PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Number7 on October 02, 2021, 05:04:10 PM
-
The faux woke pussies will ignore these warnings but the truth keeps seeping out no matter how hard leftists fight to censor anything that reduces big government control of people's lives.
I'd hat3 to see the woke trying to raise children as obsessed with the narrative over the facts as they have become.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/10/01/attorney-thomas-renz-releases-medicare-and-pfizer-whistleblower-data-vaccine-related-injuries-and-deaths-far-more-widespread-than-reported/
-
It is unfortunately hard to estimate exactly how many such injuries are due to the vaccine itself because of the fairly low rate of such injuries. (On the order of a few per million for serious injuries or death.)
In the case of the Astra-Zeneca vaccine used in Europe, it became clear that myocarditis in young males was occurring at about twice the rate of the unvaccinated. Now there is a concern that the Moderna vaccine may be causing a similar increase.
Speculation, but what may be happening with these vaccines is that if you were a person who would have had a very bad outcome from COVID-19 given genetic and lifestyle factors, the vaccine will also produce a sort of attenuated case. Thus you have a very bad outcome from the vaccine but the illness itself otherwise might have killed you.
Unfortunately with things being rushed, we really don’t know.
-
It is unfortunately hard to estimate exactly how many such injuries are due to the vaccine itself because of the fairly low rate of such injuries. (On the order of a few per million for serious injuries or death.)
In the case of the Astra-Zeneca vaccine used in Europe, it became clear that myocarditis in young males was occurring at about twice the rate of the unvaccinated. Now there is a concern that the Moderna vaccine may be causing a similar increase.
Speculation, but what may be happening with these vaccines is that if you were a person who would have had a very bad outcome from COVID-19 given genetic and lifestyle factors, the vaccine will also produce a sort of attenuated case. Thus you have a very bad outcome from the vaccine but the illness itself otherwise might have killed you.
Unfortunately with things being rushed, we really don’t know.
Yet we have a government that is insisting on everyone getting the shot. And totally disregarding natural immunity.
Total crock of shit.
-
Agreed, given the limited danger presented by COVID-19 to the majority of the population as well as the limited efficacy of the vaccines and uncertain side effect profiles, attempting to coerce people into taking them is completely immoral and unjustified by any rational assessment of the cost benefit ratio.
-
Agreed, given the limited danger presented by COVID-19 to the majority of the population as well as the limited efficacy of the vaccines and uncertain side effect profiles, attempting to coerce people into taking them is completely immoral and unjustified by any rational assessment of the cost benefit ratio.
Well said.
-
Once again, it appears basic math and basic statistics were not done.
For people over the age of 65, there were 2,117,332 deaths in 2019. Divide that by 26 to reduce to a 2 week period and you get 81,436 deaths expected in any given two week period. 90.48% of the population over 65 is vaccinated, so that gives 73,683 expected deaths within 2 weeks after a vaccine shot, from causes unrelated to the vaccine.
Scientifically, the 48,465 number reported in the linked report is sensationalized drivel., short of the expected value by 25,218 or more than 50%.
You realize that you’re getting played by these articles, right? Right?
-
I knew the make believe centrist, progressive would along to babble the party line.
Drivel is all the bullshit babbled by the big government drones.
-
I knew the make believe centrist, progressive would along to babble the party line.
Drivel is all the bullshit babbled by the big government drones.
Coming from you, I want you to sincerely know that this means absolutely nothing. Pretty much everything you’ve posted in this thread is wrong.
Good job on the consistency.
-
Interesting thoughts.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/10/02/did-the-fourth-branch-of-government-release-sars-cov-2-then-blame-china/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=did-the-fourth-branch-of-government-release-sars-cov-2-then-blame-china
-
Coming from you, I want you to sincerely know that this means absolutely nothing. Pretty much everything you’ve posted in this thread is wrong.
Good job on the consistency.
Ohh, you poor, inferior feeling, baby.
It's a horrible world when're people are allowed to blow off your bullshit and not even do in a nice way.
-
So, you don't know you're getting played or you don't care?
-
What bullshit! Someone gets a vaccine, and two weeks later dies. Yeah, blame the vaccine. I recall Remdesivir originally tried on very ill patients, to try and save their lives. Big surprise a bunch of them died. Bigger surprise that the stuff really doesn't work, quite the pity. Hopefully they'll fare better with their nucleotide analog.
-
What bullshit! Someone gets a vaccine, and two weeks later dies. Yeah, blame the vaccine. I recall Remdesivir originally tried on very ill patients, to try and save their lives. Big surprise a bunch of them died. Bigger surprise that the stuff really doesn't work, quite the pity. Hopefully they'll fare better with their nucleotide analog.
Did they try the Remdesivir on not very ill patients and see if it increased the likelihood that they resolved without becoming seriously ill?
-
Coming from you, I want you to sincerely know that this means absolutely nothing. Pretty much everything you’ve posted in this thread is wrong.
Good job on the consistency.
I’m sorry, was your commie asshole speaking????
-
Did they try the Remdesivir on not very ill patients and see if it increased the likelihood that they resolved without becoming seriously ill?
What I recall is it started out on the seriously ill and did nothing. Follow ups on not so ill folks were inconclusive, but those sorts of things always are. Really no evidence to say it does anything. Like I said, a shame. Had a really solid mechanism of action. Of course, you can find studies saying it worked. But if you look overall the record isn't all that good.
-
What I recall is it started out on the seriously ill and did nothing. Follow ups on not so ill folks were inconclusive, but those sorts of things always are. Really no evidence to say it does anything. Like I said, a shame. Had a really solid mechanism of action. Of course, you can find studies saying it worked. But if you look overall the record isn't all that good.
Because so many people who get covid have a mild case and recover without any treatment, I would think you would need to have a huge number of subjects to figure out if a drug prevents a mild case from becoming severe.
-
What I recall is it started out on the seriously ill and did nothing. Follow ups on not so ill folks were inconclusive, but those sorts of things always are. Really no evidence to say it does anything. Like I said, a shame. Had a really solid mechanism of action. Of course, you can find studies saying it worked. But if you look overall the record isn't all that good.
The idea is to give it early in the infection. Giving it to seriously ill patients is too late. Giving it to not-so-ill patients in the late stage will do nothing since they are on the way to recovery. You need to give it to patients in the early stages and see if helps or does nothing.
-
This is a list of the 22 known studies of Remdesivir on Covid-19: https://c19rmd.com/ (https://c19rmd.com/)
-
Because so many people who get covid have a mild case and recover without any treatment, I would think you would need to have a huge number of subjects to figure out if a drug prevents a mild case from becoming severe.
Yes, this is exactly the issue. The testing here has followed pretty much the standard course. First a treatment is tried in those who really need it, given the possible risks. If that fails to find a significant effect, one then moves on to the less ill or preventative studies. Since these are expensive and time-consuming, these are often not done unless there are other good reasons to think a proposed treatment may work.
Most proposed medical treatments follow a course that goes something like this: Looks good in theory or based on some anecdotal observations. Tried out in some open label uncontrolled trials. These often look promising. Then tried in randomized controlled trials. Fail these as the apparent effect in open label trials was due to placebo or some other uncontrolled variable. This is how it goes for the majority of possible treatments. Nothing unusual about that.
-
This is a list of the 22 known studies of Remdesivir on Covid-19: https://c19rmd.com/ (https://c19rmd.com/)
That’s interesting Jim and appears to be a meta-analysis. Do you know if this has been written up for publication or published as a review yet?
-
That’s interesting Jim and appears to be a meta-analysis. Do you know if this has been written up for publication or published as a review yet?
The top portion of the page can be considered either a meta-analysis or a quick summary, while the remainder of the page acts as a list of known studies - you can click on each study which will open up details, which includes their summary (and any issues they see) of the study and a link to the original paper.
They're covering A LOT of treatments besides remdesivir. At the very top of that page there is a "Select Treatment" drop-down menu that lists a whole slew of the treatments that have been tried and studied around the world. Everything from aspirin to zinc. The group that created those pages started maybe a year or more ago and only covered hydroxychloroquine studies. They later started adding coverage of other treatments.
Lastly, scroll all the way down to the bottom of that page and click on the FAQ link to get their description of themselves. The @CovidAnalysis link at the bottom is also worth a quick read.