42OhmsPA
Who likes Electrical Gremlins?
Here's a pill, wait that didn't work, let's try again. ...
Covid discussion
- Thread starter Recovering EE
- Start date
ScrodusGargleRotten
Solar Wizard
They Are trying to kill you
Daddy Tanuki
Emperor Of Solar
mine has run high since boot camp in 1985... never had it measured prior to that... some run high, some run low... some run normal and then it shoots up... it about change over time.
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
Good post Bongbong! When I read the post you responded to that was my exact thought... I remember when the vaccine first became available there weren't that many doses available. We're so remote we had to wait a long time and even then only those at extreme risk could get it. So, seems obvious any massive spike at the beginning would have little to do with the vaccine.
That spike must have been heart-breaking to everyone that worked so hard to not only create the vaccine, but to deploy it. Who could have been saved if it had been only a little faster? They're heroes though, they shouldn't be made to feel bad.
It's amazing how quickly people forget. It's like them wanting a decade study before releasing a life-saving vaccine. Some people really dumped their common sense on this issue. Sure, they scream in upper-case THE VACCINE DOESNT WORK because of their beliefs, but they don't challenge their beliefs with facts. Instead, they reinforce their paranoia with factless posts and getting information from conspiracy sites.
Independent trials, not tied to Big Pharma, show vaccines worked. India’s Covaxin, Cuba’s Abdala, Turkey’s CoronaVac, Iran’s COVIran Barekat, and Russia’s Sputnik V —all state- or academic-led, not Pfizer’s puppets—cut symptomatic cases and hospitalizations in rigorous RCTs. Real-world data, like Israel’s dose rollout correlating with fewer hospital beds filled, holds up even when you adjust for testing quirks. The UK’s age-stratified data? Vaccinated groups had lower hospitalization rates, Omicron be damned. Triangulate that with excess mortality stats, and the signal’s clear: vaccines saved lives, flaws and all.
Irregularities? Sure, they happened. A global scramble to save lives was bound to be messy—honestly, it’s a miracle it wasn’t messier. But irregularities don’t prove a grand hoax. They prove humans were racing against a killer virus.
It's been five years since the start the start of the pandemic, and the those decade long gold-standard tests are still in progress. The preliminary results look fantastic, high efficacy with near-zero risks:
- European Medicines Agency (EMA) - 95% efficacy Pfizer
- European Medicines Agency (EMA) - 95% efficacy Moderna
- Health Canada - 94.1%
- MHRA (UK) - 95%
- PMDA (Japan) - 95%
How did I know you were going to reject them like all the others?
Where's you DOI pointing out the virus doesn't work.
Those links work for me. Possibly you're in a country that's blocked?
Your anecdote about the conference superspreader event is intriguing, but it doesn’t hold up as robust scientific evidence. A controlled challenge test in monkeys would be ideal, but this human scenario lacks randomization, controls, and precise data on exposure, vaccination status, or confirmed infections. It’s more of an observational snapshot with too many uncontrolled variables to draw definitive conclusions. Comparing its statistical power to the Pfizer/Moderna RCTs is shaky at best. Those trials involved tens of thousands of participants, controlled conditions, and verified exposure rates, demonstrating 95% efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19. You want a DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2034577.
The EMA pages I referenced may not link directly to DOIs, but they summarize peer-reviewed studies accessible via PubMed. Real-world evidence from Israel, the UK, and the US further supports vaccine effectiveness, though it wanes over time and against variants. You want a DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2110345.
Your claim of near-zero vaccine efficacy relies on one uncontrolled event and dismisses extensive data. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not anecdotes.
In short, the burden of proof for vaccine efficacy has been met by multiple RCTs and real-world studies. Longer term tests are still in progress, but the results all say the same thing: The vaccine works. If you want to claim otherwise, it's you that needs a DOI.
Last edited:
Daddy Tanuki
Emperor Of Solar
what a faggotty ass answer..."That spike must have been heart-breaking to everyone that worked so hard to not only create the vaccine, but to deploy it. Who could have been saved if it had been only a little faster? They're heroes though, they shouldn't be made to feel bad."
are you fucking retarded? I mean honestly are you fucking retarded?
Last edited:
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
You're talking about the Cleveland Clinic's data? A single source not peer reviewed? The one that every other study contradicts? You know, it's the man bites dog stories that get reported. The, everything worked fine stories don't get printed. But sure, repeat that without checking facts and scare people away from life-saving vaccines.
When you collate the data from all the trials the flu vaccine was 63–78% effective against hospitalizations in children.
Half the number of kids being hospitalized sounds good to me. 26,000 people died from the flu in 2024 around the world. 206 of them children in the U.S.
Sounds a lot more like someone in Cleveland has something against vaccines and fudged the data, you know... because they saw how bad vaccines are in the forums they visit.
Last edited:
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
| But, at least you know why your microplastic count is so high. ; -) |
Daddy Tanuki
Emperor Of Solar
hey fauchi Jr. remember go down the river not across the road.
ScrodusGargleRotten
Solar Wizard
All those drugs they have you take.
It probably was the saltpeter or bromide.
The willy tranquilizers.
BarracudaBob
Harvesting free photons from clean fusion
I knew there were carnivores I never saw one chewing on a plastic diet Coke bottle before.
Like big cockroaches if there was something around and they were hungry they wouldn't hesitate
* shrug *
I did not expect you to get it.
This data provides a robust upper bound. Unfortunately due to the lack of control group, it does not provide a lower bound. It is still adequate to reach a robust conclusion on the upper bound of efficacy, which is close to zero.
Controlled challenge studies on paid volunteers would have settled the issue quckly and decisively, unfortunately it was never done.
Even ignoring the vast number of irregularities that were spotted in this one, plus the conflict of interest and fraud, the inadequate testing procedures... the product being tested isn't the one that was later distributed, and the covid variant is also different to the one spreading when the product was distributed. So it's not applicable.
That is correct: the null hypothesis was "This vaccine attempt against a coronavirus should work the same as previous vaccine attempts against other coronavirus". That's why I read pretty much all of them to form an opinion. The extraordinary evidence has not been provided, so far the null hypothesis still stands.
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
Yeah right. The RCTs were more people and more rigorous.
Oh really... what irregularities? How significant were they? Enough to invalidate the results?
You asked for a DOI, received two, and dismissed one without explanation. There’s substantial evidence supporting vaccine effectiveness. Since you didn’t engage with the provided DOIs, here are several more DOIs to peer-reviewed studies demonstrating the vaccines’ efficacy across clinical trials and real-world settings:
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32661-1
- 10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
- 10.1056/NEJMoa2035389
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00448-7
- 10.1056/NEJMoa2113017
- 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.41.2100920
- 10.1056/NEJMoa2119451
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00153-5
- 10.1056/NEJMoa2110345
Just show me one DOI proving the Covid vaccine wasn't effective rather than continue to provide misinformation.
You mention irregularities, but all studies, including historical ones like Spanish flu records, have minor discrepancies, especially during a pandemic when researchers faced unprecedented challenges. There was a pandemic going on, even researchers and testers died. These don’t equate to conspiracy or invalidate results; it reflects the messiness of the real-world and shows authenticity of the data.
Even the Gold-Standard tests you wanted are underway and they are proving the vaccine isn't just effective, but two are highly effective. There's too much evidence for anyone to ignore, especially you as you seem knowledgeable. It's not that people don't get your viewpoint or don't understand you, it's that they reject it as it's innuendo and easily explained. There's too much credible evidence for anyone to ignore.
Personal beliefs, like flat-Earth theories, can be harmless. But spreading claims contradicting robust scientific evidence, without credible counterevidence, can cause harm by undermining public health. Challenge yourself: is it worth promoting a stance that lacks peer-reviewed support when lives are at stake?
Last edited:
42OhmsPA
Who likes Electrical Gremlins?
"Vaxxine" sure did work. It culled some pupulation.
Remember Billy G famous quote? If they do a good job with vaccines, they can reduce population by 15%.
They sure did hit that mark.
(And the "fact checkers" are hyperventilating saying that Billy G was misinterpreted, LOL)
corbettreport.com
Remember Billy G famous quote? If they do a good job with vaccines, they can reduce population by 15%.
They sure did hit that mark.
(And the "fact checkers" are hyperventilating saying that Billy G was misinterpreted, LOL)
Who Is Bill Gates? | The Corbett Report
corbettreport.com
It its 1968 annual report, the Rockefeller Foundation addressed the “Problems of Population,” lamenting that “[v]ery little work is in progress on immunological methods, such as vaccines, to reduce fertility, and much more research is required if a solution is to be found here.” The Foundation vowed to correct this problem by funding “established and beginning investigators to turn their attention to aspects of research in reproductive biology that have implications for human fertility and its control.”
This was no empty promise. By the time of its 1988 Annual Report, the Rockefeller Foundation was able to report progress on its funding into contraceptive research, including NORPLANT, a contraceptive implanted under the skin of a woman’s upper arm and effective for five years. In its 1988 report, the Rockefeller Foundation was pleased to announce that NORPLANT—which was developed by the Rockefeller-founded Population Council—was “now approved for marketing in 12 countries.”
The Rockefellers’ Population Council and other research organizations joined with the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1972 to create a Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation. By 1995, they were able to report progress in “developing a prototype of an anti-hCG-vaccine,” which works by combining an immunogen formed from a synthetic peptide of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG)—a hormone secreted by the surface of the early embryo to remain implanted in the womb—with a toxoid carrier molecule. The vaccine stimulates an immune reaction, causing women to develop antibodies against the hormone, thus preventing them from carrying babies to term.
But beginning in the 1990s, a series of scandals over WHO-led vaccination programs in the third world led to allegations that tetanus vaccines in places like the Philippines and Kenya were being laced with hCG in order to implement population control by stealth. The controversy generated by these stories led global institutions to step back from the campaign to champion population control by vaccine.
But, as usual, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was there to renew interest, working with the UK government to host a “London Summit on Family Planning” in 2012 at which the foundation announced their support for funding the research, development and deployment of injectable contraceptives to the developing world.
This was no empty promise. By the time of its 1988 Annual Report, the Rockefeller Foundation was able to report progress on its funding into contraceptive research, including NORPLANT, a contraceptive implanted under the skin of a woman’s upper arm and effective for five years. In its 1988 report, the Rockefeller Foundation was pleased to announce that NORPLANT—which was developed by the Rockefeller-founded Population Council—was “now approved for marketing in 12 countries.”
The Rockefellers’ Population Council and other research organizations joined with the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1972 to create a Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation. By 1995, they were able to report progress in “developing a prototype of an anti-hCG-vaccine,” which works by combining an immunogen formed from a synthetic peptide of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG)—a hormone secreted by the surface of the early embryo to remain implanted in the womb—with a toxoid carrier molecule. The vaccine stimulates an immune reaction, causing women to develop antibodies against the hormone, thus preventing them from carrying babies to term.
But beginning in the 1990s, a series of scandals over WHO-led vaccination programs in the third world led to allegations that tetanus vaccines in places like the Philippines and Kenya were being laced with hCG in order to implement population control by stealth. The controversy generated by these stories led global institutions to step back from the campaign to champion population control by vaccine.
But, as usual, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was there to renew interest, working with the UK government to host a “London Summit on Family Planning” in 2012 at which the foundation announced their support for funding the research, development and deployment of injectable contraceptives to the developing world.
Checkthisout
Emperor Of Solar
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2021
- Messages
- 5,444
lol
Oh wait, you're serious, let me laugh even harder.
If I rolled my eyes back into my head any faster I would have just created a perpetual motion machine.
Proof?
I will personally give you $30,000 if you provide proof of this.
Why don't you just play your banjo for us instead?
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
Ummm, just so you know... those images come from the CDC's "Scenario 5: Current Best Estimate" for pandemic planning. Not actual data. The animated gif was obviously put together by someone trying to bamboozle people with misinformation.
Even so, the survival rates being high does not mean COVID-19 was fake, it means that, for most people who contracted the virus, the outcome was not fatal. But the infection fatality rates, though small in percentage terms, still translate to significant numbers of deaths when applied to large populations. For example, an IFR of 0.054% for those over 70 may seem low, but in a population of millions, that can result in tens of thousands of deaths, especially since older individuals often have comorbidities that worsen outcomes.
Additionally, these figures don’t capture the full impact of the pandemic, such as:
- Hospitalization Rates: Even if someone survived, many required intensive care, which strained healthcare systems.
- Long COVID: Many survivors experienced long-term health effects.
- Excess Deaths: Globally, millions died directly or indirectly due to COVID-19, far exceeding typical annual death rates for respiratory illnesses.
- Variants and Context: These CDC estimates are from a specific point in time (likely early in the pandemic, around 2020). Later variants, like Delta, were more deadly, and outcomes improved with vaccines and treatments.
More people died from Covid than did in WWII.
But, since you like CDC data... let's look at this and see if you don't realize what harm spreading misinformation can do:
And yes, the image is a link to the CDC so you can verify I'm not putting together BS data like others.
Last edited:
Checkthisout
Emperor Of Solar
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2021
- Messages
- 5,444
Yes, they went into a cave and got a bat coronavirus, took it back to a lab and made it infectious to people where it infected a lab worker who then didn't cover his mouth when he sneezed while eating lunch at the wet market 1500 feet away from the lab where he worked.
So yes Bat-> Lab worker-> DingDong's Mom.
Checkthisout
Emperor Of Solar
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2021
- Messages
- 5,444
DingDong is the dipshit that thinks Hunter Bidens laptop was Russian disinformation yet thinks he's somehow an intelligent skeptic when it comes to the fact that Covid was a lab leak.
Checkthisout
Emperor Of Solar
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2021
- Messages
- 5,444
Ummm, just so you know... those images come from the CDC's "Scenario 5: Current Best Estimate" for pandemic planning. Not actual data. The animated gif was obviously put together by someone trying to bamboozle people with misinformation.
Even so, the survival rates being high does not mean COVID-19 was fake, it means that, for most people who contracted the virus, the outcome was not fatal. But the infection fatality rates, though small in percentage terms, still translate to significant numbers of deaths when applied to large populations. For example, an IFR of 0.054% for those over 70 may seem low, but in a population of millions, that can result in tens of thousands of deaths, especially since older individuals often have comorbidities that worsen outcomes.
Additionally, these figures don’t capture the full impact of the pandemic, such as:
To insinuate that COVID-19 was "fake" ignores the overwhelming evidence of its existence: peer-reviewed studies, genomic sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and firsthand accounts from healthcare workers. High survival rates reflect the virus's varying impact across demographics, not its nonexistence.
- Hospitalization Rates: Even if someone survived, many required intensive care, which strained healthcare systems.
- Long COVID: Many survivors experienced long-term health effects.
- Excess Deaths: Globally, millions died directly or indirectly due to COVID-19, far exceeding typical annual death rates for respiratory illnesses.
- Variants and Context: These CDC estimates are from a specific point in time (likely early in the pandemic, around 2020). Later variants, like Delta, were more deadly, and outcomes improved with vaccines and treatments.
But, since you like CDC data... let's look at this and see if you don't realize what harm you do spreading misinformation:
And yes, the image is a link to the CDC so you can verify I'm not putting together BS data like others.
Hey shit for brains, take a look.
Looks like Meat whisperer. Ghey
ScrodusGargleRotten
Solar Wizard
Calm down, As much as I agree with you:
Bongbong has been polite. Can we keep it more civil?
42OhmsPA
Who likes Electrical Gremlins?
Center of Dumbass Control.
bong = Leo
Similar threads
