COVID-19 / Coronavirus Pandemic
- Thread starter Wally
- Start date
- Status
levi
Still fresh, damnit!
In the UK, you're not allowed to have a booster before you're 6-months from your second jab. An early Chrimbo present for me.
Phlyra
FLOSSing
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2019
- Messages
- 1,517
By the sounds of it that’s being reduced to four months in France
Croatia: Protesters salute Police officer that holds off traffic to protect the protesters:
Austria: Police joins protesters march:
Embedding seems to fail: use: vk.com/video516205560_456239313
Australia: Police joins protesters march:
Austria: Police joins protesters march:
Embedding seems to fail: use: vk.com/video516205560_456239313
Australia: Police joins protesters march:
Makes sense, even if not everyone may like the protesters, and even if this was an illegal demo, nobody would want that they will get run over by cars..
But Official Road Blocks are just a usual thing when you will make a Demo..
But Official Road Blocks are just a usual thing when you will make a Demo..
And then they came for our children....
stevekirsch.substack.com
edition.cnn.com
news.sky.com
How are they going to explain all the newborns with cardiac problems?
A local Children's Hospital reports that all three NICUs are full of infant patients with cardiac problems. How will the CDC and the White House whitewash infants with cardiac issues?
stevekirsch.substack.com
Climate change could hurt babies' hearts, study says | CNN
Cllimate change and the higher temperatures that come with it will hurt the health of babies. More babies will be born with congenital heart problems, according to a new study. Babies born in the Midwest could see the biggest increase in problems.
Madagascar is on the brink of famine caused by climate change, with children most at risk
As world leaders meet in Glasgow for COP26, Sky's Alex Crawford reports from the front line of the climate crisis in Madagascar's Grand Sud, where babies are slowly dying of hunger as their mothers plead for help.
λ the β-Redex Reducer
β-Redex Reducing Member
Warm climates cause heart failure in babies? How do people in Africa reproduce?
Linux-SWAT
Forum Addict!
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2010
- Messages
- 9,188
Untested "vaccines" have proven to be bad for the heart.
Ok, here is a retractable needle:
For the ones that want to watch the Mariah Carey videos. I think it was a cromulent injection, now as for the payload... no idea.
And here is some testimonies From Judea:
www.wochenblick.at
For the ones that want to watch the Mariah Carey videos. I think it was a cromulent injection, now as for the payload... no idea.
And here is some testimonies From Judea:
“Wir sind Laborratten”: Israels Impf-Opfer wollen ihr Leben zurück
Israel. "Ich will mein Leben zurück. Doch es gibt kein zurück", schildert eine Frau verzweifelt. Die in Israel verpflichtende Corona-Impfung hat ihr Leben zer
www.wochenblick.at
levi
Still fresh, damnit!
So there's a new variant in southern Africa, probably helped that South Africa has only mostly vaccinated it's oldest people yet, and I can't imagine the likes of Zim are any further ahead to be honest. UK government had already announced restrictions on travellers returning from those areas. It's currently known as B.1.1.529 and might well be called Nu after the WHO decide to name if of concern.
There's no evidence thus far that vaccines aren't effective against it in practice, despite a handful of gene changes relating to that spike protein that all vaccines are based on. It does seem to be starting to spread in S.Africa pretty well so if might turn out to be more virulent, but the evidence is more sketchy so far. Worth keeping an eye on though.
Edit: It's been named Omicron. I'm not sure what happened to SARS-Cov19 nu and SARS_COV19 Xi, but at long as we all know what SARS-COv19 Omicron means then I guess there's not a problem.
Omicron: How worried should we be?
Scientists are closely watching a new variant - but there are few clear answers.
www.bbc.co.uk
There's no evidence thus far that vaccines aren't effective against it in practice, despite a handful of gene changes relating to that spike protein that all vaccines are based on. It does seem to be starting to spread in S.Africa pretty well so if might turn out to be more virulent, but the evidence is more sketchy so far. Worth keeping an eye on though.
Edit: It's been named Omicron. I'm not sure what happened to SARS-Cov19 nu and SARS_COV19 Xi, but at long as we all know what SARS-COv19 Omicron means then I guess there's not a problem.
Last edited:
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
More to read: both are currently unpublished and at that time it's easier to scrutinize this research better.
Title: "The SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein disrupts human cardiac pericytes function through CD147-receptor-mediated signalling: a potential non-infective mechanism of COVID-19 microvascular disease"
Abstract: "The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes a broad range of clinical responses including prominent microvascular damage. The capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect vascular cells is still debated. Additionally, the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) protein may act as a ligand to induce non-infective cellular stress. We tested this hypothesis in pericytes (PCs), which are reportedly reduced in the heart of patients with severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Here we newly show that the in vitro exposure of primary human cardiac PCs to the SARS-CoV-2 wild type strain or the Alpha and Delta variants caused rare infection events. Exposure to the recombinant S protein alone elicited signalling and functional alterations, including: (1) increased migration, (2) reduced ability to support endothelial cell (EC) network formation on Matrigel, (3) secretion of pro-inflammatory molecules typically involved in the cytokine storm, and (4) production of pro-apoptotic factors causing EC death. Next, adopting a blocking strategy against the S protein receptors angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD147, we discovered that the S protein stimulates the phosphorylation/activation of the extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) through the CD147 receptor, but not ACE2, in PCs. The neutralisation of CD147, either using a blocking antibody or mRNA silencing, reduced ERK1/2 activation, and rescued PC function in the presence of the S protein. Immunoreactive S protein was detected in the peripheral blood of infected patients. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the S protein may prompt PC dysfunction, potentially contributing to microvascular injury. This mechanism may have clinical and therapeutic implications."
Source: https://portlandpress.com/clinsci/a...3/The-SARS-CoV-2-Spike-protein-disrupts-human
Title: "Abstract 10712: Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning"
Abstract: "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test (GD Biosciences, Inc, Irvine, CA) a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein biomarkers including IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine, soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF)which serves as a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue, among other markers. Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score.The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.This report summarizes those results. A total of 566 pts, aged 28 to 97, M:F ratio 1:1 seen in a preventive cardiology practice had a new PULS test drawn from 2 to 10 weeks following the 2nd COVID shot and was compared to the previous PULS score drawn 3 to 5 months previously pre- shot. Baseline IL-16 increased from 35=/-20 above the norm to 82 =/- 75 above the norm post-vac; sFas increased from 22+/- 15 above the norm to 46=/-24 above the norm post-vac; HGF increased from 42+/-12 above the norm to 86+/-31 above the norm post-vac. These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."
Source: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712
I also finally found some research that has statistical evidence that masks have a very positive effect on the spread of covid:
Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32473312/
Result: "A total of 21 studies met our inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses suggest that mask use provided a significant protective effect (OR = 0.35 and 95% CI = 0.24-0.51). Use of masks by healthcare workers (HCWs) and non-healthcare workers (Non-HCWs) can reduce the risk of respiratory virus infection by 80% (OR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.11-0.37) and 47% (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.36-0.79). The protective effect of wearing masks in Asia (OR = 0.31) appeared to be higher than that of Western countries (OR = 0.45). Masks had a protective effect against influenza viruses (OR = 0.55), SARS (OR = 0.26), and SARS-CoV-2 (OR = 0.04). In the subgroups based on different study designs, protective effects of wearing mask were significant in cluster randomized trials and observational studies."
Conclusion: "This study adds additional evidence of the enhanced protective value of masks, we stress that the use masks serve as an adjunctive method regarding the COVID-19 outbreak."
Title: "The SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein disrupts human cardiac pericytes function through CD147-receptor-mediated signalling: a potential non-infective mechanism of COVID-19 microvascular disease"
Abstract: "The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes a broad range of clinical responses including prominent microvascular damage. The capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect vascular cells is still debated. Additionally, the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) protein may act as a ligand to induce non-infective cellular stress. We tested this hypothesis in pericytes (PCs), which are reportedly reduced in the heart of patients with severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Here we newly show that the in vitro exposure of primary human cardiac PCs to the SARS-CoV-2 wild type strain or the Alpha and Delta variants caused rare infection events. Exposure to the recombinant S protein alone elicited signalling and functional alterations, including: (1) increased migration, (2) reduced ability to support endothelial cell (EC) network formation on Matrigel, (3) secretion of pro-inflammatory molecules typically involved in the cytokine storm, and (4) production of pro-apoptotic factors causing EC death. Next, adopting a blocking strategy against the S protein receptors angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and CD147, we discovered that the S protein stimulates the phosphorylation/activation of the extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) through the CD147 receptor, but not ACE2, in PCs. The neutralisation of CD147, either using a blocking antibody or mRNA silencing, reduced ERK1/2 activation, and rescued PC function in the presence of the S protein. Immunoreactive S protein was detected in the peripheral blood of infected patients. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the S protein may prompt PC dysfunction, potentially contributing to microvascular injury. This mechanism may have clinical and therapeutic implications."
Source: https://portlandpress.com/clinsci/a...3/The-SARS-CoV-2-Spike-protein-disrupts-human
Title: "Abstract 10712: Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning"
Abstract: "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test (GD Biosciences, Inc, Irvine, CA) a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein biomarkers including IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine, soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF)which serves as a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue, among other markers. Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score.The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.This report summarizes those results. A total of 566 pts, aged 28 to 97, M:F ratio 1:1 seen in a preventive cardiology practice had a new PULS test drawn from 2 to 10 weeks following the 2nd COVID shot and was compared to the previous PULS score drawn 3 to 5 months previously pre- shot. Baseline IL-16 increased from 35=/-20 above the norm to 82 =/- 75 above the norm post-vac; sFas increased from 22+/- 15 above the norm to 46=/-24 above the norm post-vac; HGF increased from 42+/-12 above the norm to 86+/-31 above the norm post-vac. These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."
Source: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712
I also finally found some research that has statistical evidence that masks have a very positive effect on the spread of covid:
Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32473312/
Result: "A total of 21 studies met our inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses suggest that mask use provided a significant protective effect (OR = 0.35 and 95% CI = 0.24-0.51). Use of masks by healthcare workers (HCWs) and non-healthcare workers (Non-HCWs) can reduce the risk of respiratory virus infection by 80% (OR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.11-0.37) and 47% (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.36-0.79). The protective effect of wearing masks in Asia (OR = 0.31) appeared to be higher than that of Western countries (OR = 0.45). Masks had a protective effect against influenza viruses (OR = 0.55), SARS (OR = 0.26), and SARS-CoV-2 (OR = 0.04). In the subgroups based on different study designs, protective effects of wearing mask were significant in cluster randomized trials and observational studies."
Conclusion: "This study adds additional evidence of the enhanced protective value of masks, we stress that the use masks serve as an adjunctive method regarding the COVID-19 outbreak."
Last edited:
Phlyra
FLOSSing
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2019
- Messages
- 1,517
Pity that the latter doesn’t specify what percentage of the 566 patients experienced a (presumably on average) risk increase to 1/4 people at risk of ACS in five years - though of course five years have not yet passed since administration of mRNA injections. It also doesn’t say what percentage of those people who saw this increase had also been infected with Covid-19.
Last edited:
JDTAY
Half Pepperoni, All Cheese
Just got back from my Thanksgiving trip. Saw on the CBS national news this morning what levi mentioned, that we're now battling the forces of Omicron. Just earlier today they found cases of it in the UK too, so now it's sure to prosper.
JDTAY
Half Pepperoni, All Cheese
Just read an article that said that fatigue is the main symptom of Omicron, and that no loss of taste or smell was reported among the patients of the doctor being interviewed.
I can't be the only one who keeps thinking of the Omicronians from Futurama when I hear Omicron, right?
I can't be the only one who keeps thinking of the Omicronians from Futurama when I hear Omicron, right?
you're right I'm sorry. sorry Lambda.Oh, come on... not a cheap ad-hominem. If you throw one, at least explain...
So..
My parents both just recovered from covid. My father fell, an ambulance was called and they later discovered he and my mother had covid. My father is very weak, but he was basically asymptomatic besides a mild cough. My mother is just fine, thanks for asking. My uncle - my father's brother - passed with covid last year. It seems like the reason my father survived is the vaccine.
So I question the intellectual foothold of anti-vaxers. A year ago it was acceptable to be sceptical, but now it's time to be practical. You need to revaluate your stance in light of new information. Intellectuals - people who's opinions have value - change their minds by definition.
There is also a practical element. You go along with a joint initiative for the benefit of those around you (aka society). My assumption here is that we all consider avoidable* deaths and illness to be bad.
So at this point, if you are still anti-vax, you are almost certainly:
- out of touch with society. you are inadequately loving (and loved?).
- counterinellectual. you are stubborn, dogmatic and ignore evidence.
That's all I have to say.
My parents both just recovered from covid. My father fell, an ambulance was called and they later discovered he and my mother had covid. My father is very weak, but he was basically asymptomatic besides a mild cough. My mother is just fine, thanks for asking. My uncle - my father's brother - passed with covid last year. It seems like the reason my father survived is the vaccine.
So I question the intellectual foothold of anti-vaxers. A year ago it was acceptable to be sceptical, but now it's time to be practical. You need to revaluate your stance in light of new information. Intellectuals - people who's opinions have value - change their minds by definition.
There is also a practical element. You go along with a joint initiative for the benefit of those around you (aka society). My assumption here is that we all consider avoidable* deaths and illness to be bad.
So at this point, if you are still anti-vax, you are almost certainly:
- out of touch with society. you are inadequately loving (and loved?).
- counterinellectual. you are stubborn, dogmatic and ignore evidence.
That's all I have to say.
levi
Still fresh, damnit!
Not everyone has had close relatives passing or just infected but surviving yet. The closest I know is some distant neighbours of my aunt who didn't believe in covid-19 at all and died as a result, but nobody in my immediate family has even got ill. But yeah, your report should have some value in persuading those who don't believe in vaccination.
Last edited:
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
Good to hear your parents are recovering. It's not something you like to see with anyone, especially close family members.
Because I see people labeled anti-vax when:
* They get covid just after getting their second vaccination and aren't 'fully vaccinated'
* People that can't get vaccinated because of allergies or other medical reasons
* People that are vaccinated but don't advocate for the vaccine due to personal experiences, like having family members pass away directly after getting vaccinated
* People that are vaccinated their whole life, just not for Covid
And and in the future probably everyone that doesn't get their booster shot.
I think the group of people that never take vaccines, which I would label anti-vax, is probably relatively small.
Depends on what you label anti-vax. Is it everyone that isn't (fully) vaccinated, or everyone that rejects the vaccine for a non-valid reason?
Because I see people labeled anti-vax when:
* They get covid just after getting their second vaccination and aren't 'fully vaccinated'
* People that can't get vaccinated because of allergies or other medical reasons
* People that are vaccinated but don't advocate for the vaccine due to personal experiences, like having family members pass away directly after getting vaccinated
* People that are vaccinated their whole life, just not for Covid
And and in the future probably everyone that doesn't get their booster shot.
I think the group of people that never take vaccines, which I would label anti-vax, is probably relatively small.
levi
Still fresh, damnit!
I think in this context anti-vaxers are those that post fake news about vaccines and advocate against them. So not 1 and 2 and a subset of 3 and 4.
Phlyra
FLOSSing
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2019
- Messages
- 1,517
EDIT: I let my emotions get the better of me and demonstrated what a crap human being I can be by writing a long rant before thinking to offer my condolences for your uncle. I hope you were able to share some happier memories with other family members and friends.
I think it’s fair to say that there’s yet another category of people: those who would rather proceed with an abundance of caution and are correct that the world/society we’d collectively built wasn’t that great given that we haven’t collectively insisted on maintaining an abundance of caution* (e.g. proceeding very cautiously over the first two years to discover long term effects in a proper Stage III trial before embarking on the full on vaccination campaign).
*that doesn’t just mean with the approach to vaccine roll out but also with the approach to opening up and the failure of way too many “developed” countries to value human life over the artificial economy by not following a zero-Covid policy (one which has proven highly effective in the few compassionate countries that did follow it).
It’s not that those people are stubbornly anti-intellectual or out of touch with society; it’s that they know that literally no one at all in society is able to say what the quality/quantity of those long term effects are (because two years have not yet passed and even then analysis of those two years would have to be carried out), whilst at the same time they are so in touch with society that they can see that we are fucking things up even for the effectiveness of the miraculous vaccines we do have by failing to proceed cautiously enough and giving the virus perfect conditions to evolve with variants that escape the tools currently at our disposal - so it’s no wonder that they would also have insufficient faith in society that, with making mistakes being a part of what it means to be human, so many different vaccines could be produced in such a short space of time without mistakes being made and breaking through. The idea that we also would not learn from the fact that they did in the past (and not necessarily for vaccines, specifically, but certainly within the field of medicine and under far less pressured conditions than now) is just as - no, more so - stubbornly anti-intellectual and out-of-touch with society as what’s proposed above.
I think it’s fair to say that there’s yet another category of people: those who would rather proceed with an abundance of caution and are correct that the world/society we’d collectively built wasn’t that great given that we haven’t collectively insisted on maintaining an abundance of caution* (e.g. proceeding very cautiously over the first two years to discover long term effects in a proper Stage III trial before embarking on the full on vaccination campaign).
*that doesn’t just mean with the approach to vaccine roll out but also with the approach to opening up and the failure of way too many “developed” countries to value human life over the artificial economy by not following a zero-Covid policy (one which has proven highly effective in the few compassionate countries that did follow it).
It’s not that those people are stubbornly anti-intellectual or out of touch with society; it’s that they know that literally no one at all in society is able to say what the quality/quantity of those long term effects are (because two years have not yet passed and even then analysis of those two years would have to be carried out), whilst at the same time they are so in touch with society that they can see that we are fucking things up even for the effectiveness of the miraculous vaccines we do have by failing to proceed cautiously enough and giving the virus perfect conditions to evolve with variants that escape the tools currently at our disposal - so it’s no wonder that they would also have insufficient faith in society that, with making mistakes being a part of what it means to be human, so many different vaccines could be produced in such a short space of time without mistakes being made and breaking through. The idea that we also would not learn from the fact that they did in the past (and not necessarily for vaccines, specifically, but certainly within the field of medicine and under far less pressured conditions than now) is just as - no, more so - stubbornly anti-intellectual and out-of-touch with society as what’s proposed above.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
