Great, we can go to the range together and take our shots. I’ll just be sure to stay behind his SS personnel when it’s his turn. 
Wow! I know you love them Nazis, but don’t say they requested anything, because they didn’t. It doesn’t matter how many times you repeat a lie, it doesn’t make it true. Nazi’s commanded, forced, robbed, stole, killed, raped, etc. They DID NOT request.
1 Like
We need more lockdowns, just ask Twitter -
https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1412733437631467521?s=21
If you want a more serious review of whether lockdowns “worked” or not, there’s an extensive review of the literature and critiques of some of the papers on this here:
I’m not going to follow you down one of your pro nazi|fascist|socialist rabbit holes. Besides it would be a waste of everyone’s time. I’m not the compliant type, which those cesspool ideologies require.
1 Like
Sure, but that’s because in the UK a lot of people don’t yet have both doses of their vaccine, and against the India variant the vaccine efficacy for their main vaccines (AZN, PFE) are a lot lower with only one dose than they are after two. Yes, those vaccines’ protection levels a bit lower even after two doses than against the Wuhan Classic due to the vaccines being designed against the original strain, but that’s a smaller factor than that for some reason the interim vaccine protection from only 1 of 2 doses is a lot less good vs this variant.
Plus this India variant is a lot more transmissible generally so even if half your population is full vaccinated and mostly protected, that’s not enough for herd immunity when you’re looking at a R of 6 or something, so of course it’s growing exponentially in the other half of the population.
1 Like
Looks like one of the main changes in the India variant goes back to that furin cleavage site, which doesn’t appear in any similar coronaviruses but is common in genetic engineering. The relevant P681R mutation in this variant changes one of the 4 amino acids in that furin site and facilitates more effective viral entry into the human cells.
the acquisition of this mutation may be due to a trade-off between viral infectivity and immune evasion.
In summary, here we demonstrated that the P681R mutation, a hallmark of the B.1.617 lineage, enhances viral fusion and promotes cell-cell infection. Although the P681R mutant is highly fusogenic, the virus harboring the P681R mutation did not necessarily show higher growth compared to the parental virus
2 Likes
Ivermectin round up.
High quality Isreali study in mild/outpatient covid cases finds 3x better chances of a negative test after an 3 day course of ivermectin (as judged by PCR at day 6, having been treated for days 1-3). They also did live virus cultures to see if the person was infectious or not (rather than just still having PCR detecting inactive viral fragments) and they saw similar positive and statistically signficiant results for the ivermectin group. The lack of viral viability numbers show the drug really was helping your body kill the virus faster, with obvious improvements in outcomes.
Methods The double-blinded trial compared patients receiving ivermectin 0·2 mg/kg for 3 days vs. placebo in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients… Primary endpoint was reduction of viral-load on the 6th day (third day after termination of treatment) as reflected by Ct level>30 (non-infectious level). The primary outcome was supported by determination of viral culture viability.
On day 6, 34 out of 47 (72%) patients in the ivermectin arm reached the endpoint, compared to 21/ 42 (50%) in the placebo arm (OR 2·62; 95% CI: 1·09-6·31). In a multivariable logistic-regression model, the odds of a negative test at day 6 was 2.62 time higher in the ivermectin group (95% CI: 1·06–6·45). Cultures at days 2 to 6 were positive in 3/23 (13·0%) of ivermectin samples vs. 14/29 (48·2%) in the placebo group (p=0·008).
Conclusions There were significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which could lead to shortening isolation time in these patients.
Yet another meta review showing good prospects for ivermectin across many trials, roughly a 60% improvement in outcomes for those using it.
Therapeutic Advances:
Meta-analysis of 15 trials found that ivermectin reduced risk of death compared with no ivermectin (average risk ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.19–0.73; n = 2438; I2 = 49%; moderate-certainty evidence).Conclusions:
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.
You wouldn’t know that from reading the news (MSM ignores ivermectin nearly entirely). Here’s what Wikipedia editors are talking about for ivermectin. You can see all the good medical points being made by contributors and then hidden and removed for various, poorly justified reasons by the editors. Can’t have a cheap effective treatment ruin our pandemic.
Lastly, FLCCC, the doctor group who developed the covid treatments widely used now, with some Q&A on ivermectin.
This was supposed to be a really good interview with Kory by Brett Weinstein, but I haven’t listened to the whole thing yet. DarkHorse podcast is quite good.
Also promising are several testimonials on the FLCCC site where people with “long covid,” persistent symptoms months after testing negative for the virus, found significant and nearly immediate improvements in their health upon taking ivermectin.
2 Likes
Bipartisan support. A majority of both Democrat and Republicans surveyed now say they think the virus came from the Wuhan lab.
3 Likes
A bipartisan majority of Americans believe in things that may or may not be true! News at 11.
2 Likes
Ok, so all the deaths are unvaccinated. If you think the vaccine works, shouldnt this be the expected result?
But…why the conspicuous absence of what “all” consists of? Because while only half the population is vaccinated, deaths have fallen far more than 50%. Of course, we all know that was left out because it’d only show the ongoing paranoia over risk is simply not rational.
It’s grossly dishonest to continue pimping broad death data over 1.5 years as proof of risk, when the circumstances that produced that data no longer exists. Now that the most vulnerable are protected, the current data indicates this ‘pandemic’ is little more than a curiosity, and in fact comparable in risks to the flu and other viruses we live with every day.
4 Likes
Israel data analysis on who’s reporting new cases these days compared to their cohort’s vaccination status. Of course the different age groups have different behaviors and testing levels, and they don’t report what you’d need to separate a positive but mild case from a serious one.
1 Like
That looks like honest data. It’s obvious that they are very fortunate to have such a high rate of vaccination. :-]
Last evening’s Yankees/Red Sox game, at Yankee stadium, was cancelled only shortly before first pitch. Here is my best information:
Six Yankees players tested positive. Of those, at least three were vaccinated . . . . possibly all six.
Symptoms were mild, but it was COVID. No serious illness. No hospitalizations. But these are breakthrough infections and are thought to be the Delta variant.
My best counsel:
Get vaccinated. Then behave as if you had not been vaccinated.
UK studies covid deaths in children. Looked at deaths, to judge if their (often asymptomatic) positive test was incidental to their cause of death or if it was at least partly due to covid complications. Very rare as expected, less than suicide and accidents / trauma by 10x or more. Some racial minorities and kids with numerous existing health conditions were at higher risk.
During the pandemic, the mandatory National Child Mortality Database (NCMD) was linked to Public Health England (PHE) testing data to identify CYP (<18 years) who died with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. A clinical review of all deaths from March 2020 to February 2021 was undertaken to differentiate between those who died of SARS-CoV-2 infection and those who died of an alternative cause but coincidentally tested positive. Then, using linkage to national hospital admission data, demographic and comorbidity details of CYP who died of SARS-CoV-2 were compared to all other deaths. Absolute risk of death was estimated where denominator data were available.
Findings
3105 CYP died from all causes during the rst pandemic year in England. 61 of these deaths occurred in CYP who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. 25 CYP died of SARS-CoV-2 infection; 22 from acute infection and three from PIMS-TS [this is the kids inflammatory syndrome thought to be covid related]. 99·995% of CYP with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test survived. The 25 CYP who died of SARS-CoV-2 equates to a mortality rate of 2/million for the 12,023,568 CYP living in England. CYP >10 years, of Asian [that’s Indian/Pakistani in UK speak] and Black ethnic backgrounds, and with comorbidities were over-represented compared to other children.Conclusion
25 CYP died of SARS-CoV-2 during the rst pandemic year in England, equivalent to an infection fatality rate of 5 per 100,000 and a mortality rate of 2 per million. Most had an underlying comorbidity, particularly neurodisability and life-limiting conditions. The CYP who died were mainly >10 years and of Asian and Black ethnicity, compared to other causes of the death, but their absolute risk of death was still extremely low.
Healthy children were only 1/4 of those who died, so the above stats on risk are lower for them by a factor of 3-4.
1 Like
Yeah, one of these isn’t testing!
1 Like
The intra-country data is more interesting.
Mexico is doing plenty of tests to see the status of the relatively few people who die, unless you think they’re deliberately not testing likely covid deaths or something.
2 Likes
