Vaccination and Covid Death

a reply to: 111DPKING111

😬
👍

originally posted by: 111DPKING111


Ivermectin is on the safest drug list, better option imo
c19ivermectin.com...

www.researchsquare.com...

Abstract;

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug being investigated for repurposing to SARS-CoV-2. In-vitro, ivermectin showed limited antiviral activity and a COVID-19 animal model demonstrated pathological benefits but no effect on viral RNA. This meta-analysis investigated ivermectin in 18 randomized clinical trials (2282 patients) identified through systematic searches of PUBMED, EMBASE, MedRxiv and trial registries. Ivermectin was associated with reduced inflammatory markers (C-Reactive Protein, d-dimer and ferritin) and faster viral clearance by PCR. Viral clearance was treatment dose- and duration-dependent. In six randomized trials of moderate or severe infection, there was a 75% reduction in mortality (Relative Risk=0.25 [95%CI 0.12-0.52]; p=0.0002); 14/650 (2.1%) deaths on ivermectin; 57/597 (9.5%) deaths in controls) with favorable clinical recovery and reduced hospitalization. Many studies included were not peer reviewed and meta-analyses are prone to confounding issues. Ivermectin should be validated in larger, appropriately controlled randomized trials before the results are sufficient for review by regulatory authorities.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

4 people per every 100 elderly is crazy stat. Ive various explanations, like the shot makes you vulnerable for a week or so after, Its not getting much coverage so hard to say.

a reply to: Edumakated

I think it's genuine mass hysteria.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: LordAhriman


I never wore a mask before, during and after covid, still alive and well, before, during and after.

Does is worth taking the shot, no to me, life is just as good as it was before, during and after.

My job had zero tolerance for employees. We had to wear them. Until today, and we can only go without if we're fully vaccinated.

Check out VAERS....a reply to: JAGStorm

a reply to: smurfy

So observational studies show it works - how many people in the control group of the RCT you want need to die to prove it works?

Just wondering if after observing a benefit in the Treatment arm would you allow the study to be stopped early to treat the control group? if you would why have the RCT if you already have observational studies?

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: LordAhriman


I never wore a mask before, during and after covid, still alive and well, before, during and after.

Does is worth taking the shot, no to me, life is just as good as it was before, during and after.

My job had zero tolerance for employees. We had to wear them. Until today, and we can only go without if we're fully vaccinated.

How did you have to prove you were fully vaccinated?
Were you asked by management if you were?

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: LordAhriman


I never wore a mask before, during and after covid, still alive and well, before, during and after.

Does is worth taking the shot, no to me, life is just as good as it was before, during and after.

My job had zero tolerance for employees. We had to wear them. Until today, and we can only go without if we're fully vaccinated.

This is why people say the west is where fascism is. Go to China and Russia no one cares if you wear mask or take vaccine. Very few people in China and Russia wear mask and take vaccine. Unlike in the west where everyone is forced to wear mask and take vaccine or they get thrown in jail.

a reply to: LordAhriman

My job had zero tolerance for employees.

Well , dang , that explains that .
My management desires employees , not detest them.
If I thought my job had zero tolerance for employees , I would change employer .

(You may want to think a bit deeper before posting .)

a reply to: JAGStormThe vaccines lack efficacy
1. At a mechanistic level, the concept of immunity to COVID-19 via antibody induction,
as per COVID-19 vaccination, is medical nonsense. Airborne viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 enter the body via
the airways and lungs, where antibody concentrations are too low to prevent infection.
Vaccine-induced antibodies primarily circulate in the bloodstream, while concentrations on the mucous
membranes of lungs and airways is low.

Given that COVID-19 primarily spreads and causes disease by infecting these mucous membranes,
vaccines miss the immunological mark. The documents submitted by the vaccine manufacturers to the
various regulatory bodies contain no evidence that vaccination prevents airway infection, which would
be crucial for breaking the chain of transmission. Thus, vaccines are immunologically inappropriate for
COVID-19.


The above quote explains all you need to know.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: IAMTAT
So what are the advantages of getting the vaccine now?

I no longer have to wear a mask at work.

you should still wear one for the sake of those who aren't vaccinated yet. it's your patriotic duty.

The CV of Dolores Cahill
people.ucd.ie...
Please debunk her ... i'm open minded
twitter.com... Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ninefornews.nl%2Fprofessor-cahill-gevaccineerde-70-plussers-sterven-waarschijnlijk-binnen-2-tot-3-jaar%2F

Oh yes the link isn't working ... try this one (video about mrna side effects)
www.ninefornews.nl...

If this woman is telling one percent of the thruth we will see a massacre.
If this woman is telling zero truth: she must be locked up.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: IAMTAT
So what are the advantages of getting the vaccine now?

I no longer have to wear a mask at work.

you should still wear one for the sake of those who aren't vaccinated yet. it's your patriotic duty.

Some people just won't take a vaccine no matter how much persuasion. There's no point wearing a mask for the rest of your life.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: JAGStorm

The problem with using anomalies like these as evidence of anything is that these people would likely have died had they got the annual flu or bronchitis. Anything that can lead to pneumonia is deadly for these people.

Looking at these things through the lens of individual cases is pretty much irrelevant.

Agreed, and is the perfect argument against COVID and the vaccines.

This disease simply isn't dangerous except to those who are already on the verge of dying from any old opportunistic bug that they are exposed to.

thank goodness the vaccine manufacturers recieved immunity from prosecution (the only immunity involved seemingly).

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: JAGStorm

The problem with using anomalies like these as evidence of anything is that these people would likely have died had they got the annual flu or bronchitis. Anything that can lead to pneumonia is deadly for these people.

Looking at these things through the lens of individual cases is pretty much irrelevant.

I just listed two, there are many more if one searches...
Someone brought up my question, what is the point if in fact they do not prevent severe illness or death. Might as well not take it?

Even so, considering the huge numbers of people infected, it's statistically meaningless. That does not mean I agree with how this was handled, however. I do not. It all should have been targeted at those who were at risk.

Whether or not a person chooses to be vaccinated is a personal decision and one best not made based on Internet banter, but made after careful consideration of the information coming from people qualified to give medical advice. Sensationalizing what amounts to anomalies like these cherry-picked from available information is not a wise way to make a decision like that. In particular, since most of it comes from people not even remotely qualified to give medical advice in the first place.

a reply to: Blaine91555

Sensationalizing what amounts to anomalies like these cherry-picked from available information is not a wise way to make a decision like that. In particular, since most of it comes from people not even remotely qualified to give medical advice in the first place.

See but this is bull #. There are plenty of scientists virologists
and medical doctors fully qualified to give medical advice that
are being censored. And if you aren't looking for what they have
to say. You're not gonna here it. That is a fact. And that fact alone
is cause for a hell of a lot of suspicion even before what they have
to say. And those people are obviously risking a great deal more than
those just going with the narrative.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: JAGStorm

And read this yesterday

abcnews.go.com...

New Jersey doctor who was 'giant' in field of infectious diseases dies of COVID-19 in India

Rajendra Kapila's wife, Dr. Deepti Saxena-Kapila, told the Hindustan Times that he had received both Pfizer vaccine doses in the U.S. before heading to India.

So my question, especially in regards to the elderly, does it really prevent infection and death?

No it doesn't, but it greatly improves the profits for the drug manufacturers.

Many of the 'breakout cases' have ended in death.

It's good for profits, and it will help in reducing the population.