|
Post by nazcard on Aug 2, 2023 23:57:18 GMT -6
The NYT article contained information. Respond to it, do not ignore it. Your "leading authority" simply isn't accepted as such. By the scientific community. The NYT nails that. I think I raised reasonable questions about allegations you made, and fear you are dodging those questions using the NYT as a red herring. In particular the idea you double down on that there was malicious and intentional harm done is simply not supported even if some of the misinformation you offer had more credibility. You're such an angry and bitter person, why?; the New York Times ceased being a legitimate journalistic outlet years ago (i.e. they've become an overtly liberal rag). As such I'm certainly under no obligation to respond to a NYT crap sandwich. You say the NYT "nails that", here is what nails the NYT, noted outspoken Hollywood conservative actor James Woods says: "The New York Times "won" the Pulitzer Prize for relentlessly shoving Adam Schiff's ridiculous Russia Hoax down the throats of its gullible readers. Yet they have no interest in the biggest presidential corruption scandal since Watergate. But they're not biased". Of course he is referring to Hunter and the "Big Guy". I couldn't care less about your opinion of Woods (for the record I'm an unapologetic Ronald Reagan conservative), be that as it may, he is entitled to his opinion and so am I. I had intended to post a link to a new Swiss study correlating myocarditis with concomitant vaccine recipients showing a stunning 20 fold increase in myocardial events associated with vaccine recipients, however, I will not share that as it was posted on an R. W. Malone site and you would of course freak out over Malone once again; maybe you will find it posted at the NYT or possibly the National Lampoon archives. Peace and good night.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 3, 2023 8:43:34 GMT -6
I don't see any anger, bitterness in my post.
If you consider that guy authoritative I don't see why you can't answer that NYT article critique of his credentials, based in part on quoting true authorities.
And, you still haven't provided any support for the bulk of assertions made above.
You still seem in denial that COVID has much more serious side effects than vaccine, including fatalities. I'm all for research on drug safety, I'm sure we'll learn from it how to improve vaccine choices.
|
|
|
Post by nazcard on Aug 3, 2023 23:43:02 GMT -6
"In case you wondered why you suddenly started hearing so much about respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) when you'd never heard of it before... a vaccine was in development. This is how vaccines and other meds are marketed: first a lot of articles and "awareness" and even scares are generated to create market (or perception of need). The new vax is now ready and being promoted by CDC for babies for fall". -Sharyl Attkisson
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 4, 2023 5:57:28 GMT -6
RSV was isolated first in 1956.
It causes 40% of cases of acute bronchitis. Are you saying it is no problem?
A provably effective vaccine is good news.
Gee, maybe the medical profession and public health officials should make no mention of it?
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 4, 2023 14:21:55 GMT -6
"In case you wondered why you suddenly started hearing so much about respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) when you'd never heard of it before... a vaccine was in development. This is how vaccines and other meds are marketed: first a lot of articles and "awareness" and even scares are generated to create market (or perception of need). The new vax is now ready and being promoted by CDC for babies for fall". Not clear why you oppose this new drug. RSV is dangerous for infants, not so much for adults and the new drug is recommended for vulnerable infants.
60K-80K children are hospitalized annually with 100+ deaths.
There is a new vaccine from Pfizer that is not yet approved which would mean pregnant mothers would confer immunity to their children. The recently approved Beyfortis immunization is not exactly a vaccine but a monoclonal antibody that lasts one year. It is for high risk infants.
Both these drugs are cheaper that a very expensive drug now existing to fight RSV.
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Aug 4, 2023 14:30:43 GMT -6
in the 1990s Fauci published a paper wherein he touted Ivermectin as a potential wonder drug for treating cancers. OK, fair enough, why then did it (Ivermectin) become a 'not approved for human use' "horse dewormer" during the so-called pandemic? These things don't happen without a reason. By the way, don't waste time trying to find Fauci's publication as it appears to have been 'scrubbed', or whatever. A few weeks ago Robert Kennedy Jr in an interview on Hannity (Fox News) gave a rather simply answer to this. Seems in order to approve the use of an experimental vaccine like that for Covid-19 there couldn't be a therapeutic available to treat it. Thus the use of Ivermectin had to be crushed or else Big Pharma couldn't make their billions from their vaccines. How may people lost their lives to Covid-19 because Ivermectin was discredited is the real question.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 4, 2023 14:51:43 GMT -6
Ivermectin use was crushed because it did not work. Your premise that we should let disease run rabid rather than try to stop its spread, but only treat it, would require an extremely effective drug.
|
|
|
Post by nazcard on Aug 4, 2023 23:45:50 GMT -6
Bsutrack brings up a valid point, unfortunately your bigotry and hatred blocks your ability to appreciate or perceive it, however, I digress. You completely misunderstood my above from Sheryl Atkinson; fair enough. Please allow me to use another illustration related to RFk jr. I will stay at the surface level and avoid going into the "data weeds". He has very compelling data regarding vaccine issues; he has offered to debate the so-called opponents, but has no takers (they know he would destroy them). His data clearly demonstrates a high correlation between early vaccines in children with later onset of autism. That is the inherent point of Atkinson, when is early vaccination in children, infants, newborns too early? What are the downstream problems? If we had a functioning media willing to do investigative journalism and dig for answers perhaps we would know. Rather we have "journalists" whose jobs are dedicated to destroying those trying expose the truth; I said it before and it needs repeating, "The truth said Diogenes, is like light to the sore eyes".
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 5, 2023 7:34:55 GMT -6
RFKJr and his views on autism have been debunked so many times.
If you cite the source for these "compelling" stats you find the research producing them to be fatally flawed. The scientists cited discredited.
When I see Mayo Clinic and every other reputable medical care institution evaluate the so called science and reject it, and when scientific journals that are referred reject it, I can't ignore that.
That is science not conspiracy. If well run studies surface scientific authority will recognize it. A political debate is not the path to scientific truth.
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Aug 19, 2023 21:05:00 GMT -6
Most Intensive Ivermectin Use Had 74% Reduction In Excess Deaths In PeruAccording to a new peer-reviewed ecological study, a natural experiment occurred when the government of Peru authorized ivermectin for use during the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in evidence of the drug’s effectiveness and ability to reduce excess deaths. www.cureus.com/articles/172991-covid-19-excess-deaths-in-perus-25-states-in-2020-nationwide-trends-confounding-factors-and-correlations-with-the-extent-of-ivermectin-treatment-by-state#!/ The Peruvian Ministry of Health, on May 8, 2020, approved ivermectin widely for use prompting 25 states in Peru to implement inpatient and outpatient treatments with ivermectin to different extents and in different time frames. Additionally, through the Mega-Operación Tayta (MOT)—a national program led by the Ministry of Defense—Peru’s government began distributing ivermectin on a wide scale. Through a partnership with 11 other government agencies, MOT aimed to reach every targeted region with rapid response teams to detect COVID-19 cases, administer ivermectin, and provide food to encourage people to isolate for 15 days. Shortly thereafter, MOT began distributing the therapeutic to everyone identified as high-risk, regardless of whether they tested positive or were symptomatic for COVID-19. The government of Peru independently tracked daily COVID-19 deaths and all-cause deaths through numerous Peruvian national health databases, allowing researchers to calculate excess deaths. Additionally, they extensively tracked data for deaths and other public health parameters allowing analysis of the potential efficacy of interventions such as ivermectin during the pandemic. When President Francisco Sagasti took office on Nov. 17, 2020, the government stopped distributing ivermectin and made it available only by prescription. This made the drug significantly more difficult for people to obtain and allowed researchers to see nationwide changes in daily excess all-cause deaths before and after restrictions went into place.When ivermectin was available without restriction, there was a fourteenfold reduction in nationwide excess deaths. Once access to ivermectin was restricted by the government, a thirteenfold increase in excess deaths was observed in the two months following the limitation of its use.
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Aug 19, 2023 21:11:29 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 19, 2023 23:03:13 GMT -6
You do not want to compare peer reviewed research on this topic.
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Aug 20, 2023 21:11:33 GMT -6
Peer reviewed research funded by Big Pharma you mean. Robert Kennedy nailed it when he pointed out if there had been an approved therapeutic to treat Covid such as Ivermectin then they never would have received emergency authorization to sell their vaccine. The patents on Ivermectin had long expired so Big Pharma couldn't make huge profits off it. If they could have still controlled it's marketing, then it would have been championed by them and all the "scientists" in their pay.
|
|
|
Post by nazcard on Aug 21, 2023 0:09:06 GMT -6
Frens, as some say, there may need to be an update, or a lockdown part II thread started: it would appear "The Rich Men North Of Richmond" are planning a new "variant" with concomitant lockdowns (planned launch Oct23). As a slight digression it appears Pfizer and Moderna profits are down about 98%, probably just a coincidental occurrence to another planned pandemic scare. So what do you do? Introduce another variant (once you make it or something), get more dopes to mask-up and take the new Pfizer and Moderna vaccine (which of course will kill more than any virus possibly could) and drive profits for those previously mentioned. Links you request, no problem, and just to piss off someone, here's one from, dare I say it, yes, Alex Jones:
Jones:https://www.infowars.com/posts/the-lockdowns-are-coming-back/
And a post from Kari Lake, a true Arizona patriot:
"I will not comply with any new mandates or lockdowns. Ain't gonna happen. Who's with me?" 1:17 PM • Aug 20, 2023
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 23, 2023 9:09:10 GMT -6
Frens, as some say, there may need to be an update, or a lockdown part II thread started: it would appear "The Rich Men North Of Richmond" are planning a new "variant" with concomitant lockdowns (planned launch Oct23). I see. Alex Jones and Kari Lake should be trusted? A "planned" variant? Politicians wanting a lock down? The first not supported, the second very unlikely to produce any gain for the politicians.
Have you considered the incentives for the prophets you are following?
|
|