COVID-19 / Coronavirus Pandemic


Status
Not open for further replies.
merlin_174170757_3047a1c0-6f3e-4603-bf8b-fcecbeef6e81-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg
 
It has already been said like one year ago by a french genomics specialist so it's not a surprise.
 
If the past 2 years taught us anything it's that 'fact-checkers' can be wrong and misinformation is also published by mainstream media.

Recently published study shows that mRNA is indeed entering the DNA: https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73/htm

Fact-check: This research wasn't aimed at showing mRNA being reverse-transcribed into the DNA!
This research is actually regarding the effects of the Pfizer vaccine on the human liver cell line (Huh7). The results do show the vaccines mRNA is reverse transcribed intracellularly into DNA in as fast as 6 hours, but this wasn't the goal of the study.
Research regarding mRNA being reverse-transcribed into the human cell genome was actually done in this previous study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33958444/
Most of our readers won't even read this far, they read the title only, so good on you.
This research also doesn't show the alterations to the DNA are toxic and cause cancer, as this still has to be investigated.
Publishers note: The above post was not actually posted by an accredited fact-checker.
 
"-- In life, it's important to know when to stop arguing with people and simply let them be wrong."
Be sure to blame the right people, the so-called "elites" or as I think of them,
rich as.....les and wannabes
It's really simple, you don't even have to think or research
If it is propaganda, don't swallow it
The reverse is almost always the truth
Even the present (propaganda)
 

Comments:

"Our country doesn't spend money on stuff that doesn't work so I've got a lot of faith". Stupid opinion / idiotic logic. Should not be published by the BBC.

"The NHS is paying and the NHS has spent two years checking it's OK“. Complete bafoon statement. Doesn't understand public funding. Indoctrinated, unquestioning idiot. Should not be published by the BBC.

"Others may not be as worried about their children." I take huge offense to this. SHAME on the BBC for publishing it.

But, vaccine uptake for children is low. This is expected as we have clearly observed that susceptibility is inversely proportional to age. Good!
 
Last edited:

Comments:

"Our country doesn't spend money on stuff that doesn't work so I've got a lot of faith". Stupid opinion / idiotic logic. Should not be published by the BBC.

"The NHS is paying and the NHS has spent two years checking it's OK“. Complete bafoon statement. Doesn't understand public funding. Indoctrinated, unquestioning idiot. Should not be published by the BBC.

"Others may not be as worried about their children." I take huge offense to this. SHAME on the BBC for publishing it.

But, vaccine uptake for children is low. This is expected as we have clearly observed that susceptibility is inversely proportional to age. Good!
A lot of news today is actually opinion. For some reason some people got the insight that facts are opinions, so they rather want us to teach opinions instead of (biased) facts.
The same trend can be seen in news and in government. Some things, like culture, aren't binary. So sure you can put history as an input for that, good or bad.
But some things are actually binary facts, like math and some forms of science. You could remove all knowledge of it from the planet and 1000 years later the same concepts would be there again.
The vaccine and it's research are more complex, as our body is a complex system, and not everyone is identical. So to make claims we need a lot of data, meaning studies on a lot of people over a long time.
We'll find out the truth eventually if this researched isn't buried by opinion.

More news:
"Accumulated data in the past years suggest that vitamin D deficiency has an adverse effect on cardiovascular (CVD) health and that its prevalence is significantly higher among patients with CVD risk factors, contributing to the pathogenesis of CVD."
"Conclusions: Vitamin D deficiency is associated with CVD and other risk factors in this Israeli study population. The prevalence of the deficiency in Israel is similar to the prevalence found in less sunny regions."
Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20955219/

"Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, pre-infection deficiency of vitamin D was associated with increased disease severity and mortality."
Source: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0263069
 
Last edited:
My county is in the medium range of COVID-19 levels now. What concerns me about this map though is the huge cluster of high range counties in West Virginia, western Virginia, and eastern Kentucky. Could it be a new variant? Sure looks weird on the map.

 
Assume everyone is vaccinated. Some will still end up seriously ill, and some (fewer) will end up dead.
Assume all but one is vaccinated. While the unvaccinated person remains alive and not seriously ill, all seriously ill and dying people will have been vaccinated. This does not mean the vaccine is ineffective.
Assume some of the people are not vaccinated. The disease is 'as serious as the common cold' for most people, but for a small proportion, it is not. That proportion is higher in unvaccinated people than for vaccinated.
So, you need to know what percentage of unvaccinated people are becoming seriously ill, or dying compared to the percentage of of vaccinated people who are becoming seriously ill or dying. Comparing the absolute numbers does not tell you this.

If a small proportion of a large population of vaccinated people get seriously ill or die, the absolute numbers can easily exceed a larger proportion of a smaller population of unvaccinated people.

The statistics are further complicated by the differing case fatality ratios for different age cohorts. Children tend to be unvaccinated (especially if very young), but very rarely develop severe symptoms and/or die, so they skew the statistics, making it look as though lack of vaccination is not all that bad. As you get older the CFR increases, but the vaccination rate increases as well.

The article is scaremongering by inappropriate and incorrect use of publicly published statistics.

Edit to add:

The originating website is not a credible source of information.


Please do not spread such disinformation.
 
Last edited:
This does not mean the vaccine is ineffective
Exactly! and that's why you only need one dose... for a lifetime long protection, right?
Well, just kidding. You can't get Covid in the timerange 14 days after the shot (needs some time to produce spikes and get the whitebloodcells alerted and effective) and then for an X amount of days you are guaranteed to not get... no, there is no such data Confuzzled. You are just repeating the narrative. It does not mean the vaccine is effective either.

Let me show you an example: Baby's born with less weight and stillborns. The vaccinated group has more of them, but in the conclusions they just write: vaccinated women are older, so that explains the difference:
But then do not group tit-for-tat, same age mothers... to actually be able to check if that statement is correct. (they do have some age-ranges, but the data lacks granularity to do good analysis - and that's the crux of the problem, we get not-good-enough data to crunch numbers ourselves to have high confidence levels in what we are reading/get presented)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top