News Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread IV

[DesertRoo]

If you were familiar with Clinical Papers you would know that authors are compelled to outline “limitations” of the research.
In this case, the limitations were not important enough for the Peer review process to reject the paper - they were inconsequential.

You realise the study was narrow scope, specifically looking at data for only up to 21 days after the second dose, it doesn’t account for events the after the first dose, doesn’t account for people who haven’t attended ER. the authors acknowledge it, no one claims this apart from you.


“Mycoarditis in young men is the most serious side effect at a rate of between 12-26/million depending on the mRNA Vaccine used.
That means the mRNA Vaccine is are over 99.999% safe in the highest risk cohort.”

 

[No SPIN]

You realise the study was narrow scope, specifically looking at data for up to 21 days after the second dose, it doesn’t account for the after the first dose, the authors acknowledge it, no one claims this apart from you.


“Mycoarditis in young men is the most serious side effect at a rate of between 12-26/million depending on the mRNA Vaccine used.
That means the mRNA Vaccine is are over 99.999% safe in the highest risk cohort.”

I was asked to substantiate my claim, which I did by supplying the study.
If you don’t like the maths then take it up with your maths teacher.

 

[DesertRoo]

I was asked to substantiate my claim, which I did by supplying the study.
If you don’t like the maths then take it up with your maths teacher.

you came to the conclusion by yourself with data from a press release. Massive difference between substantiating your claim that the mRNA Vaccine is are over 99.999% safe in the highest risk cohort.
You understand the difference?

 

[North1411]

No - I just understand BS and inane rebuttals when I see them.
Unlike yourself I understand the difference between quality research, and tweets from charlatans and schiffs.

I don't think you do, you don't read the study at all, you don't seem to look at the method or anything other than abstract. It does not matter if it is peer reviewed, you have to look at the method to understand the results. And then how far yoi can extrapolate it. How you think that study is able to claim that pfizer and moderna have 99.9965% safety is mind boggling.

Your not scientific you are dogmatic! So really there is no point in us engaging any further on this subject as you won't even consider any data or evidence that does not fit your narative.

 

[No SPIN]

you came to the conclusion by yourself with data from a press release. Massive difference between substantiating your claim that the mRNA Vaccine is are over 99.999% safe in the highest risk cohort.
You understand the difference?

I think you are spinning your wheels now.

 

[No SPIN]

I don't think you do, you don't read the study at all, you don't seem to look at the method or anything other than abstract. It does not matter if it is peer reviewed, you have to look at the method to understand the results. And then how far yoi can extrapolate it. How you think that study is able to claim that pfizer and moderna have 99.9965% safety is mind boggling.

Your not scientific you are dogmatic! So really there is no point in us engaging any further on this subject as you won't even consider any data or evidence that does not fit your narative.

No - that is plain wrong.
I read the study and agree with the editors the “limitations” are inconsequential.
I might be dogmatic but do it from a position of strength, using quality scientific data.

That’s a hell of a lot more than the tweets, and posts from charlatans used here and thought factual and reliable.
Maybe you should be targeting those posts, because your criticism here is just silly by comparison.

 

[ferball]

There’s a link to the study in article.
When looked in the context of live saved by the jab, most would consider cost secondary.

The study is behind a pay wall.

Its main conclusion is one vaccine has higher rates of side effects than another.

 

[Tas]

On current pace we are due to hit over 14k deaths again this year.

 

[franjon]

I don't think you do, you don't read the study at all, you don't seem to look at the method or anything other than abstract. It does not matter if it is peer reviewed, you have to look at the method to understand the results. And then how far yoi can extrapolate it. How you think that study is able to claim that pfizer and moderna have 99.9965% safety is mind boggling.

Your not scientific you are dogmatic! So really there is no point in us engaging any further on this subject as you won't even consider any data or evidence that does not fit your narative.

Brother, honestly, BigFooty is not an IT class, if you don't like something just move on.

 

[No SPIN]

The study is behind a pay wall.

Its main conclusion is one vaccine has higher rates of side effects than another.

Incorrect - it’s main conclusion is very very very low risk of heart issues with mRNA jabs - 99.9965% safe to be exact.

 

[ferball]

Incorrect - it’s main conclusion is very very very low risk of heart issues with mRNA jabs - 99.9965% safe to be exact.

From the abstract...

This study aimed to compare the risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, and myopericarditis between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273.

....

Myocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is rare, but we observed a 2- to 3-fold higher odds among individuals who received mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2. The rate of myocarditis following mRNA-1273 receipt is highest among younger men (age 18-39 years) and does not seem to be present at older ages. Our findings may have policy implications regarding the choice of vaccine offered.

So it aimed to compare the risk (a risk already known and acknowledged) between two mRNA vaccines. This risk was already acknowledged by this time (Nov, 2022) and had been demonstrated repeatedly over the year leading up till then.

It was already acknowledged that young men were the highest risk cohort and their risks were higher than other demographic groups. This data came about after mass vaccinations and wasn't picked up in the clinical testing. Studies from Europe, Israel and the West Coast of the US, all peer reviewed and published in reputable journals over the summer of 2021/22 all showed incidences of mycarditis among young men post vaccination in ranges between one in 800 and one in 5000.

Furthermore these studies show the incidence is higher between 15/16 and 24 years olds.

One final point. People who suffered vaccine injuries in 2021 faced difficulty getting a diagnosis. There are people who were diagnosed with psychosis and not offered any medical examination of their heart after first presenting with heart issues in emergency departments. Later proper diagnosis by cardiologists confirmed that they should have been diagnosed with pericarditis.

The constant minimising of the risk and repeating the mantra "safe and effective" contributed to these misdiagnoses and you are continuing with that by not acknowledging other reputable studies that show a far higher risk rate among younger men than is acknowledged in the study you quoted.

I'm not opposed to vaccines at all but we need honesty around this issue cos there are plenty of people who have lost trust in scientific medicine as a result of how certain authorities conducted themselves during this pandemic.

 

[No SPIN]

From the abstract...

This study aimed to compare the risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, and myopericarditis between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273.

....

Myocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is rare, but we observed a 2- to 3-fold higher odds among individuals who received mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2. The rate of myocarditis following mRNA-1273 receipt is highest among younger men (age 18-39 years) and does not seem to be present at older ages. Our findings may have policy implications regarding the choice of vaccine offered.

So it aimed to compare the risk (a risk already known and acknowledged) between two mRNA vaccines. This risk was already acknowledged by this time (Nov, 2022) and had been demonstrated repeatedly over the year leading up till then.

It was already acknowledged that young men were the highest risk cohort and their risks were higher than other demographic groups. This data came about after mass vaccinations and wasn't picked up in the clinical testing. Studies from Europe, Israel and the West Coast of the US, all peer reviewed and published in reputable journals over the summer of 2021/22 all showed incidences of mycarditis among young men post vaccination in ranges between one in 800 and one in 5000.

Furthermore these studies show the incidence is higher between 15/16 and 24 years olds.

One final point. People who suffered vaccine injuries in 2021 faced difficulty getting a diagnosis. There are people who were diagnosed with psychosis and not offered any medical examination of their heart after first presenting with heart issues in emergency departments. Later proper diagnosis by cardiologists confirmed that they should have been diagnosed with pericarditis.

The constant minimising of the risk and repeating the mantra "safe and effective" contributed to these misdiagnoses and you are continuing with that by not acknowledging other reputable studies that show a far higher risk rate among younger men than is acknowledged in the study you quoted.

I'm not opposed to vaccines at all but we need honesty around this issue cos there are plenty of people who have lost trust in scientific medicine as a result of how certain authorities conducted themselves during this pandemic.

Please provide the “reputable Studies that show FAR higher risk”.
Off you go - I look forward to seeing them.

There are far far more people having FOUND trust in science and avoided serious illness or death by being Vaxxed.

 

[North1411]

From the abstract...

This study aimed to compare the risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, and myopericarditis between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273.

....

Myocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is rare, but we observed a 2- to 3-fold higher odds among individuals who received mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2. The rate of myocarditis following mRNA-1273 receipt is highest among younger men (age 18-39 years) and does not seem to be present at older ages. Our findings may have policy implications regarding the choice of vaccine offered.

So it aimed to compare the risk (a risk already known and acknowledged) between two mRNA vaccines. This risk was already acknowledged by this time (Nov, 2022) and had been demonstrated repeatedly over the year leading up till then.

It was already acknowledged that young men were the highest risk cohort and their risks were higher than other demographic groups. This data came about after mass vaccinations and wasn't picked up in the clinical testing. Studies from Europe, Israel and the West Coast of the US, all peer reviewed and published in reputable journals over the summer of 2021/22 all showed incidences of mycarditis among young men post vaccination in ranges between one in 800 and one in 5000.

Furthermore these studies show the incidence is higher between 15/16 and 24 years olds.

One final point. People who suffered vaccine injuries in 2021 faced difficulty getting a diagnosis. There are people who were diagnosed with psychosis and not offered any medical examination of their heart after first presenting with heart issues in emergency departments. Later proper diagnosis by cardiologists confirmed that they should have been diagnosed with pericarditis.

The constant minimising of the risk and repeating the mantra "safe and effective" contributed to these misdiagnoses and you are continuing with that by not acknowledging other reputable studies that show a far higher risk rate among younger men than is acknowledged in the study you quoted.

I'm not opposed to vaccines at all but we need honesty around this issue cos there are plenty of people who have lost trust in scientific medicine as a result of how certain authorities conducted themselves during this pandemic.

I wouldn't waste your time on the guy ferball, he is cooked. He found one study with multiple weak points that he will dogmatically claim proves his point. He make no effort to use scientific method to assess the study as it fits his narrative

 

[ferball]

Please provide the “reputable Studies that show FAR higher risk”.
Off you go - I look forward to seeing them.

There are far far more people having FOUND trust in science and avoided serious illness or death by being Vaxxed.

I posted a fair few of them over a year ago. But I will chase them up when I get round to it. Over the next few days.

 

[No SPIN]

I wouldn't waste your time on the guy ferball, he is cooked. He found one study with multiple weak points that he will dogmatically claim proves his point. He make no effort to use scientific method to assess the study as it fits his narrative

Wake up sport.
If you can’t find studies to squash my “dogma”, then clearly that suggests it’s not dogma but fact.

 

[franjon]

Is there any chance of getting back to football?

 

[DesertRoo]

Message from one of the remianing lawyers of the apartheid.. Jay Naidoo: 'New Apartheid' is even worse than Nats, it's determined to take our lives

Spoiler

My Open Letter to the Workers Movement – The Meaning of Solidarity​

By Jay Naidoo

What I am witness to today has brought me back to the tyranny I have fought against all my life. And this time, it is affecting all of us, with no exception.

I was a statistic under apartheid. At four years old, my family was evicted from our home, our stable community, from our friends and extended family, alongside 3
million black South Africans by apartheid’s perverted social and political engineers because we were a black spot. We were non-beings to be abused, used and discarded on the rubbish bin by a crime against humanity – apartheid.


That’s what plunged me into activism. I was part of the 1976 generation, shaped by fiery activism of social justice fuelled by iconic heroes of our struggle like Steve Biko and Nelson Mandela. We were prepared to die for the freedom of our people.
And many did.
But now at 68 I see an even bigger struggle against the subjugation now facing the whole of humanity. A new apartheid at every level of our society now determined to take our lives. In the past two years it’s ugly spectre of the pandemic response has sowed its seeds of division, coercion and conflict across the world. It’s
fear mongering tactics has divided families, relationships, communities, nations and the whole of humanity.
In this battlefield I see the broken bodies of the innocent again. And mounting vaccine injuries and death tolls. From the colonisation of land and countries, we are now facing colonialism of our bodies through the greed of BigPharma penetrating the once sacred citadels of democracy, manipulating and corrupting our leadership. And ultimately usurping our rights over our personal freedoms and even the right to informed consent.
We haven’t been informed as to what is in these vaccines. And our watchdogs of society chose to ignore the 80 000 pages Pfizer wanted to hide for 75 years but was forced to disclose. In these pages they reveal the 1291 side effects of this “vaccine”. I see cases of vaccine injuries in my family and around me.
We also know that most people dying from COVID now are vaccinated. And interestingly enough, excess deaths figures are exploding across the world except in countries with low COVID vaccination rates.
I want to hear both sides of this debate of a divided medical profession. Hundreds of thousands of doctors from neurologists to cardiologists to endocrinologists to oncologists are sounding the alarm bell. But we have chosen to listen to Pfizer, who has paid one of the largest criminal fine in the history of human kind. And doctors and specialists to whom we have been seeking advice and care for decades but all of a sudden are ostracised and demonised because they do not espouse the narrative of the government and their allies in the pharmaceutical industry. And that reminds me of the dark days of apartheid repression and censorship.
It is an established fact that the COVID mRNA vaccine given to billions does not give us immunity. It does not stop transmission. In fact, in the papers of Pfizer and Moderna, they admit that this is an experiment. Furthermore, Stefan Oelrich’s, head of pharmaceutical giant Bayer said at the World Health Summit 2021 in Berlin “We are really taking that leap [to drive innovation] in cell and gene therapies…ultimately the mRNA vaccines are an example of that cell and gene therapy. I always like to say: if we had surveyed two years ago in the public – ‘would you be willing to take a gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body’ – we probably would have had a 95% refusal rate.” They are not hiding their sinister agenda anymore.
Adding to that, the number of reported vaccine injuries and deaths now exceed those of all vaccines combined in the last 30 years. Be it the Yellowcard scheme in the UK, the VAERS in the US, or the VigiAccess of the WHO, all indicate an alarming number of injuries and deaths never seen before. According to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency of the UK, the injury reporting may be less than 10% of the actual figures.
To see South African workers who I have spent most of my life with, broke bread with and built family with threatened by employers with dismissal and many actually fired if they refused an experimental untested vaccine without informed consent is a breach of the hard won freedoms and worker struggles of our past. And even more appalling is senior labour lawyers, media journalists and medical doctors are still supporting and actually forcing workers at the threat of losing their jobs is arbitrary, illegal and in conflict with the spirit of our Constitution.
I was shocked to see the once eminent lawyer, Halton Cheadle, a stalwart of our workers struggle and a key advisor to me as General Secretary of COSATU in the turbulent Eighties and in shaping the labour legislation post-apartheid say that, “ it is legally possible to fire a employee who refuses to get the COVID vaccine.”
This is the most bizarre interpretation of our Constitutional rights that hark back to dark days of our exclusionary apartheid politics. I am however heartened by some labour leaders, including the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), which says it will “fight tooth and nail to protect its members from the repercussions of resisting the jab, should it become compulsory to inoculate.”
“Just as it was done with TB and HIV, testing was voluntary and the process proved to be a success. We are of the view that when it comes to Covid-19, the same principle should apply,” said NUM deputy president Phillip Vilakazi. I have seen reports of nursing staff and doctors threatened if they talk about vaccine injuries they are seeing.
I ask myself why the courageous defenders of workers of the past when employers in the public and private sectors corporates discriminate, victimise and dismiss workers for refusing to take this vaccine?
I take a stand on this this because I am aware that lurking on the horizon are new pandemic scenarios being hatched by political and economic elites of the world while we are still reeling from the catastrophic impact of this current COVID pandemic response.
Like millions of others I have personal experience of vaccine injuries. I reiterate the call by eminent global cardiologist, Dr Aseem Malhotra and many thousands of others that we pause especially the vaccination of children. That is why we need a proper scientific debate across a very divided medical profession. And that we as citizens are given access to both sides of this debate.
Dr Aseem Malhotra and many outstanding medical professionals have spoken on the data that suggest there is when the official statistics indicate one injury in eight hundred vaccinations.
If we had to look at previous data the swine flu vaccine was withdrawn in 1976 when it recorded data showed one serious injury per 100 000. The Rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn in 1999 after 2 serious injuries per 10 000 and now we see that there are 1 serious injuries per 800 vaccinations.
And now we want to extend these vaccines to children when they have practically zero risk of dying from COVID. Between 0-19 years, there is a 99.997% survival rate.
Between 20-49 years, 99.98%; 50-69 years 99.5% and 70 years + – 94.6% (source: CDC.gov) We also now know that the FDA, the American Government and Twitter to name but a few admit that they squashed information about the role and power of natural immunity.
As a grandfather I stand up and will go back to the trenches to defend the rights of my grandchildren and the millions of others from what is a horrendous invasion of our rights to safe health and human well-being.
I believe that humanity is at a tipping point. And our guardians and watchdogs against vested interests are missing inaction. Real debate suffocated under the deluge of ridicule, demonisation, censorship and labelling so crude that it should be regarded as hate speech.
The union movement needs to look itself in the mirror. There are more grassroots doctors fighting for worker’s rights than union leaders. What is being flung out the window in this high-handed pandemic response is the standard operating procedures we have followed in the past.
Early treatment protocols have been jettisoned, effective medicine to cure from COVID banned. Dr Sankara Chetty in Port-Edward for example has treated 14 000 patients from COVID, many with comorbidities. Not one hospitalization. Not one death. But we don’t want to listen to him. In fact, he was banned from YouTube for
disclosing his lifesaving recipe.
We are witness to the disembowelment of solidarity. The old slogan of an injury to one, is an injury to all is now buried under the baggage of compromised leadership.
It’s time that union leadership in our country take a stand. To demand a proper debate of the data and facts of this pandemic response which has negatively impacted on the lives of millions of South African workers.
In this battlefield as in the past let the Truth may be the only victor.

• Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines adverse reactions
• https://www.vigiaccess.org/ (type in COVID-19 in Database)
• VAERS - Data
• Dr. Meryl Nass: More Vaccine Deaths Reported to VAERS in the Last 20 Months Than All Vaccines in the Last 30 Years Combined

 

[DesertRoo]

Only three years late to the party

 

[Tas]

As far as I am aware, nobody has ever said that anything in this video is incorrect. It is from 6 months ago.

 

[DesertRoo]

 

[ferball]

Tas - Honestly dunno about that explanation of the creation of attenuated viruses. I thought it was a very different process.

The rest of what he says is fairly reasonable. Altho at 6 minutes in I've stopped listening cos its nothing new to me.

 

[ferball]

Its obviously a lab made virus imo.

Where are the wild reservoirs of covid? Compare the lack of them to SARS or even bird flu now.

 

[DesertRoo]

Its obviously a lab made virus imo.

Where are the wild reservoirs of covid? Compare the lack of them to SARS or even bird flu now.

Yep, and I’ve said this a few times now, people are going to get their heads around this was deliberately released.

 

[ferball]

Yep, and I’ve said this a few times now, people are going to get their heads around this was deliberately released.

I dunno about that. I've heard reports on the biosecurity that the Wuhan lab staff practiced and it wasn't great (if they're accurate.) Stories about staff repeatedly being exposed to biological material while picking up samples and in the lab and poor hygiene practices as well. Also that this research isn't done in the highest biosecurity labs either it might be done at tier 3 of 4. That's everywhere, not just Wuhan, cos of how these viruses are classified. But again I don't know that for sure.

It may have been tho. There was a point early in the pandemic when a Chinese general whose name I couldn't tell you said it was deliberately released by someone who was an extremist environmentalist who was a bit of a misanthrope.

I only heard that once tho, can't even remember where it came from.

 

[DesertRoo]

I dunno about that. I've heard reports on the biosecurity that the Wuhan lab staff practiced and it wasn't great (if they're accurate.) Stories about staff repeatedly being exposed to biological material while picking up samples and in the lab and poor hygiene practices as well. Also that this research isn't done in the highest biosecurity labs either it might be done at tier 3 of 4. That's everywhere, not just Wuhan, cos of how these viruses are classified. But again I don't know that for sure.

It may have been tho. There was a point early in the pandemic when a Chinese general whose name I couldn't tell you said it was deliberately released by someone who was an extremist environmentalist who was a bit of a misanthrope.

I only heard that once tho, can't even remember where it came from.

The eco health alliance darpa proposal mentioned an aerosol delivery.