Covidiots - Compilation
- Thread starter MarketDiver
- Start date
https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/covid19-vaccinesan-australian-review.pdf
From Steve Kirsch's article:
A worldwide Bayesian causal Impact analysis suggests that COVID-19 gene therapy (mRNA vaccine) causes more COVID-19 cases per million and more non-Covid deaths per million than are associated with COVID-19 [43].
An abundance of studies has shown that the mRNA vaccines are neither safe nor effective, but outright dangerous.
Other key insights from the paper
If you don’t have time to read the entire paper, here are some of the highlights.
Here are some other direct quotes from the paper:
COVID-19 vaccines cause more side effects than any other vaccine
Not only does spike protein produce unwanted side effects, but mRNA and nanoparticles do as well.
Never in vaccine history have we seen 1011 case studies showing side effects of a vaccine (https://www.saveusnow.org.uk/covid-vaccine-scientific-proof-lethal).
Again, it is inconceivable why it would be impossible to go through the study data in a few months, when it took the CDC less than 4 weeks to give the injections emergency use authorization - unless you want to entertain the idea that the study data were never actually read and scrutinised, a frightening perspective.
The official public message is that the mRNA vaccines are safe. However, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), the medicine and therapeutic regulatory agency of the Australian Government, states quite clearly on their website that the large-scale trials are still progressing and no full data package has been received from any company.
The mRNA vaccines were supposed to remain at the injection site and be taken up by the lymphatic system. This assumption proved to be wrong. During an autopsy of a vaccinated person that had died after mRNA vaccination it was found that the vaccine disperses rapidly from the injection site and can be found in nearly all parts of the body [1]. … Research has shown that such nanoparticles can cross the blood-brain barrier and the blood-placenta barrier.
Despite not being able to prove a causal link with vaccines, as no autopsies were performed, they still believed that a link with vaccination is possible and further analysis is warranted.
In summary, it is unknown where exactly the vaccine travels once it is injected, and how much spike protein is produced in which (and how many) cells.
The S1 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein when injected into transgenic mice overexpressing human ACE-2 caused a COVID-19 like response. It was further shown that the spike protein S1 subunit, when added to red blood cells in vitro, could induce clotting.
The authors found consistent alteration of gene expression following vaccination in many different immune cell types.
Seneff et al (2022) describe another mechanism by which the mRNA vaccines could interfere with DNA repair.
It is an amazing fact that natural immunity is completely disregarded by health authorities around the world. We know from SARSCoV-1 that natural immunity is durable and persists for at least 12-17 years [17]. Immunologists have suggested that immunity to SARS-Cov-2 is no different
Immunity induced by COVID infection is robust and long lasting.
mRNA vaccines seem to suppress interferon responses. A literature review by Cardozo and Veazev [26] concluded that COVID-19 vaccines could potentially worsen COVID-19 disease.
Natural immunity is still not accepted as proof of immunity in Australia.
A study at the University of California followed up on infections in the workforce after 76% had been fully vaccinated with mRNA vaccines by March 2021 and 86.7% by July 2021. In July 2021 75.2% of the fully vaccinated workforce had symptomatic COVID.
Acharya et al. (2021) and Riemersma et al. (2021) both showed that the vaccinated have very high viral loads similar to the unvaccinated and are therefore as infectious.
Brown et al. (2021) and Servelitta et al (2021) suggested that vaccinated people with symptomatic infection by variants, such as Delta, are as infectious as symptomatic unvaccinated cases and will contribute to the spread of COVID even in highly vaccinated communities.
Countries with higher vaccination rates have also higher caseloads. It was shown that the median of new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people was largely similar to the percent of the fully vaccinated population.
Multiple recent studies have indicated that the vaccinated are more likely to be infected with Omicron than the unvaccinated. A study by Kirsch (2021) from Denmark suggests that people who received the mRNA vaccines are up to eight times more likely to develop Omicron than those who did not [40]. This and a later study by Kirsch (2022a) conclude that the more one vaccinates, the more one becomes susceptible to COVID-19 infection [41].
This has to be seen in context with the small risk of dying from COVID-19… The chances of someone under 18 years old dying from COVID is near 0%. Those that die usually have severe underlying medical conditions. It is estimated that children are seven times more at risk to die from influenza than from COVID-19. [Editor’s note: so why do colleges mandate the COVID vaccine instead of the influenza vaccine?]
From Steve Kirsch's article:
A worldwide Bayesian causal Impact analysis suggests that COVID-19 gene therapy (mRNA vaccine) causes more COVID-19 cases per million and more non-Covid deaths per million than are associated with COVID-19 [43].
An abundance of studies has shown that the mRNA vaccines are neither safe nor effective, but outright dangerous.
Other key insights from the paper
If you don’t have time to read the entire paper, here are some of the highlights.
Here are some other direct quotes from the paper:
COVID-19 vaccines cause more side effects than any other vaccine
Not only does spike protein produce unwanted side effects, but mRNA and nanoparticles do as well.
Never in vaccine history have we seen 1011 case studies showing side effects of a vaccine (https://www.saveusnow.org.uk/covid-vaccine-scientific-proof-lethal).
Again, it is inconceivable why it would be impossible to go through the study data in a few months, when it took the CDC less than 4 weeks to give the injections emergency use authorization - unless you want to entertain the idea that the study data were never actually read and scrutinised, a frightening perspective.
The official public message is that the mRNA vaccines are safe. However, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), the medicine and therapeutic regulatory agency of the Australian Government, states quite clearly on their website that the large-scale trials are still progressing and no full data package has been received from any company.
The mRNA vaccines were supposed to remain at the injection site and be taken up by the lymphatic system. This assumption proved to be wrong. During an autopsy of a vaccinated person that had died after mRNA vaccination it was found that the vaccine disperses rapidly from the injection site and can be found in nearly all parts of the body [1]. … Research has shown that such nanoparticles can cross the blood-brain barrier and the blood-placenta barrier.
Despite not being able to prove a causal link with vaccines, as no autopsies were performed, they still believed that a link with vaccination is possible and further analysis is warranted.
In summary, it is unknown where exactly the vaccine travels once it is injected, and how much spike protein is produced in which (and how many) cells.
The S1 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein when injected into transgenic mice overexpressing human ACE-2 caused a COVID-19 like response. It was further shown that the spike protein S1 subunit, when added to red blood cells in vitro, could induce clotting.
The authors found consistent alteration of gene expression following vaccination in many different immune cell types.
Seneff et al (2022) describe another mechanism by which the mRNA vaccines could interfere with DNA repair.
It is an amazing fact that natural immunity is completely disregarded by health authorities around the world. We know from SARSCoV-1 that natural immunity is durable and persists for at least 12-17 years [17]. Immunologists have suggested that immunity to SARS-Cov-2 is no different
Immunity induced by COVID infection is robust and long lasting.
mRNA vaccines seem to suppress interferon responses. A literature review by Cardozo and Veazev [26] concluded that COVID-19 vaccines could potentially worsen COVID-19 disease.
Natural immunity is still not accepted as proof of immunity in Australia.
A study at the University of California followed up on infections in the workforce after 76% had been fully vaccinated with mRNA vaccines by March 2021 and 86.7% by July 2021. In July 2021 75.2% of the fully vaccinated workforce had symptomatic COVID.
Acharya et al. (2021) and Riemersma et al. (2021) both showed that the vaccinated have very high viral loads similar to the unvaccinated and are therefore as infectious.
Brown et al. (2021) and Servelitta et al (2021) suggested that vaccinated people with symptomatic infection by variants, such as Delta, are as infectious as symptomatic unvaccinated cases and will contribute to the spread of COVID even in highly vaccinated communities.
Countries with higher vaccination rates have also higher caseloads. It was shown that the median of new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people was largely similar to the percent of the fully vaccinated population.
Multiple recent studies have indicated that the vaccinated are more likely to be infected with Omicron than the unvaccinated. A study by Kirsch (2021) from Denmark suggests that people who received the mRNA vaccines are up to eight times more likely to develop Omicron than those who did not [40]. This and a later study by Kirsch (2022a) conclude that the more one vaccinates, the more one becomes susceptible to COVID-19 infection [41].
This has to be seen in context with the small risk of dying from COVID-19… The chances of someone under 18 years old dying from COVID is near 0%. Those that die usually have severe underlying medical conditions. It is estimated that children are seven times more at risk to die from influenza than from COVID-19. [Editor’s note: so why do colleges mandate the COVID vaccine instead of the influenza vaccine?]
And once again we should note that Steve Kirsch is a demented anti-vaxxer who pushes endless Covid misinformation. The nonsense he is pushing above has been debunked numerous times.
Last edited:
View attachment 307753
So many nails it's in an iron coffin by now.
Meeting Coverage > CROI
Higher Dose of Ivermectin, and for Longer, Still No Help Against COVID
— Losing streak continues for controversial antiparasitic
by Ed Susman, Contributing Writer, MedPage TodayFebruary 23, 2023
"These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in outpatients with COVID-19," said Naggie.
One death and four hospitalizations occurred in the ivermectin group versus no deaths and two hospitalizations in the placebo group. Overall, adverse events (AEs) were uncommon in both arms.
Results of the trial were published simultaneously in JAMAopens in a new tab or window.
In an accompanying editor's noteopens in a new tab or window, JAMA Editor-in-Chief Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, MD, PhD, and Preeti Malani, MD, MSJ, the journal's deputy editor, pointed out that a 2022 Cochrane meta-analysisopens in a new tab or window of 11 eligible studies showed no benefit with ivermectin for COVID-19, and that three randomized trials since then have all reached the same conclusion.
Yet the negative trials failed to silence proponents of the controversial antiparasitic, with criticism often lobbed at the dosage selected or duration of treatment used in trials.
"Today JAMA publishes a new trial of ivermectin treatment for mild to moderate COVID-19 that addresses the possibility that the existing literature may have missed the efficacy of ivermectin because the previously tested dose -- approximately 400 μg/kg daily for 3 daysopens in a new tab or window -- was insufficient," they wrote. "At a higher treatment dose -- 600 μg/kg daily and longer treatment duration of 6 days, Naggie and colleagues again conclude that ivermectin is not beneficial for the treatment of COVID-19."
Although AEs were not significantly different between the ivermectin and placebo groups, Bibbins-Domingo and Malani cautioned that ivermectin treatment for COVID-19 could still be harmful, particularly if it delays the use of other proven interventions.
Naggie's group said a strength of the current study was that 83.5% had received at least two doses of vaccine, "thus representing a highly relevant study population," noting that past ivermectin trials had excluded vaccinated participants. No different effect by vaccination status was seen for the primary endpoint of time to sustained recovery, which was defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms.
In an accompanying editorialopens in a new tab or window, Alex John London, PhD, of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, and Christopher Seymour, MD, of the University of Pittsburgh, highlighted that despite all the evidence against it thus far, ivermectin studies continued, perhaps at the expense of other more fruitful endeavors.
"Decisions about what investigations to undertake must be responsive to the relative social value of continuing to reduce uncertainty around one intervention, and stakeholders must consider whether scarce time, resources, and participant effort could be better invested examining other questions," they wrote.
The current arm of the ACTIV-6 platform trial recruited from February 2022 to July 2022 at 93 sites in the U.S., and ultimately included 1,206 participants with confirmed COVID-19. Participants were randomized to ivermectin at a daily targeted maximum dose of 600 μg/kg for 6 days (n=602) or placebo (n=604).
Participants had a median age of 48 years, about 60% were women, and three-fourths were white. About a quarter of the individuals had hypertension, 13-16% had asthma, and 9% had diabetes.
Participants had to have at least two COVID-19 symptoms for no longer than 7 days before enrollment. From symptom onset, the median time to enrollment was 3 and 60% received treatment within 5 days. Exclusion criteria included hospitalization, ivermectin use within the past 14 days, and known allergy or contraindication to the study drug.
Concurrent use of standard therapies for COVID-19 was allowed. Here, 2.5% of patients on the ivermectin arm received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (Paxlovid) versus 4.3% of placebo patients. Other treatments included the use of monoclonal antibodies in 4.2% and 3.6%, respectively, and molnupiravir in 0.2% and 0.8%.
Disclosures
Ed Susman is a freelance medical writer based in Fort Pierce, Florida, USA.
ACTIV-6 was funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) and supported by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority.
Naggie disclosed relationships with Gilead, AbbVie, Pardes Biosciences, Silverback Therapeutics, Vir Biotechnology, Personal Health Insights, and Bristol Myers Squibb/PRA Health Sciences.
Bibbins-Domingo, Malani, and London disclosed no relationships with industry.
Seymour disclosed relationships with Inotrem and Beckman Coulter, as well as support from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences.
Primary Source
JAMA
Source Reference: opens in a new tab or windowNaggie S, et al "Effect of higher-dose ivermectin for 6 days vs placebo on time to sustained recovery in outpatients with COVID-19: a randomized clinical trial" JAMA 2023; DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.1650.
Secondary Source
JAMA
Source Reference: opens in a new tab or windowLondon AJ, Seymour CW "The ethics of clinical research: managing persistent uncertainty" JAMA 2023; DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.1675.
Additional Source
JAMA
Source Reference: opens in a new tab or windowBibbins-Domingo K, Malani PN "At a higher dose and longer duration, ivermectin still not effective against COVID-19" JAMA 2023; DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.1922.
However these clowns pushing Ivermectin don't believe in science and facts. It's all about their grifts. Now that Covid is less of a threat, they have moved on to claiming the Flu and RSV can be cured by Ivermectin so they can keep selling their tele-medical appointments hauling in millions of dollars. It's all a grift based on lies. And sadly there are people stupid enough to believe it.
Pro-Ivermectin Doctors’ Group Shifts Focus to Common Flu
https://www.thedailybeast.com/front...ce-pushes-ivermectin-as-treatment-for-flu-rsv
A group of physicians and scientists dedicated to relentlessly pushing ivermectin as a remedy for COVID-19 has pivoted to evangelizing the dewormer as an effective treatment for the flu and RSV, according to The Washington Post.
Pierre Kory, a co-founder of the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance, also known by its handy acronym FLCCC, told the newspaper that the alliance had begun exploring how “covid-like” respiratory infections “might respond to novel treatments.” The group’s ivermectin “treatment protocols” for COVID, the flu, and RSV have been downloaded more than a million times, the Post reported.
Kory explained that the so-called protocols had been developed “using medical and scientific research (including over 80 references to peer reviewed studies) as well as clinical data from doctors currently treating patients.”
A CDC spokeswoman told the Post that ivermectin was “not recommended” for prevention or treatment of the flu, and that “ivermectin has not been proven as a way to prevent or treat RSV.”
Read it at The Washington Post
Marty Makary MD, MPH is a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and author of “The Price We Pay:
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/h...d/news-story/d414984470291668356217f4b3fa1f9c
Misinformation #1: Natural immunity offers little protection compared to vaccinated immunity
A Lancet study looked at 65 major studies in 19 countries on natural immunity. The researchers concluded that natural immunity was at least as effective as the primary Covid vaccine series.
In fact, the scientific data was there all along — from 160 studies, despite the findings of these studies violating Facebook’s “misinformation” policy.
Since the Athenian plague of 430 B.C., it has been observed that those who recovered after infection were protected against severe disease if reinfected. That was also the observation of nearly every practising physician during the first 18 months of the Covid pandemic.
Most Americans were fired for not having the Covid vaccine already had antibodies that effectively neutralised the virus, but they were antibodies that the government did not recognise.
Misinformation #2: Masks prevent Covid transmission
Cochran Reviews are considered the most authoritative and independent assessment of evidence in medicine. And one published last month by a highly-respected Oxford research team found that masks had no significant impact on Covid transmission.
When asked about this definitive review, CDC Director Dr Rochelle Walensky downplayed it, arguing that it was flawed because it focused on randomised controlled studies.
But that was the greatest strength of the review! Randomised studies are considered the gold standard of medical evidence. If all the energy used by public health officials to mask toddlers could have channelled to reduce child obesity by encouraging outdoor activities, we would be better off.
NEWS.COM.AU01:01
Pink: My son's experience of Covid was 'very scary'
UP NEXT
Pop star Pink has opened up about her son's experience of COVID-19, admitting it was "very scary".
Misinformation #3: School closures reduce Covid transmission
The CDC ignored the European experience of keeping schools open, most without mask mandates. Transmission rates were no different, evidenced by studies conducted Spain and Sweden.
Misinformation #4: Myocarditis from the vaccine is less common than from the infection
Public health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine-induced myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle. They cited poorly designed studies that under-captured complication rates. A flurry of well-designed studies said the opposite. We now know that myocarditis is six to 28-times more common after the Covid vaccine than after the infection among 16- to 24-year-old males. Tens of thousands of children likely got myocarditis, mostly subclinical, from a Covid vaccine they did not need because they were entirely healthy or because they already had Covid.
A 15-year-old receives a first dose of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine at a mobile vaccination clinic at the Weingart East Los Angeles YMCA in 2021. Picture: AFP
A 15-year-old receives a first dose of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine at a mobile vaccination clinic at the Weingart East Los Angeles YMCA in 2021. Picture: AFP
Misinformation #5: Young people benefit from a vaccine booster
Boosters reduced hospitalisation in older, high-risk Americans. But the evidence was never there that they lower Covid mortality in young healthy people. That’s probably why the CDC chose not to publish their data on hospitalisation rates among boosted Americans under 50, when they published the same rates for those over 50.
Ultimately, White House pressure to recommend boosters for all was so intense, that the FDA’s two top vaccine experts left the agency in protest, writing scathing articles on how the data did not support boosters for young people.
Misinformation #6: Vaccine mandates increased vaccination rates
President Biden and other officials demanded unvaccinated workers, regardless of their risk or natural immunity, be fired. They demanded that soldiers be dishonourably discharged and nurses be laid off in the middle of a staffing crisis. The mandate was based on the theory that vaccination reduced transmission rates — a notion later proven to be false. But after the broad recognition that vaccination does not reduce transmission, the mandates persisted, and still do to this day. A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major U.S. cities had no impact on vaccination rates. They also had no impact on Covid transmission rates.
A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major US cities had no impact on vaccination rates. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Naomi Jellicoe
A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major US cities had no impact on vaccination rates. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Naomi Jellicoe
Misinformation #7: Covid originating from the Wuhan Lab is a conspiracy theory
Google admitted to suppressing searches of “lab leak” during the pandemic. Dr Francis Collins, head of the NIH, claimed (and still does) he didn’t believe the virus came from a lab. Ultimately, overwhelming circumstantial evidence points to a lab leak origin — the same origin suggested to Dr Anthony Fauci by two very prominent virologists in a January 2020 meeting he assembled at the beginning of the pandemic. According to documents obtained by Bret Baier of Fox News, they told Drs Fauci and Collins that the virus may have been manipulated and originated in the lab, but then suddenly changed their tune in public comments days after meeting with the NIH officials. The virologists were later awarded nearly $9 million from Fauci’s agency.
Misinformation #8: It was important to get the 2nd vaccine dose 3 or 4 weeks after the 1st dose
Data was clear in the Spring of 2021, just months after the vaccine rollout, that spacing the vaccine out by three months reduces complications rates and increase immunity. Spacing out vaccines would have also saved more lives when Americans were rationing a limited vaccine supply at the height of the epidemic.
NEWS.COM.AU03:11
Covid vaccine associated with fewer heart attacks, strokes, and cardiovascular issues: study
UP NEXT
New research shows the COVID-19 vaccination is associated with fewer heart attacks, strokes, and cardiovascular issues…
Misinformation #9: Data on the bivalent vaccine is “crystal clear”
Dr. Ashish Jha famously said this, despite the bivalent vaccine being approved using data from eight mice. To date, there has never been a randomised controlled trial of the bivalent vaccine. In my opinion, the data are crystal clear that young people should not get the bivalent vaccine. It would have also spared many children myocarditis
Misinformation #10: One in five people get long Covid
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims that 20% of Covid infections can result in long Covid. But a U.K. study found that only 3% of Covid patients had residual symptoms lasting 12 weeks. What explains the disparity?
It’s often normal to experience mild fatigue or weakness for weeks after being sick and inactive and not eating well. Calling these cases long Covid is the medicalisation of ordinary life.
What’s most amazing about all the misinformation conveyed by CDC and public health officials, is that there has been no apologies for holding on to their recommendations for so long after the data became apparent that they were dead wrong. Public health officials said “you must” when the correct answer should have been “we’re not sure.”
Early on, in the absence of good data, public health officials chose a path of stern paternalism. Today, they are in denial of a mountain of strong studies showing that they were wrong.
At minimum, CDC should come clean and the FDA should add a warning label to Covid vaccines, clearly stating what is now known. A mea culpa by those who led us astray would be a first step to rebuilding trust.
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/h...d/news-story/d414984470291668356217f4b3fa1f9c
Misinformation #1: Natural immunity offers little protection compared to vaccinated immunity
A Lancet study looked at 65 major studies in 19 countries on natural immunity. The researchers concluded that natural immunity was at least as effective as the primary Covid vaccine series.
In fact, the scientific data was there all along — from 160 studies, despite the findings of these studies violating Facebook’s “misinformation” policy.
Since the Athenian plague of 430 B.C., it has been observed that those who recovered after infection were protected against severe disease if reinfected. That was also the observation of nearly every practising physician during the first 18 months of the Covid pandemic.
Most Americans were fired for not having the Covid vaccine already had antibodies that effectively neutralised the virus, but they were antibodies that the government did not recognise.
Misinformation #2: Masks prevent Covid transmission
Cochran Reviews are considered the most authoritative and independent assessment of evidence in medicine. And one published last month by a highly-respected Oxford research team found that masks had no significant impact on Covid transmission.
When asked about this definitive review, CDC Director Dr Rochelle Walensky downplayed it, arguing that it was flawed because it focused on randomised controlled studies.
But that was the greatest strength of the review! Randomised studies are considered the gold standard of medical evidence. If all the energy used by public health officials to mask toddlers could have channelled to reduce child obesity by encouraging outdoor activities, we would be better off.
NEWS.COM.AU01:01
Pink: My son's experience of Covid was 'very scary'
UP NEXT
Pop star Pink has opened up about her son's experience of COVID-19, admitting it was "very scary".
Misinformation #3: School closures reduce Covid transmission
The CDC ignored the European experience of keeping schools open, most without mask mandates. Transmission rates were no different, evidenced by studies conducted Spain and Sweden.
Misinformation #4: Myocarditis from the vaccine is less common than from the infection
Public health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine-induced myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle. They cited poorly designed studies that under-captured complication rates. A flurry of well-designed studies said the opposite. We now know that myocarditis is six to 28-times more common after the Covid vaccine than after the infection among 16- to 24-year-old males. Tens of thousands of children likely got myocarditis, mostly subclinical, from a Covid vaccine they did not need because they were entirely healthy or because they already had Covid.
A 15-year-old receives a first dose of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine at a mobile vaccination clinic at the Weingart East Los Angeles YMCA in 2021. Picture: AFP
A 15-year-old receives a first dose of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine at a mobile vaccination clinic at the Weingart East Los Angeles YMCA in 2021. Picture: AFP
Misinformation #5: Young people benefit from a vaccine booster
Boosters reduced hospitalisation in older, high-risk Americans. But the evidence was never there that they lower Covid mortality in young healthy people. That’s probably why the CDC chose not to publish their data on hospitalisation rates among boosted Americans under 50, when they published the same rates for those over 50.
Ultimately, White House pressure to recommend boosters for all was so intense, that the FDA’s two top vaccine experts left the agency in protest, writing scathing articles on how the data did not support boosters for young people.
Misinformation #6: Vaccine mandates increased vaccination rates
President Biden and other officials demanded unvaccinated workers, regardless of their risk or natural immunity, be fired. They demanded that soldiers be dishonourably discharged and nurses be laid off in the middle of a staffing crisis. The mandate was based on the theory that vaccination reduced transmission rates — a notion later proven to be false. But after the broad recognition that vaccination does not reduce transmission, the mandates persisted, and still do to this day. A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major U.S. cities had no impact on vaccination rates. They also had no impact on Covid transmission rates.
A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major US cities had no impact on vaccination rates. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Naomi Jellicoe
A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major US cities had no impact on vaccination rates. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Naomi Jellicoe
Misinformation #7: Covid originating from the Wuhan Lab is a conspiracy theory
Google admitted to suppressing searches of “lab leak” during the pandemic. Dr Francis Collins, head of the NIH, claimed (and still does) he didn’t believe the virus came from a lab. Ultimately, overwhelming circumstantial evidence points to a lab leak origin — the same origin suggested to Dr Anthony Fauci by two very prominent virologists in a January 2020 meeting he assembled at the beginning of the pandemic. According to documents obtained by Bret Baier of Fox News, they told Drs Fauci and Collins that the virus may have been manipulated and originated in the lab, but then suddenly changed their tune in public comments days after meeting with the NIH officials. The virologists were later awarded nearly $9 million from Fauci’s agency.
Misinformation #8: It was important to get the 2nd vaccine dose 3 or 4 weeks after the 1st dose
Data was clear in the Spring of 2021, just months after the vaccine rollout, that spacing the vaccine out by three months reduces complications rates and increase immunity. Spacing out vaccines would have also saved more lives when Americans were rationing a limited vaccine supply at the height of the epidemic.
NEWS.COM.AU03:11
Covid vaccine associated with fewer heart attacks, strokes, and cardiovascular issues: study
UP NEXT
New research shows the COVID-19 vaccination is associated with fewer heart attacks, strokes, and cardiovascular issues…
Misinformation #9: Data on the bivalent vaccine is “crystal clear”
Dr. Ashish Jha famously said this, despite the bivalent vaccine being approved using data from eight mice. To date, there has never been a randomised controlled trial of the bivalent vaccine. In my opinion, the data are crystal clear that young people should not get the bivalent vaccine. It would have also spared many children myocarditis
Misinformation #10: One in five people get long Covid
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims that 20% of Covid infections can result in long Covid. But a U.K. study found that only 3% of Covid patients had residual symptoms lasting 12 weeks. What explains the disparity?
It’s often normal to experience mild fatigue or weakness for weeks after being sick and inactive and not eating well. Calling these cases long Covid is the medicalisation of ordinary life.
What’s most amazing about all the misinformation conveyed by CDC and public health officials, is that there has been no apologies for holding on to their recommendations for so long after the data became apparent that they were dead wrong. Public health officials said “you must” when the correct answer should have been “we’re not sure.”
Early on, in the absence of good data, public health officials chose a path of stern paternalism. Today, they are in denial of a mountain of strong studies showing that they were wrong.
At minimum, CDC should come clean and the FDA should add a warning label to Covid vaccines, clearly stating what is now known. A mea culpa by those who led us astray would be a first step to rebuilding trust.
Marty Makary is a complete Covid misinformation clown. This is well established with plenty of failed fact checks and refutations from experts. Anyone pushing Makary's nonsense clearly isn't rational, nor do they understand the difference between reality and fantasy.
GWB - still pimping da' 'ficial line of Lysenkoism! glory to the Fauciland.
Meanwhile, Newsweek saying it straight up:
https://www.newsweek.com/america-covid-response-was-based-lies-opinion-1785177
lmost all of America's leaders have gradually pulled back their COVID mandates, requirements, and closures—even in states like California, which had imposed the most stringent and longest-lasting restrictions on the public. At the same time, the media has been gradually acknowledging the ongoing release of studies that totally refute the purported reasons behind those restrictions. This overt reversal is falsely portrayed as "learned" or "new evidence." Little acknowledgement of error is to be found. We have seen no public apology for promulgating false information, or for the vilification and delegitimization of policy experts and medical scientists like myself who spoke out correctly about data, standard knowledge about viral infections and pandemics, and fundamental biology.
The historical record is critical. We have seen a macabre Orwellian attempt to rewrite history and to blame the failure of widespread lockdowns on the lockdowns' critics, alongside absurd denials of officials' own incessant demands for them. In the Trump administration, Dr. Deborah Birx was formally in charge of the medical side of the White House's coronavirus task force during the pandemic's first year. In that capacity, she authored all written federal policy recommendations to governors and states and personally advised each state's public health officials during official visits, often with Vice President Mike Pence, who oversaw the entire task force. Upon the inauguration of President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci became chief medical advisor and ran the Biden pandemic response.
We must acknowledge the abject failure of the Birx-Fauci policies. They were enacted, but they failed to stop the dying, failed to stop the infection from spreading, and inflicted massive damage and destruction particularly on lower-income families and on America's children.
More than 1 million American deaths have been attributed to that virus. Even after draconian measures, including school closures, stoppage of non-COVID medical care, business shutdowns, personal restrictions, and then the continuation of many restrictions and mandates in the presence of a vaccine, there was an undeniable failure—over two presidential administrations—to stop cases from rapidly escalating.
Meanwhile, Newsweek saying it straight up:
https://www.newsweek.com/america-covid-response-was-based-lies-opinion-1785177
lmost all of America's leaders have gradually pulled back their COVID mandates, requirements, and closures—even in states like California, which had imposed the most stringent and longest-lasting restrictions on the public. At the same time, the media has been gradually acknowledging the ongoing release of studies that totally refute the purported reasons behind those restrictions. This overt reversal is falsely portrayed as "learned" or "new evidence." Little acknowledgement of error is to be found. We have seen no public apology for promulgating false information, or for the vilification and delegitimization of policy experts and medical scientists like myself who spoke out correctly about data, standard knowledge about viral infections and pandemics, and fundamental biology.
The historical record is critical. We have seen a macabre Orwellian attempt to rewrite history and to blame the failure of widespread lockdowns on the lockdowns' critics, alongside absurd denials of officials' own incessant demands for them. In the Trump administration, Dr. Deborah Birx was formally in charge of the medical side of the White House's coronavirus task force during the pandemic's first year. In that capacity, she authored all written federal policy recommendations to governors and states and personally advised each state's public health officials during official visits, often with Vice President Mike Pence, who oversaw the entire task force. Upon the inauguration of President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci became chief medical advisor and ran the Biden pandemic response.
We must acknowledge the abject failure of the Birx-Fauci policies. They were enacted, but they failed to stop the dying, failed to stop the infection from spreading, and inflicted massive damage and destruction particularly on lower-income families and on America's children.
More than 1 million American deaths have been attributed to that virus. Even after draconian measures, including school closures, stoppage of non-COVID medical care, business shutdowns, personal restrictions, and then the continuation of many restrictions and mandates in the presence of a vaccine, there was an undeniable failure—over two presidential administrations—to stop cases from rapidly escalating.
Let's see what ant-vax Covidiots are up to now. It's quite the trainwreck.
How 'right-wing anti-vaxxer' conspiracy theorists have targeted East Palestine residents
https://www.msn.com/en-in/weather/o...st-palestine-residents-report/amp/ar-AA18nf0y
How 'right-wing anti-vaxxer' conspiracy theorists have targeted East Palestine residents
https://www.msn.com/en-in/weather/o...st-palestine-residents-report/amp/ar-AA18nf0y