• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Corona Virus News & Info

TonyG

Formerly Agg
Joined
Feb 2, 2021
Messages
248
Reaction score
283
Location
Pa.
I have been reading that xylitol, the sugar substitute and a product called iota carrageenan made from red seaweed are also viral andhibitors and killers that are being incorporated into nasal sprays.

I have been talking with gold hedge about using xylitol and now here I found a article claiming that heavy doses of xylitol will help him regain weight.

Protection as a Function of Dosage of Xylitol​

We examined the effect on survival of the dosage of xylitol in combination with the water soluble fraction of RG. We used two doses of xylitol, xylitol 1 (3.3 mg/kg/day) and xylitol 2 (33 mg/kg/day). As shown in Fig. 2A, all mice receiving xylitol 1, xylitol 2 or the water soluble RG fraction on their own died, whereas 100 and 60% of mice survived in response to xylitol 2 with the water soluble fraction and xylitol 1 with the water soluble fraction, respectively (Fig. 2A). Moreover, the body weight of mice receiving xylitol 2 with the water soluble fraction recovered more rapidly than that of the mice receiving xylitol 1 with the water soluble fraction group (Fig. 2B). The beneficial effect of xylitol is clearly dosage dependent.

 

TonyG

Formerly Agg
Joined
Feb 2, 2021
Messages
248
Reaction score
283
Location
Pa.
Ivermectin related


Background: Up-to-date, there is no recognized effective treatment or vaccine for the treatment of COVID-19 that emphasize urgency around distinctive effective therapies. This study aims to evaluate the anti-parasitic medication efficacy "Ivermectin" plus standard care (azithromycin, vitamin C, Zinc, Lactoferrin & Acetylcystein & prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation if D-dimer > 1000) in the treatment of mild/moderate and severely ill cases with COVID 19 infection, as well as prophylaxis of health care and/ or household contacts in comparison to the Hydroxychloroquine plus standard treatment.

Subject and methods: 600 subjects; 400 symptomatic confirmed COVID-19 patients and 200 health care and household contacts distributed over 6 groups; Group I: 100 patients with Mild/Moderate COVID-19 infection received a 4-days course of Ivermectin plus standard of care; Group II: 100 patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 infection received hydroxyxholorquine plus standard of care; Group III: 100 patients with severe COVID-19 infection received Ivermectin plus standard of care; Group IV: 100 patients with Severe COVID-19 infection received hydroxyxholorquine plus standard of care. Routine laboratory investigations and RT-PCR were reported before and after initiation of treatment. Group V stick to personal protective equipment (PPE) plus Ivermectin 400mcg / kg to be repeated after one week, and Group VI stick to PPE only and both groups V&VI were followed for two weeks.

Results: Patients received ivermectin reported substantial recovery of laboratory investigations; and significant reduction in RT-PCR conversion days. A substantial improvement and reduction in mortality rate in Ivermectin treated groups; group I (mild/moderate cases), (99%, and 0.0%, respectively) and group III (severe cases), (94%, and 2.0%, respectively) versus hydroxychloroquine plus standard care treated groups; group II (mild/moderate cases), (74% and 4%, respectively) and group IV (severe cases) (50% and 20%, respectively). Ivermectin had significantly reduced the incidence of infection in health care and household contacts up to 2% compared to 10% in non ivermectin group

Conclusion: Addition of Ivermectin to standard care is very effective drug for treatment of COVID-19 patients with significant reduction in mortality compared to Hydroxychloroquine plus standard treatment only. Early use of Ivermectin is very useful for controlling COVID 19 infections, prophylaxis and improving cytokines storm
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
57,811
Reaction score
114,783
Location
Rocky Mountains
Thanks!

I'm gonna go to McD's for a Big Mac gut bomb today just for the thrill of it. It's really strange.

When I eat I eat like I'm famished. Later in the day I eat again. Body is craving calories.

Last night at @ 11pm (way past my noshing time) I was starving and eating just b4 bed. Usually I'd be urping up all night long.

Nope.

Gained maybe a lb? Gonna look into above....
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated so I'm good!
Midas Member
Sr Midas Supporter +++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
59,363
Reaction score
114,414
Location
Earth
Ivermectin related


Background: Up-to-date, there is no recognized effective treatment or vaccine for the treatment of COVID-19 that emphasize urgency around distinctive effective therapies. This study aims to evaluate the anti-parasitic medication efficacy "Ivermectin" plus standard care (azithromycin, vitamin C, Zinc, Lactoferrin & Acetylcystein & prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation if D-dimer > 1000) in the treatment of mild/moderate and severely ill cases with COVID 19 infection, as well as prophylaxis of health care and/ or household contacts in comparison to the Hydroxychloroquine plus standard treatment.

Subject and methods: 600 subjects; 400 symptomatic confirmed COVID-19 patients and 200 health care and household contacts distributed over 6 groups; Group I: 100 patients with Mild/Moderate COVID-19 infection received a 4-days course of Ivermectin plus standard of care; Group II: 100 patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 infection received hydroxyxholorquine plus standard of care; Group III: 100 patients with severe COVID-19 infection received Ivermectin plus standard of care; Group IV: 100 patients with Severe COVID-19 infection received hydroxyxholorquine plus standard of care. Routine laboratory investigations and RT-PCR were reported before and after initiation of treatment. Group V stick to personal protective equipment (PPE) plus Ivermectin 400mcg / kg to be repeated after one week, and Group VI stick to PPE only and both groups V&VI were followed for two weeks.

Results: Patients received ivermectin reported substantial recovery of laboratory investigations; and significant reduction in RT-PCR conversion days. A substantial improvement and reduction in mortality rate in Ivermectin treated groups; group I (mild/moderate cases), (99%, and 0.0%, respectively) and group III (severe cases), (94%, and 2.0%, respectively) versus hydroxychloroquine plus standard care treated groups; group II (mild/moderate cases), (74% and 4%, respectively) and group IV (severe cases) (50% and 20%, respectively). Ivermectin had significantly reduced the incidence of infection in health care and household contacts up to 2% compared to 10% in non ivermectin group

Conclusion: Addition of Ivermectin to standard care is very effective drug for treatment of COVID-19 patients with significant reduction in mortality compared to Hydroxychloroquine plus standard treatment only. Early use of Ivermectin is very useful for controlling COVID 19 infections, prophylaxis and improving cytokines storm
Thanks, I downloaded the PDF and attached it below in case that article suddenly disappears
 

Attachments

  • 682247ca-ef49-4d68-aa3f-493a8fc9a056.pdf
    409.8 KB · Views: 5
Last edited:

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated so I'm good!
Midas Member
Sr Midas Supporter +++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
59,363
Reaction score
114,414
Location
Earth
Thanks!

I'm gonna go to McD's for a Big Mac gut bomb today just for the thrill of it. It's really strange.

When I eat I eat like I'm famished. Later in the day I eat again. Body is craving calories.

Last night at @ 11pm (way past my noshing time) I was starving and eating just b4 bed. Usually I'd be urping up all night long.

Nope.

Gained maybe a lb? Gonna look into above....
Don't eat that crap, its poison. Have a nice crisp and refreshing watercress sandwich instead!
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
57,811
Reaction score
114,783
Location
Rocky Mountains
Right no baggies.

Had a meal deal coupon for Hardy's roast beef sandwich. Watered down coke and greasy curly fries.

At the sandwich and tossed the rest.

To their credit, Hardy's makes a really good Market Fresh turkey sandwich that can't be beat. It's about all we go there for on occasion.
 

dacrunch

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
7,172
Reaction score
8,901
Right no baggies.

Had a meal deal coupon for Hardy's roast beef sandwich. Watered down coke and greasy curly fries.

At the sandwich and tossed the rest.

To their credit, Hardy's makes a really good Market Fresh turkey sandwich that can't be beat. It's about all we go there for on occasion.
My favorite fast food was always an Arby's (in a "clean" neighborhood... ran across a gross one on the "wrong side of the tracks once).
 

edsl48

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
7,298

The Many Variants of Fauci’s Mutating Covid Advice​

Phil Magness
Phillip W. Magness
March 23, 2021Reading Time: 9 minutes

mutant-800x508.jpg


In an explosive Senate hearing on March 18, Dr. Anthony Fauci clashed with Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul over a subject that has characterized much of the White House health adviser’s recent commentary on Covid-19: the specter of reinfection, caused by one of the emerging variants of the virus.
Several recent studies suggest that both natural and vaccine-induced immunity to Covid-19 is robust at least for the medium term, and even those hinting at possible reinfections suggest it is a rare phenomenon mainly afflicting people with severely weakened immune systems.
Fauci nonetheless maintains that reinfections, particularly from the South African variant of the virus, are not only commonplace but justify maintaining a suite of restrictive nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPI) such as lockdowns, mask mandates, and social distancing regulations – perhaps even for another year.
Paul pressed Fauci to cite the scientific literature supporting this claim, to no avail. Instead, Fauci deflected the question by repeating platitudes about masks and exaggerating a recent study about reinfections. According to Fauci, previously recovered people who “were exposed to the variant in South Africa” reacted “as if they had never been infected before. They had no protection.”
A Danish study that Fauci later referenced to justify this assertion made no such claim about reinfection being widespread. Quite the contrary, its authors concluded “that protection against repeat SARS-CoV-2 infection is robust and detectable in the majority of individuals, protecting 80% or more of the naturally infected population who are younger than 65 years against reinfections.”
They did further observe “that individuals aged 65 years and older had less than 50% protection against repeat SARS-CoV-2 infection” and recommended targeted vaccinations for this group to bolster immunity. But even this finding came with several acknowledged limitations, as the study was not designed to test for repeat infection among the vast number of mild or asymptomatic cases of the disease, or to directly verify whether suspected reinfection cases were the result of misclassified lingering infections.
The study did not, however, support Fauci’s contention that reinfections are becoming commonplace.
Last week’s hearing is not the first time in recent memory that Fauci has exaggerated the evidence around reinfection, specifically invoking the South African variant. In early February, a pair of studies produced evidence that reinfections from this strain were possible, although at this point they appear to be rare. The first confirmed one single case of reinfection from the South African variant after extensive testing to rule out a misclassified lingering infection.
The second, conducted as part of the Novavax vaccine trial, indirectly inferred that a tiny number of its participants may have become reinfected with the South African variant, “suggest[ing] that prior infection with COVID-19 may not completely protect against subsequent infection by the South Africa escape variant.”
In no sense did either study claim that reinfections are commonplace or widespread. If anything, they were measured scientific calls for further investigation of each possibility. Yet here is how Fauci described them in a mid-February interview with CNN: “[t]he experience of our colleagues in South Africa indicates that even if you’ve been infected with the original virus, that there is a very high rate of re-infection to the point where previous infection does not seem to protect you against re-infection, at least with the South African variant.”
This sort of overstatement is a familiar theme for the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) lead infectious disease bureaucrat, dating all the way back to his mishandling of the AIDS crisis in the early 1980s. Fauci has a bad habit of seizing onto a small kernel of scientific data, drawing sweeping inferences upon it through unfounded speculation, and then presenting his own exaggerated spin to the public as if it is a matter of scientific fact.

Fauci’s Mutating Scientific Commentary​

All the more curious, Fauci’s recent exaggerations about Covid-19 reinfection place him in direct conflict with another “expert” assessment of the very same question: his own, at various points over the course of the pandemic in the last year.
On March 28, 2020 – just shy of a year before his recent tangle with Senator Paul – Fauci aggressively contested the likelihood of reinfection in an interview with the Daily Show’s Trevor Noah. “It’s never 100%,” he explained, “but I’d be willing to bet anything that people who recover are really protected against re-infection.”
The NIH administrator’s many credulous enthusiasts in the news media will likely respond to such contradictory assertions by claiming that Fauci is simply updating his assessment in light of new evidence. Yet his track record over the past year suggests a very different story. Far from incorporating the latest scientific findings, Fauci appears to selectively invoke or downplay the specter of reinfection based on whether or not it serves his political objectives of the moment.

Fauci’s claims about reinfection do not follow a consistent trajectory of emerging evidence about whether or how frequently it happens. Instead they vacillate between depicting the possibility as either an overblown fear, concerning only a few rare cases, or an imminent cause for alarm that could spread to the entire population.
During the first several months of lockdowns in the United States, Fauci repeatedly asserted that immunity from the virus would preclude reinfection among those who had contracted the disease and recovered. “It’s a reasonable assumption that this virus is not changing very much,” he explained on an early April 2020 webcast for the Journal of the American Medical Association. “If we get infected now and it comes back next February or March we think this person is going to be protected.”
Fauci repeated a similar claim in a July 2020 interview with NIH director Francis Collins, who specifically asked him about the possibility of reinfection. “I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a rare case of an individual who went into remission and relapse,” he explained, “But Francis, I could say with confidence that it is very unlikely.”
These early statements aligned with Fauci’s political messaging in the first few months of the pandemic. He was operating under the assumption that lockdowns would successfully contain the virus, even praising Europe at the time for “successfully” pulling off this strategy (the fall second wave would belie this claim, as well as the notion that lockdowns even minimally guard against the course of the virus). If the United States would only accept similar measures through the summer and perhaps fall, the pandemic could be tamed through NPIs. Meanwhile, reinfections remained a non-issue in Fauci’s eyes.
When medical researchers documented one of the first confirmed cases of reinfection last August, Fauci saw no cause for alarm. During a virtual address to the staff of the Walter Reed Medical Center on August 26, he dismissed the prospect as “purely rare and anecdotal.” Fauci continued: “In every anecdotal case I’ve seen, there could have been another explanation for that. So, I can say that although we have to leave open the possibility, it is likely so, so rare that right now with what we know, it’s not an issue.”
Keep in mind that this description could just as easily apply to the recent studies of the South African strain, which have only confirmed or suggested a tiny number of reinfections. Fauci simply interpreted these earlier studies with greater caution and restraint against exaggerating their implications.
Not long after his August 2020 remarks, Fauci’s messaging on reinfections shifted to an opposite tack. With the looming prospect of another round of lockdowns in the fall, a group of scientists convened for a weekend meeting at AIER. On October 4th they issued the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD), challenging the efficacy of Fauci’s lockdown-centered strategy and calling attention to the widespread collateral harms it had inflicted on society. Instead, the GBD argued, we should adopt a strategy of “focused protection” for the most vulnerable until we built up herd immunity in the general population.
Herd immunity is a biological fact rather than a policy strategy. It comes about through the combination of naturally acquired immunity from recovered persons, and vaccine-induced immunity among the still-vulnerable. With anticipated testing and approval of the first vaccines in the late fall or winter, focused protection offered a viable pathway to reopening and thereby alleviating the widespread social and economic destruction caused by the lockdowns over the last year.
Suddenly Fauci began pivoting his messaging on reinfections. Shortly after the GBD came out, White House coronavirus adviser Dr. Scott Atlas endorsed “focused protection” as an alternative to a perpetual cycle of lockdowns. Fauci himself previously conceded the reality of herd immunity effects in the spring and summer when he pointed out that reinfections were anecdotal, rare, and unlikely. But now he saw his political authority being challenged by the GBD authors and by Atlas’s parallel recommendations.
On October 16, 2020 Fauci accordingly went on CNN with a new message of alarm about reinfections: “We’re starting to see a number of cases that are being reported of people who get re-infected, well-documented cases of people who were infected after a relatively brief period of time. So you really have to be careful that you’re not completely immune.”
Fauci’s statement implied that he had access to a growing body of new evidence on reinfection. In reality, he had a textbook example of the type of case he previously characterized as “rare and anecdotal” in August when he was trying to allay fears of the same phenomenon. A few days prior to the October CNN interview, a team of researchers in the Netherlands reported a single confirmed case in which an 89-year-old patient undergoing treatment for advanced cancer had contracted the disease, recovered, and then passed away after becoming reinfected with another strain. To Fauci however, the possibility of reinfection – once dismissed as an uncommon occurrence – became a political tool to ward off the GBD’s challenge to the lockdowns.
For the next several weeks, Fauci raised the reinfection specter whenever the subject of herd immunity came up. “We have seen specific instances of re-infection, people who got infected, recovered, and got infected with another SARS Covid-2,” he claimed in a C-Span interview that aired on November 12th. This statement came in response to questions about herd immunity from the NIH’s Francis Collins – the same person who asked a similar question in July. Recall Fauci’s answer then: “I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a rare case of an individual who went into remission and relapsed…But Francis, I could say with confidence that [re-infection] is very unlikely.”
On November 18th Pfizer announced the successful completion of its vaccine trial and intention to seek emergency authorization from the FDA within a matter of days. Fauci, who had been deprecating the herd immunity concept and hinting at reinfection only a week prior, pivoted his messaging yet again.
In a sense, he had no other option. The central premise of vaccination is to expedite reaching herd immunity in the population. As the GBD authors noted, natural immunity among the recovered and vaccination among the still-vulnerable work in concert with each other, bringing society above the necessary threshold for population-wide herd immunity. Initially, Fauci concurred, stating in an interview on November 22nd that “if you get an overwhelming majority of the people vaccinated with a highly efficacious vaccine, we can reasonably quickly get to the herd immunity that would be a blanket of protection for the country.
Within a matter of days, Fauci’s rhetoric shifted even further away from reinfection and toward touting the medium-term efficacy of immunity after vaccination. On November 27th he told McClatchy News: “From what we know of the duration thus far of immunity, I would be surprised if it turns out to be a 20-year duration, but I would also be surprised if it was less than a year. I think it would probably be more than a year.” A few days later, Fauci told Fox News that the country would reach herd immunity once about 70% received the vaccine.

Then the goalposts shifted​

Faced with mounting political pressures to relax lockdowns and other NPI measures in the wake of the vaccine, Fauci began casting about for new rationales to extend their duration. In a now-notorious interview with the New York Times’s Donald McNeil on December 24th, Fauci bumped his herd immunity threshold upward toward 90%. The lower targets from the previous month, he now insisted, were part of an elaborate noble lie to coax the public into greater compliance with his own directives: “When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent. Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,’ so I went to 80, 85.”
Throughout this period, the public discussion around Covid-19 refocused on the emergence of new variants of the disease caused by ongoing mutations of the original virus. Fauci’s messaging shifted as well, focusing again on the matter of reinfections with a clear message of downplaying the risk. That’s the argument he conveyed to California Governor Gavin Newsom in a brief webcast on December 31, 2020. The new UK variant, he insisted at the time, “doesn’t seem to evade the protection that’s afforded by the antibodies that are produced by vaccines…people who have been infected don’t seem to get reinfected by this.”
With each new strain however, Fauci’s message continued to pivot. By mid-February, as noted above, he was again raising the specter of reinfection from the new South African variant as a pretext for keeping mask mandates and social distancing requirements in place, even after vaccination. Fauci also pivoted away from setting target thresholds for herd immunity as vaccination numbers rapidly rose in the early spring. On March 15, 2021 he told a White House press conference that “We should not get so fixated on this elusive number of herd immunity” and should instead simply focus on vaccinating as many people as we can.
Fauci’s exchange with Rand Paul over the possibility of reinfections would take place later that same week, where he again engaged in unfounded speculation based on emerging evidence from the South African variant. While the aforementioned studies of this variant documented or inferred the possibility of reinfection, neither supported the claim that this was common or widespread.
Except Fauci’s depiction of them offered no such nuance. Instead, he offered Paul a sweeping generalization at the March 18, 2021 hearing. People with prior Covid-19 infection “had no protection” from the South African variant, according to Fauci. He doubled down on the exaggerated speculation the next day, telling CNN “I’m afraid, if people hear what Rand Paul says, and believe it, and you have an elderly person who has been infected, and they decide, ‘Well, Rand Paul says let’s not wear a mask,’ they won’t. They could get reinfected again and get into trouble.”
In just under a year’s time, Fauci’s messaging on reinfection and herd immunity has now mutated across dozens of variants of its own, each conveniently aligning with his political messaging of the moment. Although reinfection from new strains continues to be an avenue of research and investigation, the evidence we currently have suggests it remains uncommon. That hasn’t stopped America’s “leading infectious disease authority” from indulging in wildly irresponsible speculation from a national stage though, invariably appealing to alarmism as a pretext for continuing the same failed lockdown policies he has been peddling for over a year now.

 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,454
Reaction score
30,290
I'm thinking they have been working on this "vaccine" for over a decade.



Immunologist warns Pfizer and Moderna coronavirus vaccines may cause neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer’s​

02/23/2021 / By Virgilio Marin





Covid-19-Coronavirus-Vaccine-Bulk-Vials.jpg




Immunologist J. Bart Classen warns that the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines for COVID-19 can potentially cause neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer’s disease.
In a paper published in the journal Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, Classen reported that mRNA-based vaccines like the two jabs can misfold proteins in the body that are linked to the development of neurodegenerative disorders.

Long-term risks of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines​


The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are the only jabs for COVID-19 approved for use in the United States. They are also the first vaccines made using mRNA technology to be approved for human use.

Both jabs work by injecting genetic material called mRNA that codes for a critical fragment of the spike protein – the molecule used by SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19 – to infect human cells. Once this genetic material is inside the body, the muscle cells translate them to make the spike protein.

The immune system then gets a preview of what the real virus looks like without supposedly causing disease. When a vaccinated individual gets infected, the immune system releases antibodies that can neutralize the real virus and protect the individual from COVID-19.

But in his study, Classen found that mRNA-vaccines could favor the development of various diseases.

After sampling the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and analyzing its RNA sequences, he identified several sequences that can misfold certain proteins in the body. When misfolded, these proteins can potentially cause Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and other neurodegenerative disorders, according to Classen.

He also said that mRNA-based vaccines may cause several more adverse events, such as infections that are more serious than COVID-19. Because the vaccine places the spike protein on the surface of human cells, according to Classen, it may serve as a receptor for other foreign pathogens.

“If those who argue that COVID-19 is actually a bioweapon are correct, then a second potentially more dangerous virus may be released that binds spike protein found on the host cells of vaccine recipients,” Classen wrote in his paper, referring to the possibility that the certain powerful personalities engineered the COVID-19 pandemic.

Unfortunately, he continued, data about how long the spike protein will be present on human cells is not publicly available. (Related: Why is the CDC withholding critical covid-19 vaccine safety data from the public?.)

Classen also raised the possibility that the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna jabs could contribute to diabetes. Past studies he co-authored suggest that vaccines can give rise to chronic conditions, such as Type 1 diabetes three to four years after vaccination.

Classen concluded that these risks should have been taken into consideration before approving both jabs for use, especially as the vaccines were developed without extensive long-term safety testing.

mRNA vaccines may be dangerous in the long term​

Many researchers have identified potential long-term risks to mRNA-based vaccines. According to an article published in May last year in the journal Medical Science Monitor, these risks include the possible development of autoimmunity (where the immune system attacks the body’s own tissues) and the toxic effects of the vaccines’ components including the RNA sequences.

Though the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines already rolled out in many countries, their long-term side effects are not yet well-established. The adverse reactions that experts are aware of are short-term side effects.

“We know about short-term side effects, and the vast majority of side effects following vaccination occur within the first 30 to 40 days,” said William Moss, executive director of the International Vaccine Access Center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

While the people who participated in clinical vaccine trials have surpassed this timeline, it’s still too early to tell what the long-term side effects of the coronavirus vaccines are. Additional follow-up in the months and years to come is necessary for a fuller understanding of their risks.

Learn more about the dangers of COVID-19 vaccines at Vaccines.news.
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
57,811
Reaction score
114,783
Location
Rocky Mountains

Indiana to lift mask mandate amid concern: 'We’re not ready'​

Indiana’s governor plans to lift the statewide mask mandate and remaining COVID-19 business restrictions in two weeks
By TOM DAVIES Associated Press
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,454
Reaction score
30,290
More at link


Number of women to lose their unborn child after having the Covid Vaccine increases by 366% in just six weeks​

BY THE DAILY EXPOSE ON MARCH 21, 2021 • ( 2 COMMENTS )

Losing a new born is a heart breaking endeavour, as is the pain of losing an unborn child. Which is why we’re both saddened and shocked to bring you the latest update on the number of unborn and newborn children to lose their lives as a result of the mothers receiving one of the Covid-19 vaccines in the United Kingdom.

The Government have released weekly reports on adverse reactions to the experimental Covid-19 vaccines, the first of which covered data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme from the 9th December 2020 through to the 24th January 2021. Their latest report (find it here), which is the seventh to be remhmleased covers data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme from the 9th December 2020 though to the 7th March 2021.

Just six weeks separate the first and seventh report, and the shocking increase in the number of women losing their unborn and newborn child in that time due to having either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca Covid vaccine is appalling.

This was the Governments own advice upon emergency approval of the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine –

Pregnancy’
There are no or limited amount of data from the use of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2.
Animal reproductive toxicity studies have not been completed. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine
BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy.

For women of childbearing age, pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination. In addition, women
of childbearing age should be advised to avoid pregnancy for at least 2 months after their second dose.


We told you about this back in December, as the Governments own advice also included comments on breast-feeding and fertility which were as follows –

Breast-feeding
It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is excreted in human milk. A risk to
the newborns/infants cannot be excluded. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 should not be used
during breast-feeding.
Fertility

It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has an impact on fertility.’

It is because of this advice released by the UK Government that we were so shocked to see in the first released report of adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines, using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 24th January 2021 a total of 4 women had suffered a miscarriage as a result of having the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

image-105.png
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,454
Reaction score
30,290
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/covid-19-baby-bust-here-and-its-likely-permanent

The COVID-19 Baby-Bust Is Here And It's Likely Permanent​

BY TYLER DURDEN
TUESDAY, MAR 23, 2021 - 08:45 PM
Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,
Nine months after the pandemic began birthrates are falling in numerous countries.

Plunging Birthrates

Please consider the Covid Baby Bust.
“All evidence points to a sharp decline in fertility rates and in the number of births across highly developed countries,” said Tomas Sobotka, a researcher at the Wittgenstein Center for Demography and Global Human Capital in Vienna. “The longer this period of uncertainty lasts, the more it will have lifelong effects on the fertility rate.”
In the U.S., a survey by the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization, found that one-third of women polled in late April and early May wanted to delay childbearing or have fewer children because of the pandemic.
The Brookings Institution estimated in December that, as a result of the pandemic, 300,000 fewer babies would be born in the U.S. in 2021 compared with last year.

Birthrate Declines

  • Italy: -21.6%
  • France: -13.5%
  • Japan: -9.3%

Likely Permanent

No rebound followed the global financial crisis. The U.S. birthrate—after rising to its highest level in decades in 2007—plunged after the 2008 crisis and has declined gradually ever since.
Not to worry. The Fed has a plan to make things more expensive for everybody. That will help, right?
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
57,811
Reaction score
114,783
Location
Rocky Mountains
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated so I'm good!
Midas Member
Sr Midas Supporter +++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
59,363
Reaction score
114,414
Location
Earth
1616687210792.png
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
57,811
Reaction score
114,783
Location
Rocky Mountains

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
57,811
Reaction score
114,783
Location
Rocky Mountains

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,454
Reaction score
30,290
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated so I'm good!
Midas Member
Sr Midas Supporter +++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
59,363
Reaction score
114,414
Location
Earth
Much of my family has fell for the vaccine 'boogie man' propaganda and they are all very proud that they got their 'shots' so its really too late to save them now. I did try before they took the poison but was looked upon as an old guy who is set in his ways and won't ever change.

I've become my grandfather and since no one respects the experience and advice of the elders any more, I'm just here playing the role of an old fool to them . I hope we're all wrong here and I don't need to watch them suffer.
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated so I'm good!
Midas Member
Sr Midas Supporter +++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
59,363
Reaction score
114,414
Location
Earth

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
14,184
Reaction score
78,875
Location
third cove on the right
537uml.jpg
 

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
14,184
Reaction score
78,875
Location
third cove on the right
INTERESTING ARTICLE:

....................................



Isn’t Israel the most vaccinated country in the world? It is.

Haven’t half of all Israelis already been vaccinated? Yes, they have.

Haven’t 90% of all Israelis over 60 (the age-group most likely to die from Covid) already been vaccinated? Yes.

Then how did “Israel manage to double the number of deaths it accumulated in the prior ten months of the pandemic”…“within two months of intensive inoculation with the Pfizer vaccine”? And, why did “Israel’s Covid-19 cases… spike sharply during the first month of the … mass vaccination campaign.”? And, why “after just 2 months of … mass vaccination” are “76% of new Covid-19 cases.. under 39. Only 5.5% are over 60. 40% of critical patients are under 60.”?

Did the vaccinations shift the direction of the infection to a different demographic or have the vaccines created a more virulent strain of the virus that targets younger people?

And, why have more pregnant women suddenly entered “critical care” while Covid-19 cases among infants have soared by whopping “1,300%? (from 400 cases in under two-year-olds on November 20 to 5,800 in February 2021).”

And, why have Orthodox Jews and the Israeli Arabs experienced a sudden and dramatic shift in cases and fatalities when both groups had similar numbers prior to the vaccination campaign? Here is an excerpt from an interview with journalist Gilad Atzmon who explains what’s actually happened:

Once the vaccination campaign started, we saw a very interesting shift. While the Orthodox Jews went en masse to get “the jab”, the Palestinians (Israeli Arabs) did not follow this pattern. In the early stages of the vaccination campaign, in January, we saw a rise of 15 times as many morbidity cases in the Orthodox Jewish segment while we saw a significant drop (in morbidity) in the Israeli Arab segment. By not taking the vaccine, the level of morbidity dropped sharply. It was then that I began to figure out there was a connection between vaccination and morbidity.

“If the long-term consequences of the rNA modification being delivered by the not-vaccine are even one-third as bad as the scientific evidence appears to suggest, the rise in morbidity among the “vaccinated” in comparison to the unvaccinated population is going to lead to massive civil unrest all over the world. The media will do its best to keep the news from getting out, but it’s not going to take too long before people begin to realize the connection between “the jab” and increasingly poor health.” Quote from Vox Day.http://voxday.blogspot.com/


https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/operation-vaxx-all-deplorables-codename-satans-poker/




=========================




Dr. Oz mentioned early on that the “vax” might have the effect of making the disease worse if contracted after the vax — that was based on a similar effect of the SARs experimental vax.

Any one who has been reading the research findings knows that this ain’t a real vax, and it hasn’t been proven safe, it only has emergency use authorization.

Any government or organization that would dictate mandatory vax of this type is guilty of a crime against humanity. Exactly like the German Dr. experiments.
 

TonyG

Formerly Agg
Joined
Feb 2, 2021
Messages
248
Reaction score
283
Location
Pa.
I hope we're all wrong here and I don't need to watch them suffer.
Amen, but here is how the scenario could be orchestrated to play out. After the covid-19 and it's variance are supposedly under control by the vaccine, in 2 years another supposed virus might emerge likely similar or an extension of the covid-19. Under the guise of the new virus, those who took the job, we'll start having autoimmune disorders resulting in serious illness and death. It will be blamed on a new virus but might be the result of the covid-19 vaccines.

Not prophesying or proclaiming anything. Just a possible agenda and game plan if the present vaccine and gene therapy have chronic or longer term effects. I also hope and pray we are wrong.

What a wonderful design of the creator for children and grandchildren to have parent and grandparents like yourself and vice versa.
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated so I'm good!
Midas Member
Sr Midas Supporter +++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
59,363
Reaction score
114,414
Location
Earth
Amen, but here is how the scenario could be orchestrated to play out. After the covid-19 and it's variance are supposedly under control by the vaccine, in 2 years another supposed virus might emerge likely similar or an extension of the covid-19. Under the guise of the new virus, those who took the job, we'll start having autoimmune disorders resulting in serious illness and death. It will be blamed on a new virus but might be the result of the covid-19 vaccines.

Not prophesying or proclaiming anything. Just a possible agenda and game plan if the present vaccine and gene therapy have chronic or longer term effects.
I've seen that scenario discussed in several forums. It seems plausible now that we know there are people in power today who want us and our families dead and want to confiscate all our possessions
 

jbeck57143

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
78
Reaction score
43
Also, mRNA vaccines have never gotten FDA approval because they couldn't pass the animal testing. If they're not safe for animals they're not safe for people. The current vaccines weren't tested on animals -- probably because they knew they'd get the same results. So they still aren't safe for animals, and therefor still not safe for people. If, when the clinical trials are over they get approved they will be the first mRNA vaccines to get FDA approval, but without any animal testing having been done, and the FDA knows why that is. That means the FDA will have approved vaccines they know aren't safe. (Because they know they weren't proved to be safe for animals so they aren't safe for people). If the FDA doesn't approve them it will be because they decided they weren't safe enough for people -- millions of people will have gotten vaccines that couldn't get FDA approval because they were determined to not be safe. But the FDA already knew that when they gave them Emergency Use Authorization. They knew why they hadn't been tested on animals. Maybe by then people who got the vaccines won't even care if they were ever FDA approved. (Of course many of them could be dead by then too)

It's also possible that by then there will be new vaccines for a different strain of the virus (or for something else), and which also weren't tested on animals and therefor also still aren't safe, and will also have Emergency Use Authorization. And when the clinical trials for those vaccines are over they won't get approval either. As long there's always some "emergency" the manufacturers won't ever need FDA approval. They can skip the animal testing and not even bother to make their vaccines safe and use the Emergency Use Authorization to sell their product now and get it into millions of people. And when the vaccine gets rejected after the clinical trials are over it won't matter - they'll have more vaccines by then to get Emergency Use Authorization for.
 
Last edited:

Buck

Trying Something Different!
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
18,426
Reaction score
22,223

Voodoo

Midas Member
Midas Member
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
4,079
Reaction score
6,156
Location
Deep Underground Bunker
isn't she too young to get dosed???

NBC assholes just this morning were touting that the Pfizer jabs were being tested on poor kids as young as 6 months now.
 

the_shootist

I identify as already vaccinated so I'm good!
Midas Member
Sr Midas Supporter +++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
59,363
Reaction score
114,414
Location
Earth

Buck

Trying Something Different!
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
18,426
Reaction score
22,223
i was under the impression they fired a doctor who injected everyone and around me they're still talking about old people, also near me they speak of 'soon' alot..."we'll get to those people soon, illegals first...", er, undocumented is the word they use

i thought it was just old people and older medical people and aliens, with younger medical people not yet invited to the party


idk, idc, fk, i can't keep up anymore...

o.k., sorry for sharing my confusion

:summer:
 

dacrunch

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
7,172
Reaction score
8,901
today - repost in this thread

Well... told you about my wife's niece's family that caught the bug in Torino, Italy... and got house quarantined.
At first, the husband & teen son (who brought it home from school) got better, and the wife was still sick.
Well, the husband woke up one morning and couldn't breathe. They called the hospital and sent an ambulance for him.
He's on a ventilator, and the doctors WILL NOT GIVE HIM IVERMECTIN & AZITHROMICIN. ... ABSOLUTELY NOT - after several demands ((due to my wife's having ALREADY TOLD THAT FAMILY TO GET SOME (in the past 2 months), and PREVIOUSLY having ALREADY TOLD THEM ABOUT VITAMIN D, ZINC, TONIC WATER, VITAMIN C, QUERCETIN etc (for the last year)...))
In one ear, and out the other... They didn't do ANY of that... (Yeah, they "didn't hear it on TV"...)

NO VISITORS in the hospital, so even if a friend (since she's at-home-quarantined) got a hold of some Ivermectin & Azithromicin, NOBODY would be allowed to "visit him" in the ICU and give it to him...
MURDER IN THE 1ST DEGREE, imho.... and TOTAL DENIAL OF THEIR OATH... following BigPharma Government Guideline ORDERS...
Getting ready for the death notice. (Can't be over 55 years old...)
Leaving an unemployed widow (who speaks little Italian, being "refugees" from Venezuela) & a son who suffers from schizophrenia...
I pray that he recovers, but the old adage "Help yourself & God will help you" doesn't work as well if you DIDN'T "help yourself"...

- TAKE YOUR "PREVENTIVES"
- KEEP IVERMECTIN & AZITHROMICIN IN YOUR CUPBOARD


Because LATER you WILL NOT be able to get it...

And the more DEAD, the more they can CONVINCE people to TAKE THE SO-CALLED VACCINE, which is just UNPROVEN - UNLIKE the PREVENTION and TREATMENT which are PROVEN... (but you'll NEVER hear about it in Gvmt communications or the MSM...)

"One death is a tragedy. 1 million deaths is a statistic."
- Joseph Stalin

... and might as well add Fauci, Biden, the CDC, the WHO, the UN, the EU, Congress, the White House, the NIH, the AMA, and perhaps ALL the GOVERNMENTS (under Central Banks' Authority) IN THE WORLD...
 

TonyG

Formerly Agg
Joined
Feb 2, 2021
Messages
248
Reaction score
283
Location
Pa.
This is Desiree penrod's Facebook page. If you read the comments there's other people mentioning friends or loved ones who have to come to death shortly after receiving vaccines.

 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
57,811
Reaction score
114,783
Location
Rocky Mountains

EUROPEAN DATABASE: 3,964 DEAD 162,610 "ADVERSE EVENTS"! POISONED TEST SWABS AND MORE!​


 

Alton

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
7,244
Reaction score
15,261
Location
Michiana
The social media anti- "anti-vaxxers", the asshat collective working feverishly to make sure those who question the whole medical establishment/gov covid policies, mandates, actions/vaccines of any and all types/recommend alternatives/expose funding sources and agendas have been identified and are being challenged....think of them as the ADL/SPLC of social media world...

Linky only due to copyright claim and numerous social media linked comments and images that won't submit to cut & paste...

 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
57,811
Reaction score
114,783
Location
Rocky Mountains

TonyG

Formerly Agg
Joined
Feb 2, 2021
Messages
248
Reaction score
283
Location
Pa.
The pandemic doctors break their silence; ........ tonight on CNN!!!!

Caught a promo commercial for it. The one doctor do not know his name, announced emphatically and with most assuredness there will be more pandemics.... I wonder if the next one will be in 2 years after this vaccine slash genetic therapy starts to take hold if indeed it does.


Let us pray and hope for the lawyers in Europe to develop their case of crimes against humanity. If there is any truth to the idea that there is a patent on a covid virus, it would be strong evidence for plandemic.

Any virus that is natural and occurs naturally cannot be patented. Any patented virus would be considered biological warfare.
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
14,454
Reaction score
30,290
Just to point out someone is getting paid for all these "vaccines" at a huge profit.