COVID-19 / Coronavirus Pandemic


Status
Not open for further replies.
Given the content of the most recent BMJ report I posted, it would seem that there is more than a little malfeasance going on behind the scenes [ignorance is not a justifiable adjective to use here since those in the positions described in the report absolutely knew what they should(n’t) be doing and knew that they were(n’t) doing it]
 
Some noise around Pfizer 6-weeks FDA-approval trail. There where 153 trail sites and about one of those site the following was published:
"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."
"In Pfizer’s briefing document submitted to an FDA advisory committee meeting held on 10 December 2020 to discuss Pfizer’s application for emergency use authorisation of its covid-19 vaccine, the company made no mention of problems at the Ventavia site. The next day the FDA issued the authorisation of the vaccine."
source: https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635
My opinion about that report: It's a report about a few testing sites and can still be blamed on having third party being cheap. The way it was handled afterwards is something particular, but money choices after some risk assessment can still be an answer there.
Does it mean the vaccine itself is bad: not directly, but there is risk that they missed something due to these poor testing practices. Being vague about these risks is obviously a bad practice, but for Pfizer it's probably only a financial question, which is bad enough.
Vaccination data show that people in rich countries were vaccinated first and in most countries, rich people are generally more vaccinated than poor people.
If I expected "the powers that be" to plan to reduce the human population, I'd expect them to do it the other way around.
Well, if an Asian country would try to get rid of western countries it would be a good plan. Introduce some vaccine that can break some DNA that can cause issues in a year of 5, reducing the population growth for those countries.
An opposite idea would be to vaccinate your own people and start spreading deadlier variants of covid.
 
My opinion about that report: It's a report about a few testing sites and can still be blamed on having third party being cheap. The way it was handled afterwards is something particular, but money choices after some risk assessment can still be an answer there.
Does it mean the vaccine itself is bad: not directly, but there is risk that they missed something due to these poor testing practices. Being vague about these risks is obviously a bad practice, but for Pfizer it's probably only a financial question, which is bad enough.

Well, if an Asian country would try to get rid of western countries it would be a good plan. Introduce some vaccine that can break some DNA that can cause issues in a year of 5, reducing the population growth for those countries.
An opposite idea would be to vaccinate your own people and start spreading deadlier variants of covid.
My apologies, I completely forgot that you’d already posted that BMJ link! :$
I read through the whole report. I think the problem with the idea that “it’s just one lab out of all of the others” is that it was actually more than one lab but it was one subcontracted service provider. Now, the bigger problem is the way this was all handled - not just by Pfizer, who effectively rewarded that provider whilst failing to mention their issues to the FDA during the review the day before the EUA was granted, but also by the FDA who presumably leaked to the service provider that one of their senior staff had reported these issues to them (because that staff member was sacked the same day).
So the even bigger problem becomes: where else has this happened (and what effect on the results).

Whilst still a child I read Ben Goldacre’s “Bad Science” and, having done so (it made a lasting impression), reading this sort of report by the BMJ doesn’t surprise me at all, especially given the circumstances of the last two years, but it still makes me sick.
 
Last edited:
I haven’t read the article yet but I’m wondering if “must discuss” is meant as “consult the public for feedback on such a potential measure before deciding whether or not to implement it, rather than simply enforcing the measure without any consultation”?
Nah, probably just more EU council meetings where the elites chat amongst themselves.
 
in principle the virus replicates itself so it can cause an unbounded amount of spike protein in your body.
If it was like that, with no upperbound, then we would need to incinerate all covid positive people... just walking virus canisters...

I understand those virus cannot replicate
totally Denaturalized (shredded to pieces) it would not match and help less for building up resistance. So sometimes a few stay viable, just like bacteria in normal vaccines. Debiliated, but still a bit alive.


Wall Street Journal article, so I can't read the whole thing, but it appears that COVID-19 antibody treatments are less effective against Omicron. This would also seem to indicate that the antibodies people have been producing up until now in response to either the disease or the vaccine are also less effective against Omicron.
Well, that's convenient.... People are vaccinated, yet still dying... we need to explain this one... Deus Ex Machina... Omicron!

Vaccination data show that people in rich countries were vaccinated first and in most countries, rich people are generally more vaccinated than poor people.
If I expected "the powers that be" to plan to reduce the human population, I'd expect them to do it the other way around.
Well, Russia was not vaccinated until the sputnik trials in Argentina were done (that means: Russia produced a vaccine, and let Argentina vaccinate them with it and only a few months later, Russians started vaccinating themselves...
But that's the exception.
 
If it was like that, with no upperbound, then we would need to incinerate all covid positive people... just walking virus canisters...
steady there. We don't do that. There are all sort of infectous diseases. We can isolate patients, still try to heal them. We don't kill them.
We try to be better than the diseases we suffer.
There's an upperbound for everything. No human can produce an infinite amount of anything.
I think my meaning was clear. With vacines there's a design bound, with natural virus there is not, so as many copies as that person sustains will be made.

totally Denaturalized (shredded to pieces) it would not match and help less for building up resistance. So sometimes a few stay viable, just like bacteria in normal vaccines. Debiliated, but still a bit alive.
I can understand a weak bacteria can be alive (it takes some effort for my poor biology skills, but I can engage imagination to help). But I can't imagine what a weak living virus would be.
I don't really think virus are alive (big doubt there, though).
Well, that's convenient.... People are vaccinated, yet still dying... we need to explain this one... Deus Ex Machina... Omicron!
I guess you have a point, but you're making humans more intelligent than I hold them...
 
Omicron is now officially in the US, in California.

Edit: They say the guy arrived from South Africa on November 22nd, so it's been here a while.
 
Last edited:
My apologies, I completely forgot that you’d already posted that BMJ link! :$
No worries. You actually 'liked' that post so I guess you must have forgotten you've seen it ;)

The first ones that arrived were the 'Trump' vaccines, so I guess that's why they are still so popular now* :oops:
Currently there are alternative ones but those aren't used much in western countries.


Looks kinda like Omicron is as transmittable as they think it could be.
It's more transmittable, but statistics could also be showing that more people got tested due to hearing the news about the variant. I didn't see the total numbers tested.

*it's a joke, just so you know.
 
I haven’t read the article yet but I’m wondering if “must discuss” is meant as “consult the public for feedback on such a potential measure before deciding whether or not to implement it, rather than simply enforcing the measure without any consultation”?
I've read it now, and no, I read between lines that she meant "I want to do it, but people will complain, so I'll say we're just thinking about it as a test decoy, until it'll be too late".
This is the EU, not Switzerland, unfortunately.
 
I haven’t read the article yet but I’m wondering if “must discuss” is meant as “consult the public for feedback on such a potential measure before deciding whether or not to implement it, rather than simply enforcing the measure without any consultation”?
hahahaha-no.gif
 
I guess that it's time to fight those criminals:

How? We did not vote them into power, so we can not out-vote them out of power. R13:16


I haven’t read the article yet but I’m wondering if “must discuss” is meant as “consult the public for feedback on such a potential measure before deciding whether or not to implement it, rather than simply enforcing the measure without any consultation”?
We Europeans did not put that lady into power. She was chosen by the upper echelons. These upper echelons will be consulted, not the people. And they already agreed on the lockstep plan, so all they are discussing is WHEN it goes into effect.
 
How? We did not vote them into power, so we can not out-vote them out of power. R13:16



We Europeans did not put that lady into power. She was chosen by the upper echelons. These upper echelons will be consulted, not the people. And they already agreed on the lockstep plan, so all they are discussing is WHEN it goes into effect.
You’re confusing the Commission with the Parliament
 
President Biden is set to unveil a new COVID-19 strategy today, which includes extending the mask mandate on public transportation through March and making sure insurers reimburse people for rapid at-home COVID-19 tests.

The sad part is that the latter thing doesn't apply to Medicaid recipients, but he will be distributing rapid at-home tests to the types of clinics that handle Medicaid recipients.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top