Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Covid III: Delta Force


Recommended Posts

 

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

It is why I try not comment too much on this forum. Everyone has to pick a team.

How is this not doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing…requiring everyone on the board to “pick a team” when clearly many have not?

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Danzo said:

I am not sure I understand your question.

You have lumped the board into sides when from what I see most have varied positions where sometimes they are conservative and others liberal or don’t really attach to either. 

Link to comment
On 2/23/2022 at 4:56 PM, blarsen said:

Apparently, as “of 2:30 PM CT on July 21, 2021, the CDC's website modified the number of VAERS reports related to COVID-19 vaccination deaths from 12,313 to 6,079, through July 13, 2021”.  (See:   https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/covid-19-vaccine-related-fatalities-updated )

This is really old news.  

Quote

“The error resulted in what appeared to be a large spike in the number of deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) after COVID-19 vaccination,” Gill said. “It happened, accidentally, because of combining foreign and domestic reports, and has been corrected.”
When viewing VAERS data on its website, users can filter results by location, which includes U.S. states and territories, as well as an option labelled “foreign” and “unknown”. There are more than 110,000 results for adverse events following COVID-19 vaccines reported when selecting “foreign” and “unknown” as the location.
The advisory guide to the interpretation of VAERS data here explains: “VAERS occasionally receives case reports from US manufacturers that were reported to their foreign subsidiaries. Under FDA regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and unexpected (in other words, it does not appear in the product labeling), they are required to submit it to VAERS. It is important to realize that these case reports are of variable data quality and completeness, due to the many differences in country reporting practices and surveillance-system quality.” (vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html)
The 6,207 number of reported deaths remains on the website as of publishing, making up 0.0018 percent among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine after more than 339 million doses were administered in the U.S. (here). These deaths, however, are not confirmed to be causal.

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaers-deleted/fact-check-6000-vaers-reports-were-deleted-for-being-foreign-entries-cdc-says-idUSL1N2P91JS

Quote

Why did they do this?  According to some of their critics, they did this because they excluded any deaths that occurred within 14 days of a patient getting vaccinated, because they judged it takes that amount of time for the vaccination to take full effect; i.e., up to that time you aren’t considered fully vaccinated.

That is blatantly false.  You really need to question your sources as this is really quite embarrassing.  Vaccine related adverse events, including death, are most likely to happen within the first 2 weeks after vaccination (usually within the first 5 days).  It simply is not true that the CDC excludes deaths that occur within the first 14 days.  Adverse reactions from vaccination have nothing to do with the 2 week period it takes to build up full immunogenicity.   As a healthcare provider who is intricately familiar with VAERS and who has personally reported adverse reactions to vaccines, I can assure you this is not true.  In fact, I am pretty sure that you can search in VAERS to confirm the interval between vaccination and the adverse reaction.  Have you actually tried to verify these claims?

 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
On 2/23/2022 at 6:09 PM, blarsen said:

Oh, the Lancet. 

Yes, the Lancet, one of the most prestigious, respected, trusted, and impactful (rated second in impact factor globally) medical journals in the world, and is 200 years old.   Are you going to honestly try to discredit their work and reputation based on one retracted study after 200 years of reliability.  I wouldn't be surprised if McCullough himself proudly has several of his articles published in the journal.  Perhaps we should discount those studies because they were in the Lancet?  I also wouldn't be surprised if some of the 200+ studies that McCullough references are from the Lancet.  

On 2/23/2022 at 6:09 PM, blarsen said:

So, The Lancet is taking a fall-back position that it has no effect, using a metadata analysis.  That’s nice.  And how many articles out of the 3,000 did the authors actually use.  Not many, from my scan of it. 

After the first authors couldn't supply data for their conclusions in the retracted article, one can be assured that the peer review process was EXTRA vigilant the second time around to avoid the same controversy.  The study would have to be impeccable, knowing that strict scrutiny would be given to it.  The results would have to be repeatable and thoroughly detailed - which it is.  It is a solid pice of work that outlines the criteria for inclusion.  The question isn't how many articles were used, the question is how were they selected and why?  Was there any apparent bias in selecting for results?  The results are very compelling and transparent based on gold standard studies. 

On 2/23/2022 at 6:09 PM, blarsen said:

One would have to ask McCullough why he narrowed the field down to 250.  From my experience of the man, he would have a very good explanation for what he did.

No, one shouldn't have to ask.  One should be supplied with that data if the author wants to be taken seriously and trusted. But of course he already knows that as a well published researcher.  It is apparent that you are relying on blind trust in this specific regard.  The large scale metadata analysis in the Lancet stands mountains above McCullough's review of the research in terms of transparency, with methodology to block bias, and gold standard studies.  No comparison.  None at all. It is clear that you are not following the data, you are following your trust in this man.

On 2/23/2022 at 6:09 PM, blarsen said:

I’ve simply learned from fairly long experience to take almost any official position with a grain of salt when the topic is highly, highly controversial and has powerful political implications.

What do you mean by "official position"? We have medical consensus based on exhaustive research.  The medical community would not just take the CDCs word for it.  In other words, it is not just the "official position" (whatever that means), it is the position the medical and scientific community have all taken as guided by the research.  It is not a political thing.  Republicans and democrats alike in the medical community all agree with near consensus.  On the other hand, if you look at the outliers in the medical community, you are almost guaranteed to find a political leaning and bias. 

And I've learned from fairly long experience not to trust claims which can't be substantiated and are not transparent, and also have power political implications. 

On 2/23/2022 at 6:09 PM, blarsen said:

You’re not there, obviously . . . . yet.

If you think I am incapable of being critical, you are wrong.  I don't blindly trust.  Before the pandemic hit, you would see me on this board being very critical of many of the CDC positions, including certain vaccine mandates for children in schools, including Hep A and B.  Don't get me started on "the system"!  There is a LOT messed up about the medical system in the US, and the CDC and FDA are far from perfect.  There are a lot of things they get wrong, but there are a lot of things they get right.  Vaccination safety is one of those things.  There is no way that they are missing tens of thousands of deaths being caused by the vaccine. That simply isn't happening.  They have a demonstrated ability to find a needle in a haystack in terms of identifying extremely rare adverse reactions to vaccines.  

I will also note that if it is true that the rate of death from vaccination is as high as you and others believe without solid evidence - there is no way that this would have been missed in the large scale clinical trials for all of these vaccines.  It would be statistically impossible to not see that in the studies.  VAERS is one thing, but the more thorough and intense data comes from clinical trials.  The only things that are missed in these large scale clinical trials are the extremely rare adverse events that can't be captured in trials due to how rare they are and can only be seen and identified in larger population studies via VAERS.  Again, there is no way that the rate of death you claim would have been missed.  Furthermore, every death reported to VAERS is thoroughly investigated.  No causal link detected, and the CDC is always extremely conservative in their assessment of risk with vaccines. 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment

https://www.pharmacytimes.com/view/studies-show-slightly-elevated-risk-of-blood-clots-following-covid-19-vaccine
 

Quote

Two studies find only small elevated risk of blood clots following AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccination. EurekAlert. News release. February 22, 2022. Accessed February 23, 2022. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/943615

Possible new vaccine booster…

https://www.sanofi.com/en/media-room/press-releases/2022/2022-02-23-11-15-00-2390091

Edited by Calm
Link to comment

"

At the Munich Security Conference on Feb. 18, Bill Gates was asked to assess where we are at in beating the pandemic. He replied: “Sadly, the virus itself, particularly the variant called Omicron, is a type of vaccine. That is, it creates both B-cell and T-cell immunity.”

Maybe Mr. Gates read my Jan. 5 opinion piece, “Omicron May Help End the Pandemic This Winter”? I’m glad he agrees with me that Omicron is like an effective vaccine that is helping end the pandemic.

As a veteran vaccine scientist who spearheaded a vaccine project in 2003 against the original SARS, I was quite confident projecting where Omicron would lead the pandemic, given its characteristics after it emerged late last year. But knowing that the world’s most famous influencer looks at it the same way is quite satisfying.

 

"

From https://www.theepochtimes.com/pandemic-lessons-learned-omicron-vs-bill-gates_4302529.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-02-26-2&utm_medium=email&est=DXeTQ9y7cXY7n3nwrjniYOaDrZWiMNRZ1SR%2BSEtrjCQuuZYNH2mxEJVOsvjfvIfWML8d

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, longview said:

Sadly, the virus itself, particularly the variant called Omicron, is a type of vaccine. That is, it creates both B-cell and T-cell immunity.”

And it is sad because the cost of such a “vaccine” is quite high:

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220127/deaths-due-to-omicron-higher-than-from-delta

From January, so add. another month’s worth of deaths:

Quote

With the Omicron variant accounting for 99.9% of all COVID-19 cases in the United States, it’s proving even deadlier than the Delta variant.

This week the nation recorded a seven-day average of 2,200 daily coronavirus-related deaths, higher than the daily death count recorded two months ago during the Delta variant surge, The Wall Street Journal reported. 

That’s also the highest number of deaths since February 2021, when the U.S. was coming out of a winter wave of cases, and the vaccination drive was only a few months old, The Wall Street Journal said.

Health experts say that Omicron generally causes milder symptom than previous variants. But the death count is high because Omicron spreads quickly and is infecting a large number of people.

“You can have a disease that is for any particular person less deadly than another, like Omicron, but if it is more infectious and reaches more people, then you’re more likely to have a lot of deaths,” Robert Anderson, chief of the mortality-statistics branch at the National Center for Health Statistics, told The Wall Street Journal.

 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment

Utah is looking really good right now.  We are at a "medium" transmission level according to CDC standards.

Positive cases over the weekend: "433 are from Friday, 336 are from Saturday and the remaining 176 are from Sunday."

15.4% positivity rate, "falling from a peak of 47.4% on Jan. 21."

Only 3 deaths reported over the entire weekend!

Only 326 people hospitalized with Covid in Utah.   ICU beds are FINALLY below the utilization warning threshold of 72%.  Currently, there are 73 ICU patients being treated for Covid in Utah.

https://www.ksl.com/article/50358114/utah-reports-896-new-covid-19-cases-salt-lake-county-amends-transmission-guidelines

I am guessing there are a lot of happy people about the mask recommendations.

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, pogi said:

Utah is looking really good right now.  We are at a "medium" transmission level according to CDC standards.

Positive cases over the weekend: "433 are from Friday, 336 are from Saturday and the remaining 176 are from Sunday."

15.4% positivity rate, "falling from a peak of 47.4% on Jan. 21."

Only 3 deaths reported over the entire weekend!

Only 326 people hospitalized with Covid in Utah.   ICU beds are FINALLY below the utilization warning threshold of 72%.  Currently, there are 73 ICU patients being treated for Covid in Utah.

Interesting. We are averaging more daily cases than you are (in raw numbers), but we have no one currently in ICU and about 85 per cent fewer people in hospital. We are down to about one or two deaths per week as well. Vaccines rock!

Thanks for sharing.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Link to comment

COVID-19 can cause changes in the brain, study finds

A new COVID-19 symptom includes the brain losing gray matter

What they found: The study found that there was shrinkage and tissue damage in brain areas related to sense of smell, as well as areas associated with brain function.

 
  • The damage does not naturally occur with people who were not infected with COVID-19, the study said.
  • Those who required hospitalization from their COVID-19 infection had the most brain changes, according to USA Today.
  • Older participants had more changes than young participants, according to USA Today.

Why it matters: This study adds to the growing body of evidence that the novel coronavirus can have an impact on a patient’s brain, showing the long-term impact of COVID-19.

What they’re saying: “To me, this is pretty convincing evidence that something changes in brains of this overall group of people with Covid,” Dr. Serena Spudich, chief of neurological infections and global neurology at the Yale School of Medicine, told The New York Times.

https://www.deseret.com/coronavirus/2022/3/8/22965766/covid-19-symptom-brain-changes-gray-matter-tissue

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

COVID-19 can cause changes in the brain, study finds

A new COVID-19 symptom includes the brain losing gray matter

What they found: The study found that there was shrinkage and tissue damage in brain areas related to sense of smell, as well as areas associated with brain function.

 
  • The damage does not naturally occur with people who were not infected with COVID-19, the study said.
  • Those who required hospitalization from their COVID-19 infection had the most brain changes, according to USA Today.
  • Older participants had more changes than young participants, according to USA Today.

Why it matters: This study adds to the growing body of evidence that the novel coronavirus can have an impact on a patient’s brain, showing the long-term impact of COVID-19.

What they’re saying: “To me, this is pretty convincing evidence that something changes in brains of this overall group of people with Covid,” Dr. Serena Spudich, chief of neurological infections and global neurology at the Yale School of Medicine, told The New York Times.

https://www.deseret.com/coronavirus/2022/3/8/22965766/covid-19-symptom-brain-changes-gray-matter-tissue

This has happened to my poor mother-in-law. She was fine before and now we are moving her to assisted living with memory care. She doesn't remember anything she did that day and doesn't know who is on the other end of the line on the phone. She's improved since being out of quarantine. But not as much as we had hoped. It doesn't help that her sight has worsened and being alone in her room in a retired senior adult living apt they had these rules. So two weeks, is torture by herself.

Link to comment
On 2/28/2022 at 6:17 PM, Rivers said:

All three bishopric members maskless yesterday.  It was glorious.

I wish I could be excited by something like this. I don’t even mean that in the sense of whether I think we are ready to stop wearing masks. Assuming I think the time for masks is done I still wouldn’t be able to be excited by people not wearing them. I kind of wish I could. I would probably be a lot happier in general.

Link to comment
On 2/28/2022 at 3:23 PM, strappinglad said:

I will wait a couple of weeks to see if any spikes occur. Fingers crossed. 

Covid is a seasonal respiratory virus, so it will continue to ebb and flow through the months and years. Here in SoCal, I expect to see rises in the spring (around April), late summer (August), and winter (December - January) every year.

The question is how high those fluctuations will be, and what we need to do (and can do) to mitigate them?

And the biggest concern is new variants, especially those that "escape" prior immunity. If you're not seeing activity from new variants, and you're not approaching a seasonal rise in cases, you don't need to "cross your fingers" and hope. You can look at the current data and be pretty confident about your risk.

It looks like Alberta even publishes their wastewater testing data, so you have an excellent source of info. Wastewater testing is a leading indicator (so you can see case rises before they are reflected in individual tests), objective (no selection bias), and comprehensive (at-home test results are not reported in community data).

That being the case, the wastewater data seems to indicate cases are way down (>90%!) in Alberta. This should give you a lot of peace of mind.

https://www.alberta.ca/stats/covid-19-alberta-statistics.htm#wastewater-surveillance

 

You can also look at the Alberta dashboard's estimate of active cases. They estimate 7,158 active cases right now. For a population of 4.3m, that means the odds of someone having Covid in a random sample are 1/600. If you go to Church and there are 100 people there, it's likely no one is even infected.

Edited by cinepro
Link to comment
On 2/28/2022 at 2:50 PM, pogi said:

Utah is looking really good right now.  We are at a "medium" transmission level according to CDC standards.

Positive cases over the weekend: "433 are from Friday, 336 are from Saturday and the remaining 176 are from Sunday."

15.4% positivity rate, "falling from a peak of 47.4% on Jan. 21."

Only 3 deaths reported over the entire weekend!

Only 326 people hospitalized with Covid in Utah.   ICU beds are FINALLY below the utilization warning threshold of 72%.  Currently, there are 73 ICU patients being treated for Covid in Utah.

https://www.ksl.com/article/50358114/utah-reports-896-new-covid-19-cases-salt-lake-county-amends-transmission-guidelines

I am guessing there are a lot of happy people about the mask recommendations.

Update, Utah is now at a 6% positive test rate, and the 7-day-average of cases is down from its Omicron peak of 13,000/day to 273/day.

(I would also add that it is journalistic malpractice to report anything other than 7-day-averages for cases and deaths, since reporting fluctuates on weekends and certain days throughout the week).

Link to comment

I don't know if there is a way to compare, but now that Russia has been booted from several social networking sites, I wonder if the number of anti-vax posts has diminished? I have heard anecdotally that there was a sharp decrease when they were banned.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I barely stopped wearing them at the school. And might go back, especially since reading the above article about brain damage and my MIL going downhill fast after getting covid and having had been vaxxed. 

I don't want to take any chances, with my poor brain. And my likelihood of getting Alzheimer's like my mom in her early sixties.

I can't stand people like this horrible dude that might harass people, although come at me people, I'm ready, haha. 

⬇️

 

DeSantis is a moron. 
 

Oregon’s masking mandate ends 3/12. My employer is ending the requirement 3/19. We’ve been admonished to not harass those whom choose to continue wearing masks. The vast majority of my co-workers plan to continue masking at work/in public for the immediate future, and plan to more or less use masks at times throughout the future, as risk from Covid, the flu, colds, or other illnesses dictate. 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...