lies-lie-behind-covid-19/Susmarie108: “…Doc R – why do you think the numbers in New Mexico so different from those in other states? The unvax are the majority hospitalized!” [from yesterday’s comments]
Actually, my impression is that the official numbers for most (if not all) states in the US are showing that “the unvax are the majority hospitalized” with Covid.
In the UK, however, where the data collection is much more comprehensive and consistent, there are headlines like this one (from today’s Debt Rattle):
• Official UK Data Says COVID Infection Rates Higher in Vaxxed Than Unvaxxed [for the over 30’s]
“…this would mean the vaxxed and unvaxxed pose a comparable danger to each other… the official data undermines the entire argument behind vaccine passports”But the same UK reports say that hospitalization rates are still higher for the unvaxxed. This data supports the conclusion that the benefits of the vaxxes are more personal (reducing one’s own risk of hospitalization with Covid, for example) instead of benefitting society by slowing down and stopping the pandemic. This still leaves open the question of whether the purported benefits of the vaxxes outweigh the risks (which are not fully known).
The benefits and the risks both depend on individual characteristics (age, comorbidities, etc.) so it should be an individual assessment instead of a blanket prescription for everyone. Moreover, different people have different thresholds for acceptable risk. It’s obvious that many people, after considering the risks, would decide to take their chances with getting a Covid infection, rather than subject themselves to the risks of the vaxxes.
“According to the [New Mexico” health department’s most recent report on vaccinations, 90.6% of hospitalizations for COVID-19 are among people who are not fully vaccinated, as are 94.8% of deaths.”
The most recent report for New Mexico now shows that 82% of hospitalizations with Covid-19 (not necessarily for Covid-19) are not fully vaccinated, and 71% of deaths (with Covid-19 as a significant contributor to death) were not fully vaccinated, during the week of November 8-15.
29% of the recent Covid-19 deaths in New Mexico are thus in the fully vaccinated.
(Calculated from the Covid-19 Health and Social Characteristics Reports for Nov 8th and Nov 15.)
https://cv.nmhealth.org/epidemiology-reports/“During the week of November 1, UHS diagnosed 198 new cases, with 27% of all tests performed coming back positive. The week of November 8, there were 313 new cases, and the positive test rate increased to 37%.”
All those negative test results (for the flu) suggest that there are lots of Covid-vaxxed students with flu-like respiratory illnesses (prompting the students to get tested for the flu).
Regarding the flu outbreak among the 98% Covid-vaxxed students, “an outbreak of this size so early in flu season is concerning.”
The first positive test was on October 6, according to the college’s newspaper The University Record. Since then, 528 cases have been diagnosed by the University Health Service (UHS) on campus, with a large upswing over the past two weeks. During the week of November 1, UHS diagnosed 198 new cases, with 27% of all tests performed coming back positive. The week of November 8, there were 313 new cases, and the positive test rate increased to 37%.
It’s normal for cases of the flu to start going up as early as October—with flu activity typically peaking between December and February, per the CDC—but an outbreak of this size so early in flu season is concerning. “While we often start to see some flu activity now, the size of this outbreak is unusual”… The strain behind the Michigan outbreak is a subtype of the influenza A virus called H3N2, The University Record reports…
When it comes to distinguishing the flu from COVID-19, the illnesses can present so similarly that the only way to know is with diagnostic testing, according to the CDC. Overlapping symptoms include fever, chills, headache, fatigue, sore throat, runny or stuffy nose, cough, trouble breathing, and muscle or body aches. One differentiating symptom is losing your sense of smell or taste, which is more common with COVID-19 (though it can sometimes occur with the flu too, the CDC says). And it is possible to be infected with both at the same time, per the CDC.
https://www.self.com/story/university-of-michigan-flu-outbreak
“In early October, about 500 University of Michigan students on campus got the flu. Numbers are increasing. Last week along, more than 300 students got the flu.”
https://www.clickondetroit.com/all-about-ann-arbor/2021/11/16/university-of-michigan-flu-surge-expert-weighs-in-on-whats-happening-what-can-be-done/At the University of Michigan, 98% of students and 90% of staff have been fully vaccinated against Covid. I’d be interested to see data about whether the flu outbreaks this season are mostly affecting Covid-vaxxed or unvaxxed.
@ absolute galore
If you’re not going the mediation route (regarding future medical costs, etc.) and the vaxx is a done deal for your child, then this article makes the case for getting the 5-11 dose instead of waiting for the 12+ dose.
The article says “a smaller dose does not mean it is less effective” and it causes “fewer side effects.”
Should 11-Year-Olds Wait Until They Are 12 to Get a COVID-19 vaccine?
A smaller dose does not mean it is less effective
An FDA review showed that 2 doses of the 10 microgram dose had a 91 percent efficacy rate.“The trials found that in children aged 5-11, the lower dose (10 micrograms) produced similar levels of antibodies as the full dose in adults, caused fewer side effects, and provided high protection from COVID-19.”
“[Scientists] found for 11-almost-12 year-olds the lower dose worked well. The dose is based on immune system maturity, and waiting a few weeks for the larger dose is not necessary,”
“parents should be aware that their kids will have to get the same dose of the COVID-19 vaccine for both doses, meaning that if they turn 12 in the interim, they will not get an adult dose for the second shot.”
Kunstler: “…mothers who got vaxxed in early 2021 are just now giving birth to babies with myocarditis and other signature disorders of adverse mRNA vaccine reactions.”
I did a search for infant myocarditis, and the top result gave this statistic:
“Clinically, the manifestation of myocarditis is relatively uncommon in infants and children. It represented only 0.3% of 14,322 patients seen over a 23-year period at Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, Texas”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2805590/So here the historical number of myocarditis cases in babies is combined with the number of cases in all other children, and the total number of myocarditis cases seen by this big-city Children’s Hospital is only 2 cases per year, on average, for all ages of children.
If two cases per year is the baseline for all children, then if the Children’s Hospital sees more than one case of infant myocarditis, the vaccination status of the mothers should be scrutinized.
Meanwhile, at Texas Children’s Hospital:
Patrick, 9, received the COVID-19 vaccination at Texas Children’s Hospital on Wednesday, Nov. 3, 2021. (KPRC 2)Is it this guy?
Clif High is a computer scientist, linguist and enthusiastic futurist who has been credited as the founder of the Predictive Linguistics field.
“I’m not giving ‘Hopium’, I’m not saying that we’re all going into ‘The Wizard of Oz land’ as of any particular day, I’m saying we’ve got a very long hard, years of suffering, years of deprivation, years of shortages, years of your life changing until you will no longer even remember what we used to call Normal, and in that process of going through the agony, the suffering and the death, we will become a free humanity and that will be worth it.”
Clif High
[quoted on Delingpod]Year Woo – Woo War
(At the 8 minute mark he starts talking about vaccines.)
https://youtu.be/bkTCpmMf2uY@ absolute galore
This article is from a mainstream media source, written by professors of medicine at Harvard and Stanford (one of them an epidemiologist) who are pro-vaccine (“we should do everything we can to encourage vaccination for older people”).
The idea that everyone must be vaccinated against COVID-19 is as misguided as the anti-vax idea that no one should. The former is more dangerous for public health. The COVID-19 vaccines have been one of the few bright spots during this pandemic. While anyone can get infected, the old have a thousand-fold higher mortality risk than the young. By vaccinating older people, the country has saved thousands of lives…
First, all medical interventions should pass the test of providing more benefits than risks. For the COVID vaccine, this is decidedly true for older populations but it is not yet clear for younger people. While we know that COVID vaccines have common but mild adverse reactions, we will not know enough about rare but serious adverse reactions until a few years after vaccine approval.
For older people, this does not cause a dilemma. Even if there is a small risk of a serious adverse reaction, that is still better than the much higher risk of dying from COVID. Hence, we should do everything we can to encourage vaccination for older people, including less affluent people whom our health care system often has difficulty reaching.
For younger adults and children, it is a different story, as their mortality risk is extremely low. Even a slight risk of a serious vaccine adverse reaction could tip the benefit-risk calculation, making the vaccine more harmful than beneficial...
Martin Kulldorff, PhD, is a biostatistician, epidemiologist and professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. He does research on disease surveillance methods for post-market drug and vaccine safety surveillance and for the early detection and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD is a professor of medicine at Stanford University and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
The ill-advised push to vaccinate the young
BY MARTIN KULLDORFF AND JAY BHATTACHARYA
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/558757-the-ill-advised-push-to-vaccinate-the-youngI like the suggestion of negotiating a 6-month wait, or to be less arbitrary, waiting at least until the Pfizer injections are actually approved for 12-year-olds (they currently only have emergency use authorization for ages 12-15).
The FDA’s “Fact Sheet” for recipients of the Pfizer injections says this:
“Serious and unexpected side effects may occur. The possible side effects of the vaccine are still being studied in clinical trials.”@ ctbarnum
I did a google image search and found one that ended in .jpg for easier posting here:
@ Starfish
The information in this article was reviewed by six MDs before publication.
A practical approach to keeping healthy after your Covid-19 jab
https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/resources/a-practical-approach-to-keeping-healthy-after-your-covid-19-jab/bpeptide: “The big bird jabs are actually sufficiently diluted, that they are effectively a placebo, thus eliminating any short term side affects or long term risk for kids.”
I strongly disagree. The kids’ dosage has a third of the mRNA that’s in the adult dose, and a lot of kids in the 5-11 age group have less than a third of the body mass of adults.
In other words, the mRNA dose for many children would be higher than the adult dose, on a per-kilogram or per-pound basis.
Noirette: “I couldn’t find a date for these pieces. One should dig into DARPA.”
Versions of “Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics (ADEPT)” go back to 2015 at least:
—————————————
June 2015
Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics (ADEPT)
Col Daniel J. WattendorfThe Department of Defense must be able to provide health care anywhere in the world at anytime. Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics (ADEPT), is a five year program that seeks to provide Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines actionable information about their health, on-demand, by developing the following capabilities: diagnostics that can be carried on-person and self-administered, coupled with formats suitable for preservation of self-collected biospecimens for later expanded testing, if necessary; highly-multiplexed tests that can be performed outside of clinical laboratories; and, new methods to achieve effective immunity. These capabilities are being investigated through two efforts.
ADEPT – Diagnostics on Demand (DxOD): DxOD aims to enable in-vitro devices that address current clinical diagnostic needs and are reconfigurable to decrease the time to design, manufacture and rapidly distribute assays in response to an emerging diagnostic need. The program is addressing diagnostic technologies for use in two settings: diagnostics tailored for self-performed tests in limited resource settings and in point-of-care settings. These efforts will improve diagnostic capability and medical care in garrison, as well as in field, fleet, and air transport settings. An additional thrust of the DxOD effort includes capabilities to preserve, ship, archive and recover biomarkers from a self-collected biospecimen.
DARPA released a Request For Information related to this facet of the ADEPT program on November 14, 2011.
ADEPT – Controlling Cellular Machinery (CCM) includes two components and leverages advances to prevent, detect and treat disease using in-vivo and continuous monitoring methods.
Diagnostics and Therapeutics, launched in August 2011: advances the fundamental development and application of synthetic methods to detect, report and treat disease.
Vaccines, which began in September 2011: focuses on developing a non-integrating nucleic-acid based vaccine that has the potential to be safer and more effective than traditional vaccines.—————————————
April 2019
Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics (ADEPT)
COL Matthew Hepburn, MD, USAThe Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics (ADEPT) program supports individual troop readiness and total force health protection by developing technologies to rapidly identify and respond to threats posed by natural and engineered diseases and toxins. A subset of ADEPT technologies specifically support use by personnel with minimal medical training, delivering centralized laboratory capabilities even in the low-resource environments typical of many military operations. The program is part of a portfolio of DARPA-funded research aimed at providing options for preempting or mitigating constantly evolving infectious disease threats.
The ADEPT program’s four thrusts cover simple-to-use, on-demand diagnostics for medical decision-making and accurate threat-tracking; novel methods for rapidly manufacturing new types of vaccines with increased potency; novel tools to engineer mammalian cells for targeted drug delivery and in vivo diagnostics; and novel methods to impart near-immediate immunity to an individual using antibodies.
ADEPT has pioneered use of nucleic-acid-based anti-infective technologies, valuable for their efficacy and adaptability. These tools—primarily coded genetic instructions to the body on how to produce its own protective antibodies against a specific threat—have the advantages of being easily manufactured at scale using largely synthetic processes, transported and stored without many of the cold-chain logistics required by traditional medical countermeasures, delivered with near-immediate efficacy, and safely expressed in the body for only a limited duration, causing no permanent alteration to the genome.
—————————————
March 2020
Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics (ADEPT)
Dr. Amy JenkinsThe Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics (ADEPT) program supports individual troop readiness and total force health protection by developing technologies to rapidly identify and respond to threats posed by natural and engineered diseases and toxins. A subset of ADEPT technologies specifically support use by personnel with minimal medical training, delivering centralized laboratory capabilities even in the low-resource environments typical of many military operations. The program is part of a portfolio of DARPA-funded research aimed at providing options for preempting or mitigating constantly evolving infectious disease threats.
The ADEPT program’s four thrusts cover simple-to-use, on-demand diagnostics for medical decision-making and accurate threat-tracking; novel methods for rapidly manufacturing new types of vaccines with increased potency; novel tools to engineer mammalian cells for targeted drug delivery and in vivo diagnostics; and novel methods to impart near-immediate immunity to an individual using antibodies.
ADEPT has pioneered use of nucleic-acid-based anti-infective technologies, valuable for their efficacy and adaptability. These tools—primarily coded genetic instructions to the body on how to produce its own protective antibodies against a specific threat—have the advantages of being easily manufactured at scale using largely synthetic processes, transported and stored without many of the cold-chain logistics required by traditional medical countermeasures, delivered with near-immediate efficacy, and safely expressed in the body for only a limited duration, causing no permanent alteration to the genome.
—————————————
From the Wayback Machine at the Internet Archive
https://web.archive.org/web/20150628170424/https://www.darpa.mil/program/autonomous-diagnostics-to-enable-prevention-and-therapeuticsManipulated photo? (from above):
Compare to this video screenshot, where the message is different:
From this video, at 01:54
https://www.nfl.com/videos/patriots-hosting-mobile-covid-19-vaccination-site-at-camp-for-fans• Feds Pay Zero Claims For COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries/Deaths (ZH)
According to the .GOV website, the majority of Covid countermeasure claims are not due to the vaxx, but are instead related to a wide range of countermeasures such as ventilators and medications.
As far as which brand of vaxx is resulting in the most claims, they are not keeping track of it.
As of October 1, 2021, the CICP has not compensated any COVID-19 countermeasures claims….
This table displays the alleged countermeasure and alleged injury/death for each COVID-19 countermeasure claim filed as of October 1, 2021. Of the 3,158 COVID-19 countermeasure claims 1,357 allege injuries/deaths from COVID-19 vaccines and 1,801 allege injuries/deaths from other COVID-19 countermeasures.
The CICP does not maintain its aggregated data concerning alleged countermeasures, including vaccines, by specific manufacturer or trade name.
• Pfizer Shares Surge After Release Of ‘Miracle’ COVID Pill (ZH)
Some information about Pfizer’s Covid pill:
Pfizer is calling its medication Paxlovid with the study drug name of PF-07321332/ritonavir. Those of us with medicine training will recognize the ritonavir component as this is a medication used in HIV and has been around for decades…
The study found an 89% reduction in risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause compared to placebo in patients treated within three days of symptom onset…
Although these numbers sound extremely promising, when you plug in these numbers into your number needed to treat calculator, you find that you have to treat 16.1 patients to avoid one hospitalization or death from any cause…
In the Paxlovid group, no one died. These are high-risk patients (although we don’t know how high-risk) as a quick reminder. 1.6% of patients died in the placebo group at day 28. The numbers are too small to be academically honest and provide an accurate NNT but, just for fun, the NNT here is 62.5. This get you thinking a bit about the overall mortality rate of all this. If high-risk patients have a mortality rate of 1.6%, what does that mean for other populations? I’ll leave that for you to decide risk tolerance…
The number that I have read on various media outlets, and I don’t trust media outlets, is $700 a regimen. If we do math here, and know that we have to treat 16.1 people to keep one person out of the hospital, this means that we will be spending over $11,000 tax or debt dollars per hospitalization that we will be avoiding. Whether this is cost effective I leave up to your interpretation.
Paxlovid (PF-07321332/ritonavir) for outpatient COVID-19: EPIC-HR Trial
https://eddyjoemd.com/paxlovid/my parents said know: “What if some good soul were to get a box of cominarty and bring it to the US and give it to a bunch of people? And if those people suffered adverse events, would Pfizer be liable?”
A WaPo Fact Checker article reported “Indeed, contrary to the claims of Malone and others, the Comirnaty vaccine has the same liability protection as the vaccine approved under the EUA. That’s because… the PREP Act… covers all vaccines that might be produced to combat the coronavirus, whether fully authorized or not.”
Dr. Robert Malone later agreed with the WaPo article, saying “Very nice coverage of this by Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post. Yes, I got it wrong at first, and then corrected myself (including here)… I am very grateful that Glenn took the time to discuss the truth of the liability situation, which is actually worse than I had thought!”
It’s worse because according to the WaPo, Comirnaty has the same liability shield as the EUA products, as long as the PREP Act emergency is still in effect, so the vaxx-injured have to rely on the government CICP program for any compensation, but the CICP has so far paid $zero compensation for Covid vax injury claims.
https://twitter.com/RWMaloneMD/status/1432325367591809027
The CICP website currently says:
“Has the CICP made any decisions regarding COVID-19 Claims?
As of October 1, 2021, the CICP has not compensated any COVID-19 countermeasures claims.”Now another ethical problem: bribing kids (age 5-11) to get their uninformed “consent”.
“These states and cities are offering to pay kids if they get vaccinated”
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/05/us/children-covid-19-vaccine-incentives/index.htmlIn New York City, children can claim $100 if they get their first dose of Pfizer’s vaccine at city-operated vaccine site… In Chicago, health officials are also offering $100 gift cards for children ages five to 11 when they get the shots at Chicago Public Health events or clinics…
In Texas, San Antonio officials announced that parents and guardians who help their children get vaccinated at a public health clinic may claim a $100 gift card for H-E-B grocery stores. And in neighboring Louisiana, officials said the 5-11 age group could soon also claim $100.
From Steve Kirsch:
Here’s the real reason Comirnaty is not available
It’s all about liability. It will magically become available when the vaccine for children is fully approved, not before.The reason Comirnaty isn’t available is because those shots would expose the company to liability since the fully-licensed product doesn’t have the liability waiver of the EUA product.
But once the Pfizer vaccine is fully approved in kids, then Pfizer gets liability waiver on all age groups due to a “feature” in federal law for child vaccines (NCVIA). At that time, they are done. They can market the COVID vaccine products under full approval for all age groups and face no liability when it kills or disables you.
This is why they are focused on the kids. This is why there is a reformulation at a 1/3 dose and they changed the buffer and the storage conditions (low temperatures not required). All of these will weaken the protection, but result in a safer vaccine (since it is ineffective).
But for the clinical trials on the 5-11 year olds, they did not use the formulation they approved in the meeting…
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/heres-the-real-reason-comirnaty-is
Are Vaccines Driving Excess Deaths in Scotland, a Professor of Biology Asks
…we can see that these ‘Other’ deaths are occurring at home, implying that they are likely to have been sudden because there has been no hospital admission. Furthermore, these excess deaths are not confined to the oldest age groups, where we expect most deaths, but are extended into the younger age group. Analysis of the timing of this rise in excess death shows that it started in the oldest age group and is initiated sequentially in ever younger age groups (see graph below). This strongly suggests that there is some cause for these excess deaths at home that operates first in the elderly and works its way sequentially down the age groups in Scotland. What could this be?
Published in Newsweek:
How Fauci Fooled America
by Martin Kulldorff and Jay Bhattacharya“…Unfortunately, Dr. Fauci got major epidemiology and public health questions wrong. Reality and scientific studies have now caught up with him…
By pushing vaccine mandates, Dr. Fauci ignores naturally acquired immunity among the COVID-recovered, of which there are more than 45 million in the United States… Under Fauci’s mandates, hospitals are firing heroic nurses who recovered from COVID they contracted while caring for patients. With their superior immunity, they can safely care for the oldest and frailest patients with even lower transmission risk than the vaccinated…
After more than 700,000 reported COVID deaths in America, we now know that lockdowns failed to protect high-risk older people. When confronted with the idea of focused protection of the vulnerable, Dr. Fauci admitted he had no idea how to accomplish it, arguing that it would be impossible. That may be understandable for a lab scientist, but public health scientists have presented many concrete suggestions that would have helped, had Fauci and other officials not ignored them…
Considering the devastating effects of school closures on children, Dr. Fauci’s advocacy for school closures may be the single biggest mistake of his career…
A fundamental public health principle is that health is multidimensional; the control of a single infectious disease is not synonymous with health. As an immunologist, Dr. Fauci failed to properly consider and weigh the disastrous effects lockdowns would have on cancer detection and treatment, cardiovascular disease outcomes, diabetes care, childhood vaccination rates, mental health and opioid overdoses, to name a few. Americans will live with—and die from—this collateral damage for many years to come…
Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D., is an epidemiologist, biostatistician, and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School.
Jay Bhattacharya, MD, Ph.D., is a Professor of Health Policy at Stanford University School of Medicine.https://www.newsweek.com/how-fauci-fooled-america-opinion-1643839
Q: why doesn’t molnupiravir interfere with the vaccines’ EUA?
A: For a similar reason as to why the existence of the FDA-approved vaxx “Comirnaty” didn’t interfere with the other vaxx EUAs. If the drug companies don’t make enough of the product available “to fully meet the emergency need” then the EUA products can keep their EUAs.
For FDA to issue an EUA, there must be no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the candidate product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating the disease or condition. A potential alternative product may be considered “unavailable” if there are insufficient supplies of the approved alternative to fully meet the emergency need.
Emergency Use Authorization of Medical Products and Related Authorities
Guidance for Industry and Other Stakeholders
https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/emergency-use-authorization-medical-products-and-related-authoritiesAn important peer-reviewed study looked at the CDC’s data on pregnancy losses following the mRNA injections, and found that more than 80% of those who got the injections during the first 5 months of pregnancy ended up with a spontaneous abortion (which is 7- to 8-times higher than the expected baseline of around 11%)
The study indicates that at least 81.9% (≥104/127) experienced spontaneous abortion following mRNA exposure before 20 weeks, and 92.3% (96/104) of spontaneous abortions occurred before 13 weeks’ gestation (Table 4, footnotes).[4] This is a very high proportion of pregnancy loss observed in those exposed to the mRNA vaccination before 20 weeks’ gestation, ranging from 81.9–91.2% (n = 114–127), which is significantly different to baseline estimates from other studies (11.3%, n = 79,978 [6]; p < 0.001), being 7- to 8-fold higher than expected (p < 0.001).
Spontaneous Abortions and Policies on COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Use During Pregnancy
https://cf5e727d-d02d-4d71-89ff-9fe2d3ad957f.filesusr.com/ugd/adf864_2bd97450072f4364a65e5cf1d7384dd4.pdf“@pfizer Asked The @FDATo Change Their “Approved” #COVID19 Shot For Children Age 5-11 Years Old!
Pfizer Wants To Replace Phosphate-Buffered Saline With #Tromethamine.”A new Pfizer formulation (with Tromethamine) was also authorized for adults (and 12+) according to the October 29 emergency-authorization letter for children age 5-11.
The formulation of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine that uses Tris [Tromethamine] buffer is authorized in two presentations:
1) Multiple dose vials, with gray caps and labels with a gray border, formulated to provide, without need for dilution, doses (each 0.3 mL dose containing 30 µg nucleosidemodified messenger RNA (modRNA)) for individuals 12 years of age and older; and
2) Multiple dose vials, with orange caps and labels with an orange border, formulated to provide, after dilution, doses (each 0.2 mL dose containing 10 µg modRNA) for individuals 5 through 11 years of age. [page 3]Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine EUA LOA reissued October 29 2021
https://www.fda.gov/media/150386/downloadI found no mention of any clinical testing done on adults with this new formula. So there are now 2 versions of the Pfizer injections for adults (and 12+), plus a lower-dose version for kids 5-11, plus the COMIRNATY brand which is unavailable in the US.
Published today in the British Medical Journal BMJ:
Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial
Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight.
https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635For example, they “lacked enough employees to swab all trial participants who reported covid-like symptoms, to test for infection. Laboratory confirmed symptomatic covid-19 was the trial’s primary endpoint, the employee noted. (An FDA review memorandum released in August this year states that across the full trial swabs were not taken from 477 people with suspected cases of symptomatic covid-19.)”
• Dutch Customs Impound 55,000 Doses Of Ivermectin Sent To Private Buyers (DN)
Meanwhile in Amsterdam,
“EU Medicines Agency starts review of Merck oral COVID-19 drug molnupiravir”To get a reported 50% reduction in hospitalizations and deaths, as claimed in a press release, Merck is charging $712 (wholesale to the US government) for each treatment (pills for 5 days). Along with a high price, these pills could come with a significant risk of cancer or birth defects, due to mutagenesis.
β-d-N4-hydroxycytidine (NHC, initial metabolite of molnupiravir) is >100-fold more active than ribavirin or favipiravir against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), with antiviral activity correlated to the level of mutagenesis in virion RNA. However, NHC also displays host mutational activity in an animal cell culture assay, consistent with RNA and DNA precursors sharing a common intermediate of a ribonucleoside diphosphate. These results indicate highly active mutagenic ribonucleosides may hold risk for the host…
Evaluating the utility of this drug should be done in those likely to receive the greatest benefit with monitoring provided to assess potential long-term genotoxic side effects.
β-d-N4-hydroxycytidine Inhibits SARS-CoV-2 Through Lethal Mutagenesis But Is Also Mutagenic To Mammalian Cells
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC8136050/Could ivermectin have similar cancer-causing properties? A search for medical studies related to ivermectin and cancer shows the opposite:
Ivermectin has been shown to fight various types of cancer.
Some of the studies:Anti-parasite drug ivermectin can suppress ovarian cancer by regulating lncRNA-EIF4A3-mRNA axes
Ivermectin induces PAK1-mediated cytostatic autophagy in breast cancer
Antibiotic ivermectin preferentially targets renal cancer through inducing mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative damage
Ivermectin reverses the drug resistance in cancer cells through EGFR/ERK/Akt/NF-κB pathway
Ivermectin induces cytostatic autophagy by blocking the PAK1/Akt axis in breast cancer
Ivermectin as an inhibitor of cancer stem‑like cells
Progress in understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying the antitumour effects of ivermectin [NIH]
The multitargeted drug ivermectin: from an antiparasitic agent to a repositioned cancer drug [NIH]
A study from Germany did some postmortem exams of deaths occurring after the Covid vaxx injections. They found myocarditis in somebody who got the Pfizer vaxx. They said it’s an autoimmune process which leads to myocarditis after vaccination. They also referenced a hospital study showing that twice as many myocarditis cases were diagnosed postmortem, compared to premortem. Their conclusion was that postmortem investigations are necessary for all fatalities following the Covid vaxx. Of course, this is not happening.
IMAGE
“Case 6 with myocarditis with lymphocytic and plasmocytic infiltration of the perivascular space (black down-pointing triangle) and the myocard (downward arrow) (H&E, Orig. Magn. 100 ×)”It is suspected that myocarditis caused by vaccines is the result of an autoimmune phenomenon. However, a verification of a causal relationship between myocarditis and COVID-19 vaccination is not yet possible.
Symptoms of myocarditis following other vaccinations have been reported after 1 week at the earliest. Due to the considerably earlier occurrence of myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccinations, the 1st vaccination, rather than the 2nd vaccination, is suspected to possibly trigger the autoimmune processes leading to myocarditis [45].
Regarding our investigated case of myocarditis, the period between the 2nd vaccination with a COVID-19 vaccine and the time of death was 11 h, which is also quite short. A causal relationship to vaccination was considered possible, but could not be proven beyond doubt.
The postmortem confirmation of myocarditis requires histologic examination of the heart and fulfillment of the Dallas criteria [5, 6]. Kytö et al. [36] reevaluated all cases of myocarditis diagnosed postmortem in Finland between 1970 and 1998. Among patients who died at a hospital, only one-third of the myocarditis cases had been diagnosed premortem. This result clearly emphasizes the importance of autopsies and histopathological examinations for the diagnosis of myocarditis not only for those who died at home but also for those who died at a hospital.
Conclusions
The results of our study demonstrate the necessity of postmortem investigations on all fatalities following vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines.Postmortem investigation of fatalities following vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00414-021-02706-9“people with covid jabs have been less likely to die of other causes”
I’ll repeat my earlier comment about that study:
The actual report from the CDC shows that the study only sampled the portion of the population which got a flu shot during the past two years. And they don’t look at deaths occurring after July. So a more accurate summary would be this:
People who got a flu shot during the past 2 years, but then didn’t get a Covid shot, had a higher non-Covid mortality rate than the people who got a Covid shot, when looking at the number of deaths from December 14, 2020 up to July 31, 2021.
Do these results apply to the overall population? According to the CDC, only about half of the adult population in the US got a flu shot during the 2019-2020 season.
(“during the 2019–20 flu season… flu vaccination coverage among adults ≥18 years was 48.4%, an increase of 3.1 percentage points from the prior season.”)This to me is the most important sentence in the CDC’s study report:
“Lower rates of non–COVID-19 mortality in [COVID-]vaccinated groups suggest that COVID-19 vaccinees are inherently healthier or engage in fewer risk behaviors; future analyses will address these issues.”
So the study results suggest that people who got the Covid shots are overall more likely to be healthier to start with and/or take less risks. But the mainstream media coverage makes it sound like the injections result in less mortality.
An interesting study of the “Swedish Total Population” shows how the vaxx effectiveness crashes and goes into negative numbers (causing more Covid infections in the vaxxed, compared to unvaxxed, after 240 days from being fully vaxxed.
Only the summary is available without an account, but this graph from the study was posted at Peak Prosperity today:
Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccination Against Risk of Symptomatic Infection, Hospitalization, and Death Up to 9 Months: A Swedish Total-Population Cohort Study
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3949410chooch: “I am looking for a recent link the some data showing vax/unvax viral load comparisons. Both symptomatic and asymptomatic groups compared.”
Shedding of Infectious SARS-CoV-2 Despite Vaccination when the Delta Variant is Prevalent – Wisconsin, July 2021
…these results indicate that some individuals who are infected despite vaccination can have high viral loads and shed infectious virus even while being asymptomatic… . Our detection of infectious virus in 93% of samples with Ct <25 indicates that high viral loads are consistent with the potential to transmit SARS-CoV-2, regardless of the individual’s vaccination status…
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.31.21261387v3.full.pdf
Some more studies related to transmission are listed in this article:
22 Studies and Reports that Raise Profound Doubts about Vaccine Efficacy for the General Population
https://brownstone.org/articles/22-studies-and-reports-that-raise-profound-doubts-about-vaccine-efficacy-for-the-general-population/Covid-19: UK stockpiles two unapproved antiviral drugs for treatment at home
https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2602The UK has started stockpiling two antiviral drugs as part of a plan to give people who are staying at home with covid-19 a treatment to reduce symptoms and the spread of the virus.
The government has purchased 480 000 courses of molnupiravir (made by Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD)) and 250 000 courses of the combination of PF-07321332 and ritonavir (Pfizer), neither of which have been approved by the UK’s regulator of medicines…
Previous stockpiling: Tamiflu
The government’s previous record on stockpiling of antivirals had proved controversial, particularly oseltamivir (Tamiflu), stockpiled on a large scale after the 2009 H1N1 “swine” flu pandemic, despite a lack of evidence to support its use…
The 2014 Cochrane review that followed found no compelling evidence to support claims that oseltamivir [Tamiflu] reduced the risk of flu complications, such as pneumonia and hospital admission, which were used to justify international stockpiling.The NIH information gives ivermectin a D rating for liver damage (“possible rare cause of mild clinically apparent liver injury”), while acetaminophen (Tylenol, paracetamol) gets an A rating (“well established cause of liver injury, but severe cases occur only with high doses”).
Liver damage is a more of a concern with acetaminophen (aka Tylenol, Paracetamol), “the leading cause of drug-induced acute liver failure in many developed countries.”
Mechanisms of acetaminophen-induced liver injury and its implications for therapeutic interventions
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29753208/boilingfrog: I’ve been trying to find out about this claim of ‘liver damage’
The FLCCC (Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care alliance) has this in their FAQ on ivermectin:
“Can ivermectin be given to patients with acute or chronic liver disease?”
In regards to liver disease, ivermectin is well tolerated, given that there is only a single case of liver injury reported one month after use that rapidly recovered, ivermectin has not been associated with acute liver failure or chronic liver injury. Further, no dose adjustments are required in patients with liver disease.The NIH has extensive information on “Clinical and Research Information on Drug-Induced Liver Injury” and the section on ivermectin says there has only been one case of apparent liver injury reported after ivermectin use, and “recovery was rapid and complete.” The NIH concluded that ivermectin is a “possible rare cause of mild clinically apparent liver injury.”
Hepatotoxicity
Single dose therapy with ivermectin has been associated with a low rate of serum aminotransferase elevations. A single case of clinically apparent liver injury has been reported after ivermectin use (Case 1). The onset of injury occurred 1 month after a single dose and was characterized by a hepatocellular pattern of serum enzyme elevations without jaundice. Recovery was rapid and complete. In trials of ivermectin to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and to ameliorate the course of early as well as severe COVID-19, serum aminotransferase elevations were not uncommon but were no more frequent among patients receiving ivermectin than among those receiving placebo or a comparator drug.Likelihood score: D (possible rare cause of mild clinically apparent liver injury).
Steve Kirsch’s presentation to the FDA’s advisory committee meeting today:
The FDA’s advisory committee just finished voting:
17 in favor of the Pfizer injections in kids 5-11
1 abstentionThe FDA advisory committee meeting, on whether the Pfizer injections should be authorized for children age 5-11, is happening right now, and currently is live-streaming the public input portion (3 minutes per speaker):
Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee – 10/26/2021
4,324 watching now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laaL0_xKmmA
