Forwarded from C CR
Cheap asthma drug better than any other treatment for corona
"We have shown that the inhaled glucocorticoid budesonide, given for a short duration, might be an effective treatment of early COVID-19 in adults. This effect, with a relative reduction of 91% of clinical deterioration is *equivalent to the efficacy seen after the use of COVID-19 vaccines and greater than that reported in any treatments used in hospitalised patients and patients with severe COVID-19*".
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2213-2600%2821%2900160-0
"We have shown that the inhaled glucocorticoid budesonide, given for a short duration, might be an effective treatment of early COVID-19 in adults. This effect, with a relative reduction of 91% of clinical deterioration is *equivalent to the efficacy seen after the use of COVID-19 vaccines and greater than that reported in any treatments used in hospitalised patients and patients with severe COVID-19*".
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2213-2600%2821%2900160-0
"People who develop COVID have complete and durable immunity - a very important principle - complete and durable. You can't beat natural immunity. You can't vaccinate on top of it and make it better. There's no scientific, clinical or safety rationale for ever vaccinating a COVID recovered patient.
There's no rationale for ever testing a COVID recovered patient. My wife and I are COVID recovered. Why did we go through the testing outside? There's absolutely no rationale.
I'd encourage this committee to actually look at what's being done and ask, is there any rationale, is there any rationale for anything? Listen, there's plenty of COVID recovered patients. Let them forgo the vaccine and let people who are clamoring for it get it. But at 80% herd immunity in the vaccine trials, fewer than 1% in the vaccine and the placebo actually get COVID. Fewer than 1%. The vaccine is going to have a 1% public health impact. That's what the data says. It's not going to save us. We're already 80% herd immune. If we're strategically targeted, we can actually close out the pandemic very well with the vaccine, but strategically targeted.
People under 50, who fundamentally have no health risks. There's no scientific rationale for them to ever become vaccinated." - Peter McCullough, MD (Texas Senate HHS Committee Testimony)
There's no rationale for ever testing a COVID recovered patient. My wife and I are COVID recovered. Why did we go through the testing outside? There's absolutely no rationale.
I'd encourage this committee to actually look at what's being done and ask, is there any rationale, is there any rationale for anything? Listen, there's plenty of COVID recovered patients. Let them forgo the vaccine and let people who are clamoring for it get it. But at 80% herd immunity in the vaccine trials, fewer than 1% in the vaccine and the placebo actually get COVID. Fewer than 1%. The vaccine is going to have a 1% public health impact. That's what the data says. It's not going to save us. We're already 80% herd immune. If we're strategically targeted, we can actually close out the pandemic very well with the vaccine, but strategically targeted.
People under 50, who fundamentally have no health risks. There's no scientific rationale for them to ever become vaccinated." - Peter McCullough, MD (Texas Senate HHS Committee Testimony)
"One of the mistakes I heard today as a rationale for vaccination is asymptomatic spread. And I want you to be very clear about this. My opinion is there is a low degree, if any, of asymptomatic spread." - Peter McCullough, MD (Texas Senate HHS Committee Testimony)
Reading AFP's Fact Check on Peter McCullough, MD https://factcheck.afp.com/us-cardiologist-makes-false-claims-about-covid-19-vaccination It's deceptive and wrong, as I've came to expect all too-often from "fact checking" services.
Fact Check
US cardiologist makes false claims about Covid-19 vaccination
Video of a cardiologist claiming that there is no reason for healthy people under the age of 50 or those who have recovered from Covid-19 to be vaccinated against the virus has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on social media. But medical experts…
Hi Oliver,
I was reading this AFP "fact check"
https://factcheck.afp.com/us-cardiologist-makes-false-claims-about-covid-19-vaccination
It states:
Olivier Schwartz, head of the Virus and Immunity Unit at the Pasteur Institute, told AFP by phone: “It is obvious that people under 50 who are in good health should be vaccinated” because they can still be affected by the disease.
I came across it in part because I've been trying to find someone qualified who can explain the reason/s to vaccinate everyone, and not just the vulnerable.
I've been struggling for weeks to find anyone. Everyone I've found has said we absolutely should not be vaccinating everyone. In fact I've been told that I won't find an infectious disease epidemiologist who will lend support to vaccinating everyone.
Some responses by scientists to my initial asking around almost two-weeks ago are here https://dryburgh.com/should-everyone-get-vaccinated/
I absolutely do not understand your statement to AFP. People under 50 in good health have negligible risk, comparable to that of influenza. The vaccines are novel (still under trial) and as such there is insufficient safety data to warrant their use on individuals who face negligible risk from the disease. The immediate side effects of the vaccine alone, are worse than a SARS-CoV-2 infection for many.
Furthermore the immunity conferred is narrow unlike natural immunity, and the vaccine could potentially lead to suboptimal innate immune response. See https://dryburgh.com/byram-bridle-coronavirus-vaccine-concerns/
From what I gather the complexity of the immune system is akin to the size of the universe and so far, we haven't even mapped out a galaxy. In this context I understand vaccines to be akin to a crow-bar, i.e. that caution and judgement should be used when considering such a blunt instrument.
I'd love to hear your thoughts. I promise not to quote you, i.e. to keep it private.
Regards
Lee
I was reading this AFP "fact check"
https://factcheck.afp.com/us-cardiologist-makes-false-claims-about-covid-19-vaccination
It states:
Olivier Schwartz, head of the Virus and Immunity Unit at the Pasteur Institute, told AFP by phone: “It is obvious that people under 50 who are in good health should be vaccinated” because they can still be affected by the disease.
I came across it in part because I've been trying to find someone qualified who can explain the reason/s to vaccinate everyone, and not just the vulnerable.
I've been struggling for weeks to find anyone. Everyone I've found has said we absolutely should not be vaccinating everyone. In fact I've been told that I won't find an infectious disease epidemiologist who will lend support to vaccinating everyone.
Some responses by scientists to my initial asking around almost two-weeks ago are here https://dryburgh.com/should-everyone-get-vaccinated/
I absolutely do not understand your statement to AFP. People under 50 in good health have negligible risk, comparable to that of influenza. The vaccines are novel (still under trial) and as such there is insufficient safety data to warrant their use on individuals who face negligible risk from the disease. The immediate side effects of the vaccine alone, are worse than a SARS-CoV-2 infection for many.
Furthermore the immunity conferred is narrow unlike natural immunity, and the vaccine could potentially lead to suboptimal innate immune response. See https://dryburgh.com/byram-bridle-coronavirus-vaccine-concerns/
From what I gather the complexity of the immune system is akin to the size of the universe and so far, we haven't even mapped out a galaxy. In this context I understand vaccines to be akin to a crow-bar, i.e. that caution and judgement should be used when considering such a blunt instrument.
I'd love to hear your thoughts. I promise not to quote you, i.e. to keep it private.
Regards
Lee
Fact Check
US cardiologist makes false claims about Covid-19 vaccination
Video of a cardiologist claiming that there is no reason for healthy people under the age of 50 or those who have recovered from Covid-19 to be vaccinated against the virus has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on social media. But medical experts…
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
British coronavirus restrictions explained. Accurate.
Hi Bruno,
I was reading this AFP "fact check"
https://factcheck.afp.com/us-cardiologist-makes-false-claims-about-covid-19-vaccination
It quotes you as supporting mass vaccination, rather than just vaccination of the vulnerable, namely:
1) This would not be effective if only people over 50 years old received the vaccine. That is less than half the population, and “under these conditions, we will never slow down the circulation of the virus,” he said.
2) Lina also explained that if a vaccinated person does contract Covid-19, the amount of virus present compared to an unvaccinated person is “16 times less,” reducing the likelihood of transmission.
In terms of the first statement, of course it will slow, as ever more hosts acquire natural immunity. A fair proportion of the population was to all intents and purposes, had prior "immunity" owing to t-cell/cross-immunity for example. Herd immunity is reached with or without a vaccine clearly.
In terms of the second statement, yes although transmission was not a clinical endpoint of the vaccines i.e. not tested, it does appear and it would be logical that, transmission is blunted. Coarsely speaking, the sicker you are, the more likely you are to spread it, thus if the vaccine stops disease progression, it also reduces transmission. But the majority of those under 50 and healthy, don't get very sick at all.
I came across the "fact check" in part because I've been trying to find someone qualified who can explain the reason/s to vaccinate everyone, and not just the vulnerable. I've been struggling for weeks to find anyone. Everyone I've found has said we absolutely should not be vaccinating everyone. In fact I've been told that I won't find an infectious disease epidemiologist who will lend support to vaccinating everyone.
Some responses by scientists to my initial asking around almost two-weeks ago are here https://dryburgh.com/should-everyone-get-vaccinated/
For children SARS-CoV-2 is ~2.5x less risk than influenza. As you'll know, all medical treatments confer risk. Particularly an experimental one without longitudinal data. Plus naturally acquired immunity is superior to narrow immunity from a present vaccines, see https://dryburgh.com/byram-bridle-coronavirus-vaccine-concerns/ Thus I can't understand a vaccinate everyone policy. It would seem criminal in fact to be vaccinating children. I believe that you are both a Professor of virology, and a member of the Covid-19 Scientific Council to Emmanuel Macron. As such I was hoping to hear your thoughts. I promise not to quote you without your explicit permission.
Regards
Lee
I was reading this AFP "fact check"
https://factcheck.afp.com/us-cardiologist-makes-false-claims-about-covid-19-vaccination
It quotes you as supporting mass vaccination, rather than just vaccination of the vulnerable, namely:
1) This would not be effective if only people over 50 years old received the vaccine. That is less than half the population, and “under these conditions, we will never slow down the circulation of the virus,” he said.
2) Lina also explained that if a vaccinated person does contract Covid-19, the amount of virus present compared to an unvaccinated person is “16 times less,” reducing the likelihood of transmission.
In terms of the first statement, of course it will slow, as ever more hosts acquire natural immunity. A fair proportion of the population was to all intents and purposes, had prior "immunity" owing to t-cell/cross-immunity for example. Herd immunity is reached with or without a vaccine clearly.
In terms of the second statement, yes although transmission was not a clinical endpoint of the vaccines i.e. not tested, it does appear and it would be logical that, transmission is blunted. Coarsely speaking, the sicker you are, the more likely you are to spread it, thus if the vaccine stops disease progression, it also reduces transmission. But the majority of those under 50 and healthy, don't get very sick at all.
I came across the "fact check" in part because I've been trying to find someone qualified who can explain the reason/s to vaccinate everyone, and not just the vulnerable. I've been struggling for weeks to find anyone. Everyone I've found has said we absolutely should not be vaccinating everyone. In fact I've been told that I won't find an infectious disease epidemiologist who will lend support to vaccinating everyone.
Some responses by scientists to my initial asking around almost two-weeks ago are here https://dryburgh.com/should-everyone-get-vaccinated/
For children SARS-CoV-2 is ~2.5x less risk than influenza. As you'll know, all medical treatments confer risk. Particularly an experimental one without longitudinal data. Plus naturally acquired immunity is superior to narrow immunity from a present vaccines, see https://dryburgh.com/byram-bridle-coronavirus-vaccine-concerns/ Thus I can't understand a vaccinate everyone policy. It would seem criminal in fact to be vaccinating children. I believe that you are both a Professor of virology, and a member of the Covid-19 Scientific Council to Emmanuel Macron. As such I was hoping to hear your thoughts. I promise not to quote you without your explicit permission.
Regards
Lee
Fact Check
US cardiologist makes false claims about Covid-19 vaccination
Video of a cardiologist claiming that there is no reason for healthy people under the age of 50 or those who have recovered from Covid-19 to be vaccinated against the virus has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on social media. But medical experts…
I was going to put out "Peter McCullough, MD testifies to Texas Senate HHS Committee" today but for the past week I've been trying to take it easy/slow as I need some recovery time.
In addition I was slowed going through that "fact check". It's full of absolute garbage aside from those two scientists I wrote to, who may know something counter to what I've picked up so far.
In addition I was slowed going through that "fact check". It's full of absolute garbage aside from those two scientists I wrote to, who may know something counter to what I've picked up so far.
Sorry Bruno, one more thing with
University of Lyon’s Lina confirmed that it is incorrect to claim that asymptomatic people can’t spread the virus.
He explained that asymptomatic people often have lower amounts of the virus so they may be less contagious, but “as this virus is very transmissible, in particular the British variant, there can be transmission from asymptomatic carriers.”
Yes of course asymptomatic people may spread the virus, however it's not that likely relative to symptomatic people. Asymptomatic people as Tony Fauci said have never been the core driver of a respiratory disease.
Regards
Lee
University of Lyon’s Lina confirmed that it is incorrect to claim that asymptomatic people can’t spread the virus.
He explained that asymptomatic people often have lower amounts of the virus so they may be less contagious, but “as this virus is very transmissible, in particular the British variant, there can be transmission from asymptomatic carriers.”
Yes of course asymptomatic people may spread the virus, however it's not that likely relative to symptomatic people. Asymptomatic people as Tony Fauci said have never been the core driver of a respiratory disease.
Regards
Lee
YouTube has banned the channel of Millat Times, an Indian news website, for posting a video showing workers protesting lockdown in the state of Maharashtra.
On April 9, Millat Times uploaded a video titled “People Continue Protest Against Lockdown, Gherai CM’s House.” The post showed clips of people protesting the newly enforced lockdown in Maharashtra outside the state’s Chief Minister’s residence.
Millat Times’ editor-in-chief, Shams Tabrez, said that the protesters were mostly daily wage workers who would lose their livelihood due to the lockdown.
“They were protesting near the Maharashtra chief minister’s residence and speaking about the issues that they will face in their life due to the lockdown,” Tabrez continued.
“They were scared, of course, we all know what happened to migrant workers during the nationwide lockdown [in 2020]. Whatever they said was presented as it is by us. It was their version, not fake news,” he added.
On April 9, Millat Times uploaded a video titled “People Continue Protest Against Lockdown, Gherai CM’s House.” The post showed clips of people protesting the newly enforced lockdown in Maharashtra outside the state’s Chief Minister’s residence.
Millat Times’ editor-in-chief, Shams Tabrez, said that the protesters were mostly daily wage workers who would lose their livelihood due to the lockdown.
“They were protesting near the Maharashtra chief minister’s residence and speaking about the issues that they will face in their life due to the lockdown,” Tabrez continued.
“They were scared, of course, we all know what happened to migrant workers during the nationwide lockdown [in 2020]. Whatever they said was presented as it is by us. It was their version, not fake news,” he added.
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
The British were permitted by the state to drink beer under tight conditions, including that it's outside.
WEF May 2017
"Scientists have discovered that vitamin D is necessary to activate the immune system’s T-cells, which identify and attack bad pathogens circulating throughout the body."
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/05/vitamin-d-could-be-much-more-important-to-your-health-than-you-think
"Scientists have discovered that vitamin D is necessary to activate the immune system’s T-cells, which identify and attack bad pathogens circulating throughout the body."
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/05/vitamin-d-could-be-much-more-important-to-your-health-than-you-think
World Economic Forum
Vitamin D could be much more important to your health than you think
Vitamin D deficiencies are widespread, even in countries with year-round sunshine, but studies have shown the widespread health implications of deficiencies.
Come on, we all know Public Health now means only 1) wear a sock on your face 2) get a novel experimental treatment even if at negligible disease-risk 3) worry only about a single influenza-like illness
https://archive.is/wIEnF
https://archive.is/wIEnF
Slovenia also had this rubbish for a limited time mid last year. E.g. sign in just to go to the sauna. First I had no phone ;-), second my name was Bertie Basset and my address was Timbuktu
https://www.stopcommonpass.org/boycott/
https://www.stopcommonpass.org/boycott/
Forwarded from Mac Taylor