CORONA Main Coronavirus thread

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
Is this not a real heads up? We’re all this young healthy doctors all murdered together in a drive by? Man, this not something I’ve seen before…. :whistle:


I have recently seen commercials for the Shingles Shot that I never saw before -and BTW, I’ve been of that age for a few years, so I have been paying attention. Then I see young people, of the aforementioned doctors ages, getting shingles. They have all been vaccinated. I know all anecdotal….:hmm:
Yep, that too.

"Shingles doesn't care!"
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
If you browse through this doctor’s thread wow ….I’m amazed Twitter hasn’t pulled his account by now. He literally goes on and on, with the deaths, he reports on each one, he goes on rants about other others, how this is all evil beyond our comprehension….

Seriously!
I follow him on twitter. I hope they don't cancel him.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Doctor: Biden tests positive for COVID for 2nd day in a row
By JOSH BOAK
yesterday

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden tested positive for COVID-19 for the second straight day, in what appears to be a rare case of “rebound” following treatment with an anti-viral drug.

In a letter noting the positive test, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, the White House physician, said Sunday that the president “continues to feel well” and will keep on working from the executive residence while he isolates.

Biden tested positive on Saturday, requiring him to cancel travel and in-person events as he isolates for at least five days in accordance with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines.

After initially testing positive on July 21, Biden, 79, was treated with the anti-viral drug Paxlovid. He tested negative for the virus this past Tuesday and Wednesday, clearing him to leave isolation while wearing a mask indoors.

Research suggests that a minority of those prescribed Paxlovid experience a rebound case of the virus. The fact that a rebound rather than a reinfection possibly occurred is a positive sign for Biden’s health once he’s clear of the disease.

“The fact that the president has cleared his illness and doesn’t have symptoms is a good sign and makes it less likely he will develop long COVID,” said Dr. Albert Ho, an infectious disease specialist at Yale University’s school of public health.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

'Rebound' coronavirus cases: What to know after Biden tests positive again
Bryan Pietsch, The Washington Post
Sun, July 31, 2022, 7:47 AM·3 min read

President Joe Biden is one of the latest patients to experience a "rebound" coronavirus infection following a course of Paxlovid, an antiviral used to treat people at risk of severe illness from covid-19.

Rebound cases, in which someone experiences symptoms or tests positive after completing the course of the medication and testing negative, have been described as rare, but some medical experts are saying they may be more common than previously thought.

Biden began his Paxlovid treatment shortly after testing positive. He emerged from isolation on Wednesday after he started testing negative, but the White House announced Saturday that he had again tested positive and was not experiencing symptoms.

Here's what to know about rebound cases of the coronavirus following Paxlovid treatment.

- What is Paxlovid?

Paxlovid is an antiviral drug by pharmaceutical giant Pfizer used to treat mild to moderate covid-19. It's been made available to Americans under emergency use authorization by the Food and Drug Administration for people ages 12 and older who have tested positive for the coronavirus and are at higher risk of having severe illness from the disease. One factor that can raise a patient's risk is age; Biden is 79 years old.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that people start Paxlovid treatment "as soon as possible" after receiving a positive coronavirus test, and no later than five days after symptom onset, similar to the antiviral Tamiflu, which is used to treat the seasonal flu and is only effective shortly after symptoms start. Paxlovid tablets are taken twice daily for five days.

The Biden administration has in recent months pushed the treatment as a tool to help the country through ongoing waves of coronavirus cases. Ashish Jha, the White House coronavirus response coordinator, said in April that "Paxlovid is a really important step in our ability to fight this pandemic."

More than 3 million courses of Paxlovid have been administered in the United States since December, according to data from the Department of Health and Human Services.

- What are 'rebound' cases, and how common are they?

A rebound case is "characterized by a recurrence of covid-19 symptoms or a new positive viral test after having tested negative," according to the CDC. The agency issued an advisory in May amid concerns about the phenomenon, recommending that people who experience a resurgence of covid-19 following treatment should again isolate for five days and wear a mask for 10 days.

The CDC said in the advisory that "a brief return of symptoms" may come naturally, "independent of treatment with Paxlovid."

Still, rebound cases had been described as rare - even by Biden in his tweet announcing his case.

But many people may not test if they get sick again after their initial infection, making rebound cases hard to track.

Jeremy Faust, an emergency medicine doctor at Brigham and Women's Hospital, responded to Biden on Twitter, writing that "this doesn't seem rare. Horse has left the barn on that."

Catherine Bennett, a professor of epidemiology at Deakin University in Australia, said in an email that recent data have suggested that rebound cases happen in about 10 percent of Paxlovid recipients, "so not rare, but uncommon."

- Should we be concerned about rebound cases?

Bennett said that the public should not be concerned by rebound cases, but rather be aware that such cases are possible, and to monitor themselves closely after they finish a course of Paxlovid. She advised people to recognize the signs of rebound cases - testing positive or experiencing a resurgence of symptoms - and go back to their doctor if the signs appear.

The CDC said that there was "currently no evidence" that people who experience rebound cases need to have a second course of Paxlovid.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

'Living with COVID': Where the pandemic could go next
Jennifer Rigby and Julie Steenhuysen
Mon, August 1, 2022, 2:04 AM

LONDON/CHICAGO (Reuters) - As the third winter of the coronavirus pandemic looms in the northern hemisphere, scientists are warning weary governments and populations alike to brace for more waves of COVID-19.

In the United States alone, there could be up to a million infections a day this winter, Chris Murray, head of the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), an independent modeling group at the University of Washington that has been tracking the pandemic, told Reuters. That would be around double the current daily tally.

Across the United Kingdom and Europe, scientists predict a series of COVID waves, as people spend more time indoors during the colder months, this time with nearly no masking or social distancing restrictions in place.

However, while cases may surge again in the coming months, deaths and hospitalizations are unlikely to rise with the same intensity, the experts said, helped by vaccination and booster drives, previous infection, milder variants and the availability of highly effective COVID treatments.

"The people who are at greatest risk are those who have never seen the virus, and there's almost nobody left," said Murray.

These forecasts raise new questions about when countries will move out of the COVID emergency phase and into a state of endemic disease, where communities with high vaccination rates see smaller outbreaks, possibly on a seasonal basis.

Many experts had predicted that transition would begin in early 2022, but the arrival of the highly mutated Omicron variant of coronavirus disrupted those expectations.

"We need to set aside the idea of 'is the pandemic over?'" said Adam Kucharski, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. He and others see COVID morphing into an endemic threat that still causes a high burden of disease.

"Someone once told me the definition of endemicity is that life just gets a bit worse," he added.

The potential wild card remains whether a new variant will emerge that out-competes currently dominant Omicron subvariants.

If that variant also causes more severe disease and is better able to evade prior immunity, that would be the "worst-case scenario," according to a recent World Health Organization (WHO) Europe report.

"All scenarios (with new variants) indicate the potential for a large future wave at a level that is as bad or worse than the 2020/2021 epidemic waves," said the report, based on a model from Imperial College of London.

CONFOUNDING FACTORS

Many of the disease experts interviewed by Reuters said that making forecasts for COVID has become much harder, as many people rely on rapid at-home tests that are not reported to government health officials, obscuring infection rates.

BA.5, the Omicron subvariant that is currently causing infections to peak in many regions, is extremely transmissible, meaning that many patients hospitalized for other illnesses may test positive for it and be counted among severe cases, even if COVID-19 is not the source of their distress.

Scientists said other unknowns complicating their forecasts include whether a combination of vaccination and COVID infection – so-called hybrid immunity – is providing greater protection for people, as well as how effective booster campaigns may be.

"Anyone who says they can predict the future of this pandemic is either overconfident or lying," said David Dowdy, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Experts also are closely watching developments in Australia, where a resurgent flu season combined with COVID is overwhelming hospitals. They say it is possible that Western nations could see a similar pattern after several quiet flu seasons.

"If it happens there, it can happen here. Let's prepare for a proper flu season," said John McCauley, director of the Worldwide Influenza Centre at the Francis Crick Institute in London.

The WHO has said each country still needs to approach new waves with all the tools in the pandemic armory – from vaccinations to interventions, such as testing and social distancing or masking.

Israel's government recently halted routine COVID testing of travelers at its international airport, but is ready to resume the practice "within days" if faced with a major surge, said Sharon Alroy-Preis, head of the country's public health service.

"When there is a wave of infections, we need to put masks on, we need to test ourselves," she said. "That's living with COVID."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)



Macau to reopen city as no COVID infections detected for 9 days
by Farah Master and Twinnie Siu
Sun, July 31, 2022, 10:16 PM

HONG KONG (Reuters) - Macau will reopen public services and entertainment facilities, and allow dining-in at restaurants from Tuesday, authorities said, as the world's biggest gambling hub seeks a return to normalcy after finding no COVID-19 cases for nine straight days.

Beauty salons, fitness centres, and bars too will be allowed to resume operations, the government said in a statement on Monday.

Health authorities will require residents to wear masks when they go out and must show a negative coronavirus test within three days to enter most venues.

"There have been no community infection cases in Macau for nine consecutive days ... and the risk of the spread of the coronavirus has been greatly reduced," it said.

The former Portuguese colony has reported around 1,800 infections since mid-June when it was hit with its worst coronavirus outbreak that forced the closure of casinos and locked down most of the city.

Macau reopened its casinos on July 23, as authorities began unwinding stringent measures which required most businesses and premises to shut.

This is the first time Macau has had to grapple with the fast spreading Omicron variant.

More than 90% of Macau's residents are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 but authorities have closely followed China's zero-COVID mandate which seeks to curb all outbreaks at almost any cost, contrary to the rest of the world which is already living with the virus.

The city only has one public hospital which was already overburdened even before the pandemic.
While Macau's casinos are open, there is likely to be no business for at least a few weeks, analysts said, due to strict restrictions still in place.

Sands China, Wynn Macau, MGM China, Galaxy Entertainment, SJM Holdings and Melco Resorts are the current six casino license holders in Macau. Their licenses will expire by the end of the year.

They are soaking up losses as they prepare to bid for new licenses in a business that generated $36 billion in revenue in 2019, the last year before COVID curbs slammed the sector.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Pathogenic Bacteria and Fungi Found on Masks: Study
By Meiling Lee
July 31, 2022

Several pathogenic microbes were identified and quantified on masks worn during the pandemic, according to a Japanese study that was published in Scientific Reports.

The study is one of the first to address the probable hygiene issues caused by bacterial and fungal growth on masks worn daily in the community.

“Since masks can be a direct source of infection to the respiratory tract, digestive tract, and skin, it is crucial to maintain their hygiene to prevent bacterial and fungal infections that can exacerbate COVID-19,” the authors wrote.

The study involved 109 participants aged 21 to 22 years who were asked about the type and duration of mask used and their lifestyle habits. Bacteria and fungi were collected from the three types of masks—gauze, polyurethane, and non-woven—worn between September and October 2020.

41598_2022_15409_Fig1_HTML.png

Bacterial and fungal isolation from face masks under the COVID-19 pandemic - Scientific Reports
This picture comes from the actual Nature.com study that this article is describing. I thought it important to show the types of masks they were testing, with their pictures. Notice no cloth mask that you put in the washing machine and dryer were studied. / HD]


The researchers found that the face side of the masks had more bacteria, whereas the outer side of the masks contained more fungi.

In addition, longer use of the mask resulted in an increase in fungi but not in bacteria because “fungi and their spores are resistant to drying, they can survive under the condition where masks dry out.”

Non-woven masks were found to have fewer fungal colony counts on the outer side compared to the other two mask types. Non-woven masks have three layers, two-layer fabric with a non-woven middle layer filter.

Researchers said they were surprised to find that there were no significant differences in the numbers of bacteria or fungi on washable or reusable masks that had been washed.

“The proper cleaning method for cotton face masks has been recommended to reduce the microbial load on the masks,” the authors wrote. “However, in the current experiments, we did not find significant differences in bacterial or fungal colony numbers on the masks based on washing.”

Lifestyle Habits

The researchers also examined whether certain lifestyle habits such as gargling, consumption of natto, and use of the different modes of transportation—public transportation, personal vehicle, and walking or biking— had any effect on the microbial counts on the masks.

“We found no differences in the bacterial or fungal colony counts on both sides of the masks among the three transportation systems,” the authors wrote.

There were also no differences in microbial counts on masks of participants who gargled once a day. Gargling is a Japanese custom believed to prevent respiratory infections. The practice is often recommended by the Japanese health authority alongside hand washing as a preventative measure against influenza.

A study from Penn State College of Medicine published in the Journal of Medical Virology in September 2020 found that several types of mouthwash and nasal rinses were effective at neutralizing human coronaviruses, suggesting that the products may have the potential to lessen the amount of SARS-CoV-2 load, or the amount of virus inside the mouth.

SARS-CoV-2 is the virus that causes COVID-19.

A small pilot study is currently being conducted by the University of California, San Francisco on whether gargling with certain mouthwash or gargling solutions will reduce viral load in patients diagnosed with COVID-19. The study is expected to complete this September.

Gargling with antiseptic mouthwashes is part of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance’s protocol for “both chronic (ongoing) prevention as well as to avoid getting sick” after an individual has been exposed to the virus.

FLCCC Alliance is a nonprofit organization consisting of critical care specialists who’ve dedicated their time to developing treatment protocols to “prevent the transmission of COVID-19 and to improve the outcomes for patients ill with the disease.”

As for the consumption of natto, soybeans that are fermented with a bacterium called bacillus subtillis or B. subtilliss, the researchers said that the participants who consumed the sticky soybeans, “had a significantly higher incidence of large white B. subtillis colonies on both sides of the masks than those who did not.”

B. subtillis is a bacterium found in soil, water, decomposing plant residue, and air. It is used for “industrial production of proteases, amylases, antibiotics, and specialty chemicals” and is “not considered pathogenic or toxigenic to humans, animals, or plants,” according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (pdf).

Pathogenic Microbes

While most of the bacteria and fungi cultured from the masks were not harmful to humans, some were opportunist pathogens, while others were found to cause diseases like bacteria that cause food poisoning and staph infections, and a fungus that causes ringworm, athlete’s foot, and jock itch.

From their findings, the authors of the study suggest that people with a weakened immune system should “avoid repeated use of masks to prevent microbial infection.”

The CDC says that immunocompromised people or those at high risk for severe disease should wear a mask or respirator when there is a high community level of COVID-19.

The health agency did not respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment on the findings of the Japanese study.
Supporters of universal masking during the pandemic say that masks help to prevent or reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Scientific Evidence

Epidemiologist and researcher Dr. Paul Alexander disagree. He says that there are over 150 studies and articles that conclude cloth and surgical masks are not effective in slowing the spread of COVID-19 and does more harm.

“To date, the evidence has been stable and clear that masks do not work to control the virus and they can be harmful and especially to children,” Alexander wrote in a February op-ed for The Epoch Times.

In a critical review (pdf) of cloth masks used during the pandemic, the authors stated that evidence does not support community masking with cloth masks to limit the spread of the virus.

“The available clinical evidence of facemask efficacy is of low quality and the best available clinical evidence has mostly failed to show efficacy, with fourteen of sixteen identified randomized controlled trials comparing face masks to no mask controls failing to find statistically significant benefit in the intent-to-treat populations,” the authors wrote.

“Although weak evidence should not preclude precautionary actions in the face of unprecedented events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, ethical principles require that the strength of the evidence and best estimates of amount of benefit be truthfully communicated to the public,” they added.

Prior to the pandemic, researchers conducted a small randomized controlled study in 2008 among health care workers in Japan to examine whether surgical masks reduced the incidence of the common cold.

They found that participants in the mask group “were significantly more likely to experience headache during the study period” and concluded that “face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.”
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Scientists Question Pfizer’s Paxlovid Data as Biden Tests Positive for COVID-19 Again
By Jack Phillips
July 31, 2022

President Joe Biden posted a video after he tested positive for COVID-19 again saying that he’s “feeling fine,” as scientists speculate that rebound cases tied to the use of the antiviral drug Paxlovid are more common than initially suspected.

“Hey, folks, Joe Biden here. Tested positive this morning. Going to be working from home for the next couple of days. And I’m feeling fine, everything’s good. But Commander and I got a little work to do,” Biden, 79, said in the video posted to Twitter late on July 30. He was referring to his dog, Commander.

White House physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor said in a letter on July 30, in confirming Biden’s diagnosis, that people who take Paxlovid can test positive for the virus after testing negative.

“As described last week, acknowledging the potential for so-called ‘rebound’ COVID positivity observed in a small percentage of patients treated with Paxlovid, the President increased his testing cadence, both to protect people around him and to assure early detection of any return of viral replication,” O’Connor said. Now, Biden will engage in “strict isolation procedures,” O’Connor said.

Biden tested positive again for COVID-19 on July 30 after using an antigen test, the letter said. It comes days after he tested negative and delivered a speech at the White House.

Questions

Dr. Jonathan Reiner, a prominent cardiologist and professor of medicine at George Washington University Hospital, wrote that he believes that “COVID rebound” cases sparked by taking Paxlovid are quite common.

“The prior data suggesting ‘rebound’ Paxlovid positivity in the low single digits is outdate[d] and with BA.5 is likely 20-40 percent or even higher,” Reiner wrote on Twitter in response to Biden’s second positive test. He didn’t provide a study or data to back up his comment.

Eric Topol, a physician and scientist, wrote on Twitter that “Paxlovid rebound is quite common … a retrospective study using [electronic health records] of 11,270 people before BA.5 that suggests it’s 5 percent is way off the mark.” Topol was citing a National Institutes of Health-published study from last month.

“The actual incidence can only be meaningfully assessed through a prospective study conducted directly with participants with frequent testing. This is in progress. Whether longer than 5 days treatment will reduce the rate also needs to be determined by a RCT (5 vs 10d),” Topol wrote on July 31.

Meanwhile, White House COVID-19 coordinator Ashish Jha has rejected the claim that Paxlovoid rebound numbers are 40 percent or more. The actual percentage, he claimed, is “in the single digits.”

“If you look at Twitter, it feels like everybody has rebound, but it turns out there’s actually clinical data,” he said last week. “If you look at major health systems that have given out Paxlovid to tens of thousands of people, rebound rates are around 5 percent. There are some studies that say it’s maybe 7, 8 percent, some that say it’s 2 percent, but it’s in the single digits. So it happens; it’s not that frequent.”

“When people have rebound, they don’t end up in the hospital. They don’t end up particularly sick.

“Paxlovid is working really well at preventing serious illness, rebound or no rebound, and that’s why he was offered it. And that’s why the president took it.”

Earlier this year, White House medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci also took Paxlovid for a COVID-19 case. After four days of negative tests, Fauci, 81, said he tested positive for the virus.

Weeks before that, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued an alert to health providers about rebound cases associated with Paxlovid, which is made by Pfizer.

“Paxlovid continues to be recommended for early-stage treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 among persons at high risk for progression to severe disease,” said the agency in a notice posted in June. “Paxlovid treatment helps prevent hospitalization and death due to COVID-19. COVID-19 rebound has been reported to occur between 2 and 8 days after initial recovery and is characterized by a recurrence of COVID-19 symptoms or a new positive viral test after having tested negative.”

Pfizer, in its marketing literature, has said there’s a 2 percent chance of a COVID-19 rebound case after taking Paxlovid.

Pfizer officials didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Oversight Committee Investigating ‘Unnecessary’ COVID-19 Deaths in New York Nursing Homes
By Naveen Athrappully
uly 31, 2022


Republicans on the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis and the House Committee on Oversight and Reform have opened an inquiry into thousands of deaths at New York nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In a letter to New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (pdf), the ranking members from the two committees point to guidance issued by then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo on March 25, 2020, which stated that “no resident shall be denied readmission or admission to the [nursing home] solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19,” and that “[nursing homes] are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident … be tested for COVID-19 prior to admission or re-admission.”

This order contradicted guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and “likely” led to the “unnecessary deaths” of thousands, the July 26 letter says.

The letter reminds Hochul that her administration had promised to be “fully transparent” with regard to the data related to nursing home readmissions and COVID-19 deaths.

“This investigation is even more important considering troubling reports from the New York Assembly Minority Leader that you are in ‘no rush’ to provide answers to the families that lost loved ones in New York nursing homes,” the letter reads.

The letter asks Hochul to produce critical material regarding the issue no later than Aug. 9, including, in part, the total number of COVID-19-related nursing home deaths, and all state-issued guidance, executive orders, and directives regarding hospital discharges to nursing homes.

In an interview last year, former White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx admitted that Cuomo’s March 25, 2020, guidance had violated CMS guidance. She also said that readmitting potentially positive COVID-19 residents back into nursing homes had negative consequences.

Wrong Data

In January 2021, New York Attorney General Letitia James published a report stating that the state’s health department underreported COVID-19-related nursing home deaths by up to 50 percent.

In March this year, New York state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli released a report (pdf) stating that during the 10-month period between April 2020 and February 2021, the New York Health Department had failed to account for about 4,100 lives lost in nursing homes due to COVID-19.

Meanwhile, the state administration is reportedly planning to hire a third-party auditor who will be given until late 2023 to deliver a final report on the state’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. An initial report on the findings is expected by May 2023.

New York State Assemblymember Ron Kim, a Democrat, has blamed Hochul for waiting too long to begin an investigation to scrutinize the Cuomo administration’s efforts to allegedly falsify the COVID-19 death toll.

What “was the intent behind hiding the accurate death toll numbers, which precluded the legislators from intervening sooner on behalf of their panicked constituents?” Kim said in a statement, according to The Associated Press. Kim’s uncle died in a New York nursing home from a suspected COVID-19 infection.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
For those who are Geert followers, watch the video in this article, from about 30 seconds in until he starts pushing boosters at around 2min 20 sec.


(fair use applies)


MAYO CLINIC

COVID-19 variant BA.5 is dominant strain; BA.2.75 is being monitored
By Deb Balzer
July 28, 2022

COVID-19 infections in the U.S. continue to rise, with omicron BA.5 causing an estimated 82% of cases, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). It may be the most dominant strain, but it's not the only one public health officials are monitoring. Omicron is a variant of COVID-19. BA.5 and BA.2.75 refer to as subvariants or strains of omicron. Variant basically means a mutation that occurs in the virus over time.

"BA.5 is a strain that has properties associated with increased transmission of the virus, which is really why it's become so prevalent in the U.S. and globally," says Matthew Binnicker, Ph.D., director of the Clinical Virology Laboratory at Mayo Clinic. "It also has some properties of what we call 'immune evasion' that allows the virus to sidestep some of the prior immunity from either vaccination or previous infection."

BA.2.75

A subvariant known as BA.2.75 also is being monitored by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the CDC. Since it was detected in India in May, cases of BA.2.75 have been reported in more than a dozen countries. It's also been referred to unofficially as Centaurus.

"BA.2.75 has multiple mutations in the gene encoding for the spike protein of the virus. That's the part of the virus that sticks out and binds to the host cell receptor, and those mutations allow the virus to bind to that receptor more efficiently," says Dr. Binnicker. "It can infect human cells better. And it also has mutations that may make our antibodies, which are generated in response to vaccination, less able to bind or neutralize the virus. So there, again, is some concern that this virus may be able to spread quicker and also be able to evade immunity from vaccination or prior infection."

Watch: Dr. Matthew BInnicker discusses COVID-19 variants BA.5 and BA2.75.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1-8dUGj-xU
3 min 21 sec

Dr. Binnicker says this strain is causing a low number of infections in the U.S., but that could change over the coming weeks or months.

Most illnesses and hospitalizations from COVID-19 infection are from the BA.4 and BA.5 variants. So how does the BA.2.75 subvariant affect people?

"BA.2.75 appears to have a higher rate of infectivity," says Dr. Binnicker. "So more efficiently being spread from person to person. We don't have any solid data to suggest that it causes more severe disease, but it's important to point out that as more people are infected, even with a less virulent strain, the chances that the virus infects someone who's more susceptible to severe infection increases. Those who have an immunocompromised condition could still end up with severe disease and be hospitalized. It is a concern whenever a virus can infect people at a higher rate because the chances that the virus will infect an individual who is highly susceptible to worse outcomes then increases."

Looking ahead as children across the nation ready for the return to the classroom, Dr. Binnicker says it's going to be important to keep an eye on the rate of infection.

"There definitely is concern that as we move into the fall and winter months of 2022, and then into 2023, that the new strains of the virus, including BA.27.5, will increase as kids go back to school. They're going to be interacting, and there's going to be increased rate of transmission of viruses, including COVID 19."

Vaccination

Dr. Binnicker says vaccination against COVID-19 is still the best way to reduce infections, hospitalizations and deaths.
"If someone has been recently vaccinated or received a booster, the levels of their antibodies and their immunity is very high. Even with the new strains that seem to have properties of immune evasion, those really high levels of antibodies and immunity generated in response to vaccination or being boosted seems to have a good protective effect against someone coming down with an illness, especially of severe illness."

Dr. Binnicker urges everyone to ensure they are fully vaccinated for COVID-19 and get boosters if eligible.

"Keep a close eye on what the booster recommendations are from the CDC and WHO. It is very likely that coming into the fall and winter months of this year, there may be a reformulated COVID-19 vaccine available that individuals will have access to that will provide hopefully better protection against some of the newer strains of COVID-19," he says.

COVID-19 vaccinations are available for all people ages 6 months and older. Learn where you can get your COVID-19 vaccination at any Mayo Clinic location.
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

12 states with BA.2.75 cases
Mackenzie Bean
Friday, July 29th, 2022

A dozen states have reported cases of the newest omicron subvariant BA.2.75 as of July 29, early disease surveillance data shows.

The subvariant has numerous mutations that may make it more adept than BA. 5, the nation's dominant strain, at spreading quickly and evading immune protection. While it's still unclear whether BA.2.75 will compete against BA.5 or cause more severe illness, some experts contend the subvariant is not the next big one to fret over.

Below is a breakdown of U.S. states reporting BA.2.75 cases, based on a dashboard run by Raj Rajnarayanan, PhD, assistant dean of research and associate professor in the department of basic sciences at the New York Institute of Technology College of Osteopathic Medicine at Arkansas State University in Jonesboro. The dashboard uses data from GISAID, a global data-sharing platform for viruses.

California — 10
Washington — 9
Illinois — 4
Virginia — 3
North Carolina — 3
Wisconsin — 2
New York — 2
Texas — 1
Nebraska — 1
Iowa — 1
Delaware — 1
Arizona — 1
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

sunlight, not gaslight
the case for ending systematic suppression and getting adverse events data out in the open
el gato malo
17 hr ago

i see we have now reached the “if you identify as covid positive, the world must respect your self-identity” stage of the pandemic.



given the over-sensitivity of these tests, this seems deeply implausible.

at a certain point, it becomes predatory.

they are seeking to coax the anxious and unwell into the cult of the branch covidian. this is nasty, manipulative stuff.
it’s very much like what has been done with “long covid.”

feel unwell? low energy? feel a little fogged in the ol’ brainpan?

yeah, it’s “long covid.”

but long covid is mostly a made up disease. it’s the attribution of generalized symptoms to a high profile cause to which they are not actually linked. it has ALL the hallmarks: little to no correlation to actually having had covid, zero biomarkers or definitive tests, generalized symptoms, over-presentation in female. and highly correlated to mental health disorders, especially anxiety.

(PASC = long covid) in this study 48% with “long covid) had mental problems and 38% had anxiety disorder. (and that’s clinically diagnosed. who knows what the capture rate/missed cases are on that?)

you can see the full analysis HERE.



the simple fact is that belief you had covid is a better predictor for long covid than having actually had covid.
what else can one really say?


and now some are testing the waters on validating this belief in having covid among those who test negative. though certainly in keeping with the current fad for “adopting made up identities,” this seems a pointless and counterproductive enterprise.

or is it?

call me mr cynical paws, but i always like to ask “cui bono?” and “what end is served here?”

i doubt the “you have covid despite the lack of evidence” play generates a whole ton of revenue.

but it might create a certain mindset: “i know what’s going on with me and it must be covid” is easy to turn into “i have long covid” and spreading the idea of long covid has great appeal to vaxx companies and their proponents. and convincing those who have a negative covid test that they really have covid and then progressing them on to “long covid” is what’s called a “low hanging fruit market.”
  1. it makes you want vaccine boosters because it ups the perceived risk of having covid.
  2. probably more important, it encourages the view that “anything that feels wrong is long covid” which, of course, shifts suspicion from other possible causes that might rhyme with “french bean inquiry.”
and that second one looks to be getting more and more important.

despite early claims to the contrary, studies keep validating the fact that covid does not cause a rise in heart or most other issues. this is not to say that covid cannot have lasting sequelae (any disease can) just that they are not terribly common.

flu and pneumonia do this too. covid is likely roughly in line with them.

the rest is coached testimony.


but what is not in line is this huge rise in persistent effects and suspicious deaths.

toronto recently mandated 4th boosters for docs. 4 died in the first week after this was done. and all were healthy.
there is an awful lot of coinciditis going around.



Trillium Partners staff physicians Dr. Jakub Sawicki, Dr. Stephen McKenzie and Dr. Lorne Segall died last week, just days after the tragic death of North York General Hospital’s Dr. Paul Hannam, an Olympian who died during a run at 50 years old.

and it seems to be taking down the healthiest preferentially.

this is, of course, very much in line with the experience in so many high end athletes.



hospitals are, of course, quick to disclaim possibly vaxx involvement.

“In all four cases, their hospitals made it clear their deaths “were not related to the COVID-19 vaccine.”
The cause of death in Dr. Nayman’s case has not been released.”

but, i mean, what else are they going to say?

“oops, we killed our doctors because we caved to political pressure over evidence based medicine?”

the covid vaccines have set off AE reports and chronic conditions at a rate wholly unprecedented in vaccine history. it’s orders of magnitude worse than even ALL other vaccines combined.

it has also led to a mad scramble for alternative explanation and elimination of facts.

and not only is the CDC refusing to even assess the data (as their own mandate would seem to require) but we’re getting an endless media barrage of the 900 things you never knew caused young, healthy people to suddenly drop dead from heart attacks, strokes, and blood clots. (all known side effects of these jabs)

apparently, this was always normal?



the more conspiratorially minded might be landing here and while one certainly cannot rule it out, i suspect it’s more prosaic:

big pharma is more marketing than pharma. they buy/in-license most of their science.

they are also massive advertisers and political donors. so the politicians and the media ask only “how high?” when told to jump.

pharma tells them about “sources of sudden death” and they hop all over it. happy to oblige. our brand is crisis anyhow!

Image

it’s just simple cause and effect.

the line between “won an effie” and “psyop” was never terribly clear, but when you get government and regulators involved as well, it disappears entirely.

pay the piper, call the tune, cover your tracks.

see how easy it is?



but despite all this, covid vaccine injury has become the pachyderm in the parlor and the attempts to hide it grow ever more far fetched.

worse, they grow ever more damaging. it looks like 3rd dose triggered A LOT more AE’s per dose than the first 2.
the 4th is likely to be worse still.

it’s vital this is brought to light. medicine is a cost/benefit calculation and suppressing the costs while overstating the benefits is not a road to public health and may generate severe public harm.

and this is not a shot in the dark. it’s a predicted outcome from the CG enriched nature of the mRNA vaccines. all of this is.


mRNA was never a “safe” modality. it failed every therapeutic trial ever run, even oncology, because it was too toxic and too prone to generating autoimmune issues. this is why there were no mRNA drugs used in despite decades of work.

choosing mRNA as a basis for a vaccine was beyond questionable and suppressing the adverse events and silencing doctors who speak about them is unconscionable.

this is the story that needs to get out and to be told.

this is how we show the fraud to penetrate the EUA liability shields and generate the outrage to ensure that something is done about this when we do.

it’s how we flip the script and hold accountable those who cause harm.

no pharma product should operate under a liability abeyance. ever. and especially not vaccines. (reagan really blew that one in 1986)

the agencies that should be doing this are impeding it instead. they are monopolies and utterly captured nose to tail.
this is the people’s business and should be performed where the people can see it.

we must demand sunlight, not gaslight.

that’s how this gets fixed and how the next one is prevented.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

BA.5 much more infectious than BA.2; Kislaya et al.: "SARS-CoV-2 BA.5 vaccine breakthrough risk & severity compared to BA.2: a case-case and cohort study using Electronic Health Records in Portugal"
Dr. Paul Alexander
12 hr ago

SOURCE:

SARS-CoV-2 BA.5 vaccine breakthrough risk and severity compared with BA.2: a case-case and cohort study using Electronic Health Records in Portugal

“The odds of complete primary vaccination (aOR=1.07, 95% CI 0.93-1.23) or booster dose (aOR=0.96, 95% CI 0.84–1.09) among the BA.5 cases were similar to the BA.2 cases, suggesting no significant differences in vaccine effectiveness against infection for the BA.5 lineage compared to BA.2(Table2).

Higher odds of reinfection were observed in BA.5 cases compared with BA.2 (aOR=1.43, 95% CI 0.92-1.26). Combining vaccination and previous infection status, the aOR of BA.5 infection was 1.70 (95% CI 1.40- 2.05) times higher than for a BA.2 infection, within those with complete primary vaccination and with previous infection. Among those with booster dose vaccination and previous infection, the aOR was not statistically significant (aOR=1.18, 95% CI 0.95-1.47).”





 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


We locked children down too long & hard & denied their IMMUNE system training (innate antibodies/immune system) needed); 'Adeno-associated virus 2 infection in children with non-A-E hepatitis'
Lockdowns did this, prevented them from training immune system, Collins, Fauci & Birx & Walensky, such stupid inane a vapid health idiots, dangerous; they caused this dangerous dual adeno & hepatitis

Dr. Paul Alexander
10 hr ago

Parents, pay attention please:

By locking children down and closing schools the insane way we did, we prevented children from sharing virus among themselves, infecting each other, and taxing and toning and tuning up their developing immune systems. This study is clearly showing us what happens due to the lockdowns.

The vast majority of these afflicted children are under 5 years old. Detected in plasma of all the sample, 9 out of 9 children, the adeno-associated virus. We see small sample size but the clarity of the data and the completeness is staggering. Though we still be cautious in the non-peer reviewed status at this time.

Fauci and Birx et al. caused this hepatitis devastation. They prevented the immune system of children the proper development at the proper time (window of opportunity) due to their lockdown lunacy and we are now seeing the impact and will see more, especially if we vaccinate with the COVID vaccine.

Due to post lockdowns, it is likely that children are now being devastated with two common viruses spreading among children e.g. Acute non-A-E paediatric hepatitis and adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2).

Key phrases:

“Acute non-A-E paediatric hepatitis is associated with the presence of AAV2 infection, which could represent a primary pathogen or a useful biomarker of recent HAdV or HHV6B infection.”

“AAV2 typically requires a coinfecting ‘helper’ virus to replicate.” It needs another virus to co-infect, needs a ‘helper’ virus such as another adeno virus or a herpetic virus. You need to be unfortunate to be impacted by both at the same time.

“Adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2), was detected in the plasma of 9/9 and liver of 4/4 patients but in 0/13 sera/plasma of age-matched healthy controls, 0/12 children with adenovirus (HAdV) infection and normal liver function and 0/33 children admitted to hospital with hepatitis of other aetiology.”

We all are exposed to these adeno viruses. Yet children subjected to lock downs and school closures and repeated, were thus exposed to these viruses (adeno etc.) later in life and likely did not develop immunity (the robust immune system) as they normally should e.g. the lockdowns, and now paying a price as the immunity has not been built up and many of these children now need liver transplants, catastrophic. Many of these children need liver transplantations which is very devastation at such an age. Will need life-long support. This acute hepatitis is devastating.

Similarly, if we vaccinate with the COVID vaccine, the vaccinal antibodies will subvert the innate antibodies in children from training by their binding to live viruses, pathogen in the environment. The vaccinal antibodies will now block the innate antibodies from binding and training and thus educating the innate immune system to cope with a broad range of viruses e.g. glycosylated viruses.

The lockdown and school closures caused this, NOT COVID, not the vaccine. But now we will do to children same with the vaccine. We will damage their immune system.

“An outbreak of acute hepatitis of unknown aetiology in children was first reported in Scotland in April 2022.1 Cases aged <16 years have since been identified in 35 countries.2 Here we report a detailed investigation of 9 early cases and 58 control subjects. Using next-generation sequencing and real-time PCR, adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2), was detected in the plasma of 9/9 and liver of 4/4 patients but in 0/13 sera/plasma of age-matched healthy controls, 0/12 children with adenovirus (HAdV) infection and normal liver function and 0/33 children admitted to hospital with hepatitis of other aetiology.”

SOURCE:

Adeno-associated virus 2 infection in children with non-A-E hepatitis

 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

More disappearing Covid vaccine data
Add British Columbia to the governments trying to hide the reality that the mRNA jabbed make up the vast majority of Covid hospitalizations and deaths.
Alex Berenson
13 hr ago


If at first you don’t succeed, hide the numbers.

Until Thursday, the Canadian province of British Columbia provided a clear breakdown of hospitalizations and deaths by vaccine status. Each week, the BC Centre for Disease Control offered an updated count of vaccinated, boosted, and unvaccinated people who had been hospitalized or died.

British Columbia presented the data in what it called “vax donut charts,” because the charts looked like donuts and were stratified by Covid vaccine status. (Crazy, I know.)

Here’s a vax donut chart from May, for example:



Unfortunately, in the last few months the vax donut charts have become less tasty than vaccine advocates had hoped.
The dark purple color represents people who have received at least three Covid vaccine doses, and the purple color those who have received two. As the charts make clear, vaccinated and boosted people account for the vast majority of all Covid hospitalizations and deaths in British Columbia.

By way of comparison, just over half of all of British Columbia’s 5.3 million residents are boosted, while another 31 percent have received at least two doses. Yes, vaccinated and especially boosted people tend to be somewhat older than the unvaccinated.

Still, the fact that 75 to 80 percent of all deaths occur in boosted people highlight the sad reality that the shots do little if anything to stop severe cases and death from Omicron - the final defense of vaccine advocates.

And so British Columbia announced last week that the Vax Donut Chart would be no more. “As of July 28, the Outcomes by Vax and Vax Donut Charts have been retired,” a notice on the Centre for Disease Control Website said blandly.

Retired! Orwell would be proud.

Worse, the charts from earlier weeks also seem to have disappeared from the Wayback Machine - the Internet’s most crucial archive. Trying to find them on saved pages simply pulls up the July 28th notice.

Amazingly, a Canadian television network actually asked the Centre for Disease Control why it had pulled the charts. The agency’s response:

“As most of the population has now been vaccinated with at least two doses of vaccine and many more have been infected with COVID-19, the data became hard to interpret."

The data became hard to interpret.

And by “hard” they mean “easy.”
.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Kim Iversen Resigns The Hill's Morning Show Because She Was Blocked from Questioning Fauci. Join Me in Her Community.
Fauci Lied During the Interview She Was Blocked from and Claimed He Never Supported Lockdown
James Lyons-Weiler
19 hr ago


Kim Iversen, one of the hosts of The Hill’s morning show “Rising”, abruptly resigned after she was blocked from participating in a recent interview with Anthony Fauci, who is increasingly under fire for his participation in questionable policies on public health matters related to COVID-19.

Kim Iversen, joined The Hill’s “Rising” in 2021, said in her July 29 video (linked above) that she joined “Rising” under the condition that she never be censored that the content she provided to viewers was her own.

Iversen has been accurate in her reporting and commentary on the futility and harm of many of the public health policies advanced and promoted by Fauci and others.

According to Epoch Times,

“On the evening of July 24, Iversen says, she was told that Fauci’s team asked earlier in the month who the hosts would be when he appeared on the show and that Iversen wasn’t included because the interview was going to take place earlier than she typically reports to work.
Iversen told the producers to go back to Fauci’s team and say Iversen had to be included. If the interview was then canceled, then The Hill could run a segment about the development, she proposed.
While an agreement seemed to be reached, Iversen received a call the next morning from the show’s executive producer.
“They had made the final decision not to approach Fauci’s team but to instead move forward with the interview without me. They wanted me to come on the show, record a couple of segments, and then ask me to leave so they could interview Fauci,” Iversen said.
During the actual interview, Fauci falsely said that he never recommended lockdowns over COVID-19.”

Iversen felt she could not be honest with viewership by continuing to report via The Hill without putting her reputation at risk.

“How could I say ‘it’s corporate media, but trust me,'” Iversen said.

“That would make me a liar and that would put my reputation at risk because I made promises to the viewers. And so, because of all of this, I am no longer with ‘Rising,’” she reported.

Wow.

Iversen has created a social media-based reporting outlet, which is available via monthly or annual subscription.

I joined the community this morning with an annual subscription, and will be sharing her articles and news about her videos on regular basis.

She needs our support. In just a few step, you can join and be able to access exclusive, objective news without corporate influence.


Join Kim’s community, and let’s get her 1M supporters.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

A pandemic of the undead vaccinated
Age-standardization with unknown or incorrect denominators
Jestre
7 hr ago

I wanted to follow up to my Manitoba post with an example of how having incorrect population denominators can affect age-standardization. The problems that arise from incorrect denominators are similar to the problems that arise from age-specific rates with some unique characteristics. For this article, I will be using synthetic data for purposes of example.

Age-Standardization

In a nutshell, what is age-standardization? Say we want to compare the rate of a disease in two populations with different age demographics. We can normalize the rate of disease in these populations by assigning a weight based on the age demographics in a standard population. The standard population demographics can be taken from one of the two populations at hand or a third population.

Consider the simple example:

Country X:
  • 60% of the population is under 60; and,
  • 40% of the population is over 60.
Country Y:
  • 50% of the population is under 60; and,
  • 50% of the population is over 60.
For both countries, the rate of cancer is 5 in 100,000 for those under 60 and 30 in 100,000 for those over 60. However, the crude rate per 100,000 in both countries is different because the demographics are different.

The crude rate of cancer in Country X is 15 per 100,000 for the entire population1; whereas, in Country Y it is 17.5 per 100,000 for the entire population2. The difference is entirely due to Country Y having an older population.

But what if Country Y had the same age demographics as Country X? Then the rates of cancer in both populations would be exactly the same at 15 per 100,0003.

This is done by simply taking the proportion of ages in Country X, 50%, and multiplying it by the rates in Country Y.

Simple enough, right? The “expert” argument for using age-standardized rates has been to avoid a scenario where the crude rate in the vaccinated population is much higher than the unvaccinated population due to the vaccinated population being older.

Obviously, you’ll have to forget the fact that the experts spent nearly a year locking down the world while ignoring age demographics. Also, forget the idea that even with a working vaccine, the fact that the vaccinated were at a higher risk of hospitalization and death due to age demographics than the young and unvaccinated is why vaccine passports were so ridiculous in the first place. We don’t talk about those things here!

So, what is my gripe with age-standardization?

Denominators.

Like with all things COVID, statistical errors that would have been mundane have been magnified due to the incompetence and limitations of the people in charge of the data. Rates require knowledge of the population at risk.
Populace at risk is taken from population estimates. These estimates are extrapolated from census numbers. As a rule, the further from the census, the more inaccurate the numbers.

In Canada, we have a rapidly aging population. If you look at any population projection, you’ll start to see the population pyramid that is associated with the baby boomers is becoming inverted. In other words, older populations are growing and younger populations shrinking. So having inaccurate numbers, will impact the elderly population the most.

As it turns out, most population numbers used in the COVID era were about as far from the census as possible. We have seen this in the Canadian numbers where most populations are based on 2020 estimates or 2021 non-census estimates, New Zealand numbers (who have a census in 2023), New York numbers (using 2019 population estimates that were wildly different than the census numbers), and so on. This is best shown by asking the question: are the population estimates reasonable given what we know about vaccination rates?

The short answer is no. These countries, provinces, states, and even into the municipal level all have something in common in the older age groups: vaccination rates greater than 100%.

In our cancer example above, inaccurate population estimates would be a problem, but not necessarily a large problem.
However, where the problem traditionally has been magnified, and a good statistician would have pointed this out prior to 2021, occurs in age intervals with smaller populations. As populations get smaller, the impact that errors in population estimates get larger, and the variability in rates increases exponentially.

Small populations are a problem because, with vaccination rates, we are partitioning already small populations into chunks. In our cancer example, we were comparing countries. With COVID, we are working within countries, within provinces, within states, and sometimes at the local level. Some data sets are even more unclear. Take the CDC, who also age-standardize their data and as a rule only give rates. They claim to use certain states for their age-adjustments; however, the deeper you dive into their data, it becomes more unclear whether they mean states or participating health authorities within states4.

As if partitioning small populations into chunks was not enough, the unvaccinated rate is widely considered to be the population estimate less the vaccinated population. In other words, if the vaccinated population is over 100%, then the unvaccinated population is essentially negative. To take one example, for those 80-84 in New Zealand, the vaccination rate is 104.5% or about 4,300 more vaccinated people than the estimates suggest.

Where did these people come from?

But, perhaps more importantly, where do these numbers go?

They are usually taken from the unvaccinated in another age group. When we are talking about very small populations of unvaccinated to begin with, under-counting them by thousands is extremely significant as I will show. It is also unlikely that any age group has 100% vaccinations barring the government going door to door with needles. These represent an unknown number of unvaccinated who are also not counted in unvaccinated denominators.

Furthermore, the vaccinated population never decreases even when a vaccinated person dies. In older age groups, this number will also be significant, perhaps numbering in the thousands as well. And what if the population estimates are ever adjusting to be closer to the current year? Due to the way of calculating the unvaccinated population, the vaccinated dead, when reporting rates, is counted as an unvaccinated dead. Meaning, we may well have a pandemic of the undead vaccinated.

In the New Zealand example, one could easily imagine this under-counting the unvaccinated in the elderly population by an order of magnitude.

Now, nothing I have stated is particularly new if you’ve been reading my substack for awhile. The specific problem with age-standardized rates is they help to mask this effect. Even if disease rates are similar in every age group except the elderly, where population is poorly estimated, the age-standardized rates will be wildly different. If, as in Manitoba’s case, some information is missing like unvaccinated deaths, say, then it becomes difficult to know if the unvaccinated are much worse off or if the entire rate is due to a denominator error.

Consider these two scenarios:

Scenario A:

Using old census data, a province’s population is distributed as such:
  • There are 50000 people aged under 60 years old; and,
  • 5000 people over the age of 60.
In the province,
  • 40000 people aged under 60 years old have been vaccinated with an 80% vaccination rate meaning 10000 unvaccinated are left; and,
  • 4750 people aged above 60 have been vaccinated with a 95% vaccination rate meaning 250 unvaccinated are left.
With,
  • 10 deaths occurring in the vaccinated over 60, 4 deaths occurring in the vaccinated under 60; and,
  • 2 deaths occurring in the unvaccinated over 60, 1 occurring in the unvaccinated under 60.
If we calculate age-standardized rates, using the vaccinated as the standard population, then the age-standardized death rates become 93.9 for the unvaccinated and 31.3 for the vaccinated.

Scenario B:

However, the province decides to update their figures using the latest census data. In the newest census, everything remains the same, except there are 500 more people in the over 60 category.

Less than a 1% increase in the overall population from census to census, in our example, leads to drastic changes in the results. The over 60 category instead of being 95% vaccinated was actually 86.4% vaccinated and the new age-standardized rates become 37.2 for the unvaccinated and 31.3 for the vaccinated.

In fact, the population distribution I chose, while arbitrary, is not entirely different from those actually at risk from the virus (~10% of the population) based on age and with the rapid aging of the population, even the census change in Scenario B is mild. As we have seen, the results are wildly different for such a small change.

But more importantly, the resulting difference in rates gets larger and larger the closer to 100% vaccination rates one gets. Observe the graph below holding all of the variables in Scenario A and B constant except the population of those over 60.
The far left end of the graph has an unvaccinated population of 10 and the right end of the graph an unvaccinated population of 750. Except the interval from 10 to 50 all other changes along the x-axis represent a 50 population increase.
Small errors at the margin make a huge difference. In the case of moving from 50 to 10 people, decreasing the unvaccinated population by less than 0.5% and the entire population by less than 0.1% leads to an almost 5x increase in death rates.



Please let me know if you have any questions. I personally think using incorrect denominators is the biggest scandal of the pandemic and made most of the tyranny possible — I also think misuse of denominators is their most likely way of justifying bringing back vaccine passports in the fall.

Edit: The original e-mail listed 4500, not 4750 as the vaccinated over 60 population in Scenario A; fixed it, all the other numbers were correct, I just made a typo in this post!

Edit2: Age-intervals also matter and can make a qualitative and quantitative difference. Consider the case where there is a third age group in Scenario A, 0 to 18 years old with 20000 vaccinated being removed from the under 60 group and 3000 unvaccinated being removed. Death remain the same. This alone changes the age-standardized death rate. Or choosing age-intervals to make it so 2 deaths occur in the larger group and 1 in the small group for the unvaccinated makes a radical difference.

~~~~~~~

1 60% multiplied by 5 in 100,000 plus 40% multiplied by 30 in 100,000 = 15 per 100,000
2 50% multiplied by 5 in 100,000 plus 50% multiplied by 30 in 100,000 = 15 per 100,000
3 Conversely, if we assumed Country X had the same age demographics as Country Y, the rate in both countries would be 17.5 per 100,000.
4 For their part, the CDC recognizes that over 100% vaccination rates are ridiculous and sets an arbitrary cap at 95% when age-adjusting. I don’t know what this does to the data, quite frankly. The way their data is presenting is not transparent to an outside observer, in my opinion.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Why Is #VaccineInjured Being Allowed To Trend On Twitter?
2nd Smartest Guy in the World
15 hr ago

This substack has chronicled the various recent mea culpas and partial admissions by the regular cast of puppet murderers like Fauci, Birx, Borla, et al.

This is a trend that was predicted last year; namely, that at some point the CIA-run MSM and BigTech’s social media complex would be tapped on their proverbial shoulders to commence the culpability phase of their PSYOP-19 depopulation and control program.

This is being done for a vital reason: at some point the mortality, disease and overall damage caused by the DEATHVAX™ will become so undeniable even to the most brainwashed amongst us, that an unprecedented public response will be unavoidable.

This is all by design.

The Cult needs a violent uprising to both round out their eugenics plans and concurrently lock down the planet with martial law. This consolidation of power is a requisite of the 4th Industrial Revolution. The revolting Genetically Modified Humans are to join forces with the unmodified refusenik “domestic terrorists” in a violent civil war which will flawlessly play into the hands of the One World Government.

This is precisely why we must engage in total nonviolent noncompliance.

Do not for a millisecond believe that the people are overriding the Twitter algorithms; this would be sheer naïveté:


What we are witnessing in this recent Twitter trend is the behavioral psychologist’s game of priming the populace for their pre-engineered outcome.

They are now goading the populace, taunting both the slow kill bioweapon injected and uninjected alike.

The leading “experts” are being paraded with their admissions that their “vaccines” were always known to not protect anyone from infection, and to waffle about various claims like lockdowns, etc.

When Klaus Schwab said, “we have to prepare for an angrier world” what he was actually telegraphing was that he and his partners in crime were actively executing the preparations for said angrier world. They know how critical violence is for the success of their plans.

Twitter is just as WEF “penetrated” as the foreign nation of Washington, D.C. is. There is now no difference between a government waging a full spectrum soft war against its citizenry and all of the other Cult nodes from BigPharma to BigTech to the CIA to the Federal Reserve to the CDC, IMF, UN, BIS, WHO, NGO’s, terrorist nonprofits, etc. also busily engaging in that war against We the People.

None of the below tweets somehow managed to outwit the algorithms:


Image
Image
Image

These tweets are not deleted or suppressed for a reason.

What do you think happens when the leading “experts” are paraded out again to admit to exactly what they have perpetrated?

What do you think happens when #DEATHVAX™ is the top Twiiter trend?

They want you angry, and when they are good and ready they want you as violent as possible. And when they pull the rug from under society, we must offer them only undivided nonviolent noncompliance.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

BOLDING IN ORIGINAL (not mine)

Book review: "Vaccination, Social Violence, and Criminality: The Medical Assault on the American Brain"
Harris L. Coulter connected the dots back in 1990 and his words still ring true today
Toby Rogers
Jul 31

I want to draw your attention to an extraordinary but little-known book titled Vaccination, Social Violence, and Criminality: The Medical Assault on the American Brain. It was published in 1990 and it’s out of print but there are still a few used copies available on Amazon and eBay. It was written by Harris L. Coulter (1932 – 2009) a visionary medical historian (with a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Columbia University) who also co-authored A Shot in the Dark with Barbara Loe Fisher in 1986.
Vaccination, Social Violence, and Criminality is as close as our movement gets to a Unified Field Theory. Coulter argues that everything from the social upheaval of the 1960s to the sharp rise in autism, cranial nerve palsies, depression, suicide, eating disorders, learning disabilities, seizures, allergies, family dissolution, demyelinating disorders, sexual violence, and other forms of psychopathy & sociopathy — all stem, at least in part, from pervasive subclinical encephalitis (and post-encephalitic syndrome) as a result of vaccines. Coulter provides extensive references from the scientific and medical literature at the end of each chapter to document his claims (this was before science and medicine started censoring all discussion of vaccines).

I disagree with Coulter’s claim that vaccines led to the civil unrest in the 1960s. The U.S. war in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia combined with the draft and the introduction of high dose progesterone birth control pills are much better explanatory factors. The fact that the CIA/FBI/deep state systematically assassinated the most important political leaders of that era added to the chaos.

But there is growing evidence that the rest of Coulter’s theory is on target. Of course I would add many other disorders — ADHD, Alzheimers, childhood cancers, diabetes, Gulf War Syndrome, ME/CFS, etc. that have since been linked with vaccines. I would point out that emissions from coal fired power plants, plastics, pesticides, herbicides, nuclear weapons tests, fire retardants, EMF, and other pharmaceuticals (notably Tylenol and SSRIs) also likely play a role. And human actions are not driven solely by toxicants, there is still human agency and social factors always play a role as well. But the story of our era is a mass poisoning event wrought by vaccines (and other seeming technological miracles that have tremendous, rarely acknowledged, downsides).

What’s remarkable is that Coulter came to this conclusion so early — 1990 was just the fourth year of the genocide (if one starts counting from the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act) or the 25th year of the genocide (if one starts counting from the 1965 Immunization Assistance Act). The book was written before the widespread deployment of the internet enabled people to quickly share information.

The book is also an interesting time capsule. In the book, Coulter is still contending with psychoanalytic theories (that have since become passé), he still believes that appeals to science will somehow convince the gatekeepers to do the right thing (we now know that they are psychopaths), and he has no idea how much worse things were about to become (he’s describing a small minority of the population with these disorders and now they are everywhere).

I think Coulter does a brilliant job of mapping the various pathologies associated with vaccine-induced pervasive subclinical encephalitis. But what fascinates me — and what I want to write about today — are the ways in which this mass poisoning event reshapes what is normal and what is desirable in a society. If 95% of the population is poisoned (they are), including nearly all of the elites (they are), then EVERYTHING in society will be warped by these toxicants — including hopes, dreams, norms, and ideals.

Let’s work through some examples:

I think a strong case case be made that post-modernism (‘there are no universals’) — is the result of vaccine injury. Everything from Foucault now needs to be interpreted in light of this possibility. It is strange to suggest that one could not possibly come to understand another person’s perspective — and that all we can do is celebrate difference. But if the dendrites in the brain necessary to process empathy are damaged by mercury poisoning (from vaccines and other sources) — it would make sense that lots of people might conclude that Foucault and post-modernism have it exactly right.

State Senator Richard Pan in California is clearly a criminal psychopath. Devoid of normal human feelings, he grins like a Cheshire Cat for hours as THOUSANDS of parents testify every year about the vaccine injury suffered by their children.
And this criminal psychopath is ADORED by his Democratic colleagues who see him as an ideal pediatrician politician. But of course many of the other members of his party in the state legislature are similarly afflicted. Like is attracted to like.
Facebook was invented by severely vaccine-injured Harvard University student, Mark Zuckerberg, to publicly humiliate a female student who rejected his advances. This is not a normal way to respond to disappointment. Facebook is now used by 2.9 billion people worldwide. When Facebook first launched, remember how weird we all thought it was that people were expected to just blurt out what they were doing in their status update? That is not how normal people communicate. Heretofore, communication was based on dialogue. Now publicly announcing, into a digital void, what we are doing throughout the day is seen as normal (because of course it is to a planet full of people dealing with pervasive subclinical encephalitis).

Bill Gates appears badly vaccine-injured. He’s spent millions of dollars on coaching to cover it up but his pathologies have a way of slipping out in nearly every interview. Melinda too. (It’s interesting that they appear to have spent no money on detox nor healing.)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UD_FfYW23ZQ
30 seconds

Bill Gates’ obsessive focus on monopolies and control; the fact that everything he touches becomes so much worse (he invests in farms and fertilizer, then there are food shortages; he invests in Common Core and our educational system collapses; he invests in public health and suddenly there is a pandemic); and his fondness for known pedophile sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein — these are not the actions of a healthy person. But Bill and Melinda Gates are seen as exemplary citizens (the best of the best) by people like Anderson Cooper and Sanjay Gupta who are similarly afflicted.

Giving the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry to the inventors of CRISPR — during the middle of a global pandemic caused by CRISPR — is not normal. But it feels normal and desirable to the members of the Nobel Prize committee because they too are damaged by chronic brain inflammation and other vaccine-induced harms. CRISPR was exciting, the pandemic was exciting, the Nobel Prize committee was excited, they apparently did not care how many people died.

Klaus Schwab at the World Economic Forum is a textbook psychopath — he dresses like a psychopath, talks like a psychopath, and thinks like a psychopath (“you will own nothing and be happy”). He doesn’t hide it, he writes books telling everyone exactly how he plans to enslave them. But he is celebrated by business and political leaders throughout the world because they are damaged just like him.

Zuckerberg, Gates, and Schwab are such obvious examples, but the harms go well beyond them to impact all facets of modern society.

Elite universities are unable to conduct proper risk benefit analysis in connection with Covid-19 vaccines. They gleefully turn the students in their care over to the pharmaceutical industry and seem unconcerned when these students later develop myocarditis and drop dead. This is a strange way for universities to conduct themselves.

Pediatrics has seen a 277-fold increase in autism over the course of the last fifty years and nearly the entire profession is unable to see it or acknowledge it. Yes, that’s a story of cultural and financial capture, shame, and self-deception. But the entire profession is also affected (to varying degrees) by the same harms that they inflict.

All public health institutions in the U.S. — CDC, FDA, NIH — have failed in response to a relatively straightforward problem over the last two years. When I watch Peter Marks, Amanda Cohn, or Paul Offit speak, I believe that I am staring at psychopaths who have been elevated to the highest echelons of their profession by other like-minded individuals.
Our taste in art and music is likely affected as well. The fact that Limp Bizkit ever got played on the radio is a sign of a society in catastrophic decline.

The corruption, chaos, coarsening, and unravelling of our society since 1965 may all stem, at least in part, from the fact that our brains and bodies are so inflamed. And the fact that all of this dysfunction is celebrated, normalized, and sought after is a sign of a society in the grips of a mass poisoning event.

I’m sure you can think of 100 more examples (and I look forward to reading your thoughts in the comments).
The reason it feels like we are living in an insane asylum is because we are. Upwards of 95% of the population may be dealing with pervasive subclinical encephalitis and post-encephalitic syndromes. So logic, reason, empathy, desire, connection, and all other human attributes are affected by the way that this interferes with brain and bodily functions.

One of my takeaways from all of this is that it has been a waste of time to try to convert the gatekeepers. Pan, Zuckerberg, Gates, Schwab etc. will never come to their senses because they are not physically capable of it — quite literally their brains and body are too damaged right now. If they are involved in any way, they will only makes things worse. That doesn’t excuse their actions, it just suggests that we should put our energies into replacing them rather than convincing them.
Also, if we are going to survive as a species we need to block the introduction of new toxicants into our bodies and detox, if we can, the toxic junk that is currently inside us.

The movement for medical freedom has become the monks and nuns who are fighting to save civilization. While the vaccine-injured Neros set fire to the world we are trying to preserve a sense of what normal human functioning looked like before everyone got poisoned. But what I’m realizing is that the scale of what we are up against is so much larger than we are usually willing to admit. My concern is that vaccine injury has become so pervasive in our society that now it just seems like culture (which is exactly how Pharma wants us to experience it). Healing is possible but that can only begin if we acknowledge what is happening.

The humbling thing about this is that we are nearly all affected — even those of us who are fighting to stop this toxic tyranny. So it’s a useful reminder to hold our own thoughts lightly and practice grace with ourselves and others.

Update July 31, 2022
I rewrote the third paragraph based on valid criticism in the comments.

Blessings to the warriors.

Prayers for everyone trying to stop Pharma from destroying civilization.

In the comments, please let me know if you can think of other examples of this phenomenon (the warped becomes normal because of widespread encephalitis) or anything else that is on your mind.

As always, I welcome any corrections.



.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic

BREAKING: Fauci's July 2020 Surprise Cost Trump the Election
New evidence shows that Fauci forced Moderna to delay their clinical trial by 3 weeks which postponed the results until after the election
Toby Rogers
5 hr ago

I. Fauci fires Trump

Think back to July 2020. Trump and Fauci were at war with each other. Key leaders within the Trump administration, including Peter Navarro, wanted to fire Fauci. There were riots in the streets as people protested the murder of George Floyd. And new evidence shows that behind the scenes, Fauci was working to torpedo Trump’s chances for re-election.
We already knew that Fauci, the FDA, CDC, and the pharmaceutical industry went to great lengths to block safe and effective treatments including hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin in order to prolong the pandemic and create the market for Covid-19 vaccines. But a new book reveals that Fauci also forced Moderna to delay their clinical trial by three weeks — which pushed the release of their preliminary results until after the presidential election.

This key piece of information comes from The Messenger: Moderna, the Vaccine, and the Business Gamble That Changed the World published last week by Harvard Business Review Press. The author, Peter Loftus, is a reporter for the Wall Street Journal and they published his essay about the book in their Review section on Saturday. What’s astonishing is that Loftus does not even realize the enormity of the story he just stumbled upon. Cultural capture and too many shots apparently prevent one from connecting the dots, so I will do it for him.

Most people already know the broad brush strokes of the Moderna story — they had never successfully brought a product to market before Operation Warp Speed. They were grifters — they took $25 million from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in 2013 to develop mRNA products that never worked and another $125 million from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) in 2015 for a vaccine for Zika that also failed. But Fauci really liked these grifters and so when the pandemic began in 2020, BARDA directed $483 million to Moderna for Covid-19 vaccine development — and Moderna cut NIH in on the patents. That gave NIH and especially Fauci control over what came next.

The key paragraphs from Loftus’ WSJ essay are here:

Dr. Zaks [Chief Medical Officer for Moderna] had wanted to use a private contract research organization to run the whole trial, but NIAID officials wanted their clinical-trial network involved. Eventually, Dr. Zaks backed off, and both entities participated. “I realized we were at an impasse, and I was the embodiment of the impasse,” Dr. Zaks said.
Next, when Moderna’s 30,000-person study began enrolling volunteers in July 2020, the subjects weren’t racially diverse enough. Moncef Slaoui, who led Warp Speed’s vaccine efforts, and Dr. Fauci began holding Saturday Zoom calls with Mr. Bancel and other Moderna leaders to “help coax and advise Moderna how to get the percentage of minorities up to a reasonable level,” Dr. Fauci recalled.
Drs. Fauci and Slaoui wanted Moderna to slow down overall enrollment, to give time to find more people of color. Moderna executives resisted at first. “That was very tense,” Dr. Slaoui said. “Voices went up, and emotions were very high.” Moderna ultimately agreed, and the effort worked, but it cost the trial about an extra three weeks. Later, Mr. Bancel called the decision to slow enrollment “one of the hardest decisions I made this year.”

The claim that Fauci cared about racial diversity in the clinical trial is a lie. How do we know this? Later “clinical trials” for Pfizer and Moderna in kids looked at antibodies in the blood, not actual health outcomes, in only about 300 study participants. The number of people of color enrolled in those undersized trials were in the single digits (literally two or three Black participants total) — so those results were not statistically significant. Yet this did not stop authorization. It appears that Fauci’s delay tactics were designed to accomplish a different goal.

Let’s do the math:

Moderna released their preliminary results — claiming 94.5% effectiveness — on November 16, 2020.

The presidential election was less than two weeks earlier — on November 3, 2020.

Trump lost by less than 1% of the vote in 4 key swing states.

Fauci’s demand to slow down enrollment in July 2020 cost Moderna 3 weeks.

If Moderna had released their results 3 weeks earlier — on October 25, 2020, Trump would have scored a major win in the final week of the campaign and won the election.

It does not matter how one feels about Trump or Biden. A massive political win in the week before the election would have convinced enough voters of Trump’s competence and thus pushed Trump’s vote total over the top.

What about Pfizer? They also could have published their preliminary results prior to the election which would have secured Trump’s re-election. According to Loftus, Pfizer “opted out of Operation Warp Speed for fear it would slow the company down.” Pfizer still took $2 billion off of the Trump administration for advance purchase orders. But Scott Gottlieb and Pfizer clearly preferred Biden and so they held their preliminary results until November 9, 2020 — just 6 days after the election. The Biden administration returned the favor by giving Pfizer a blank check and authorizing shots for additional age groups based on the worst “clinical trial” results anyone has ever seen.

The important thing to understand in all of this is that Fauci, the FDA, NIH, and CDC are political functionaries pretending to be scientists. Pandemics, vaccines, and public health are a way for the Democratic Party machine to direct billions of dollars to their base and reward large donors to the party. These companies and their bureaucratic enablers were happy to take money off of Trump. But they knew that they could get an even better deal from Biden.

As you know, the results of this criminal scheme are gruesome. The Covid-19 shots authorized right after the 2020 election have made no discernible impact on the course of the pandemic. Far more people have died of Covid-19 since the introduction of the shots under Biden than during the Trump administration when no Covid-19 shots existed. The Covid-19 shots have negative efficacy and even quadruple-dosed Biden and quadruple-dosed Fauci have contracted Covid-19, twice. These are the deadliest and most toxic shots in the history of the world.

So what started out as a grift turned into mass murder and a crime against humanity.

And now it’s happening again…

II. Pfizer and Moderna move up the release date for reformulated Covid-19 shots in the effort to help Democrats win the midterm elections

On Thursday of last week, the White House and the FDA told their favorite stenographers at the NY Times that Moderna and Pfizer are going to release their reformulated Covid-19 shots, that will completely skip clinical trials, in mid-September.

As readers of my Substack will recall, back on June 28, Pfizer said that the fastest the reformulated shots could be released was October; Moderna said “late October or November” — provided they could skip clinical trials (which of course the FDA granted because they work for Pharma). Did Pfizer and Moderna not understand their own production capabilities?
How did Pfizer and Moderna suddenly speed up their production schedule by 6 weeks?

It appears that once again, the public health gatekeepers are doing politics not science. If shots go into bodies in the last two weeks of September, Democrats will claim progress against Covid during October right before the midterm elections on November 8. It’s basically the political win that these same actors denied to Trump (it’s not a public health win, as I will show below).

What’s likely driving this is that Fauci, Pfizer, Moderna, the FDA, CDC, and NIH all want Democrats to retain the House and Senate in order to prevent hearings into their bungling of the Covid-19 response. Of course they also want to keep the Covid-19 vaccine gravy train going as long as possible.

But, you’re surely saying to yourself, we know that these 5th dose reformulated shots are likely to cause catastrophic harms. We’re already seeing a 5% to 15% increase in all-cause mortality across the most heavily vaccinated countries as a result of non-specific effects from these shots. There are 29,790 VAERS reports of death following these shots and this is likely an underestimate by a factor of 41 (so actual death toll = 1,221,390). These reformulated shots are going to use a form of mRNA never tried before and skip clinical trials altogether, so the harms could be even worse. There also seem to be cumulative harms from these shots — the more doses, the more messed up the immune system, the more vulnerable one is to Covid and all sorts of other diseases including cancer.

So how exactly do they plan to get away with this, especially right before an election?

The same way they always get away with it — they own the media. Pfizer and Moderna will rush out press releases claiming that these reformulated shots are a miracle. The CDC’s in-house newsletter, MMWR, will rush out articles and janky studies claiming that these reformulated shots are a miracle. The mainstream media will dutifully report that these reformulated shots are a miracle. Meanwhile, people you know and love — coworkers, friends, neighbors, and family — will be getting injured and killed by these shots. Yet all of the stories in the news will be hosannas about the genius of Tony Fauci, Peter Marks, and the FDA. Billions of dollars of dark money from Pharma will flow into Democratic Congressional campaign coffers. If Democrats can retain the House and Senate they will reward Pfizer and Moderna by blocking any inquiry into the failed Covid-19 response. Win, win, win for Pharma. Everyone else loses.

Which brings me to my last point….

III. Republicans, you have to step up and fight for us or you will lose

Republicans thought that they could take back the House and Senate simply by not being Democrats. Most Republicans did not really fight for us, they just sat back and let Dems destroy themselves. That plan was working until the Supreme Court overturned Roe. Now the Republican advantage in the generic Congressional ballot (‘which party do you prefer’) has evaporated. Pelosi has passed a range of popular bills. Manchin has fallen in line so Biden will likely get some late legislative wins. Gas prices have declined somewhat. And now it appears that Democrats, who were left for dead just weeks ago, will retain the Senate and may retain the House.

IF REPUBLICANS WANT TO WIN THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS THEY HAVE TO MAKE IT ABOUT DEMOCRATS’ FAILED RESPONSE TO COVID!

No more sitting back. No more making warrior mamas do all of the emotional labor for our country. If Republicans want to win they have to make it clear that they will fire, arrest, and prosecute Fauci (and all of his lieutenants) as soon at Republicans take power. Fauci funded the creation of the chimera virus, blocked access to safe and effective treatments, and inflicted deadly toxic vaccines on the entire population. Over 2 million Americans are dead as a direct result of Fauci’s corruption (1 million dead from/with Covid, over 1 million dead from the shots). If Republicans cannot be bothered to sink this two-foot putt then they don’t deserve to win. If Republicans want the votes of the 18 million single-issue medical freedom voters who decide every national election these days — that’s what they have to run on: #ArrestFauci!

Blessings to the warriors.

Prayers for everyone fighting to bring these monsters to justice.

In the comments, please let me know what’s on your mind.

As always, I welcome any corrections.
.
 

BUBBAHOTEPT

Veteran Member
Trust your gut? If you feel like you have COVID? That really sounds like science! :whistle:
But hey, I have a lot of feelings and gut suggestions on what I think of politicians in DC. Does that work too???:kaid:
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Biden covid case highlights confusing CDC guidance on ending isolation
Lena H. Sun and Joel Achenbach, The Washington Post
Mon, August 1, 2022, 5:04 PM

WASHINGTON - Before President Joe Biden emerged from coronavirus isolation Wednesday, he made double-sure he was no longer contagious. He received negative tests Tuesday night and Wednesday morning. To test at all meant Biden was going above and beyond the guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for exiting isolation.

The CDC has built that guidance around a timeline - a prescribed minimum number of days of isolation - rather than the direct, personalized evidence of virus shedding that rapid antigen tests provide. But the usefulness of these tests was highlighted anew Saturday when Biden, who had taken the antiviral during his illness, tested positive again and returned to isolation in the White House residence.

More than 2 and one-half years into the pandemic, and with a highly contagious version of the virus circulating, the CDC guidelines for what to do when falling ill - and when to return to public life - continue to stoke as much confusion as clarity. That's a reflection of the changing nature of the virus, the inherent unpredictability of an infection, and the demands and expectations of work and home life.

With new research showing that people are often infectious for more than five days, the CDC guidance has drawn criticism from some infectious-disease experts. The Biden protocol strikes many of them as the right way to go - because it's empirical evidence that a person isn't shedding virus.

The CDC does not explicitly recommend a negative test to patients who want to resume activities. It describes such a test, which offers a direct if imperfect measure of contagiousness, as optional. The guidance states that a patient should isolate for at least five days. (Day 1 is the day after your symptoms manifest or your test was collected.) Patients who end isolation should continue to wear a well-fitting mask around others at home or in public through Day 10.

"Given that a substantial portion of people do have a rapid positive test after 5 days, I think an updated recommendation should include people having a negative rapid test before coming out of isolation for COVID," said Tom Inglesby, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, who was the Biden administration's senior adviser on testing from December until April.

Rapid tests are widely available, and "there is new science and practical experience with this virus since December when isolation guidance was issued," Inglesby said in an email.

People who are being required to go back to their workplaces after five days of being sick with covid even if they still have a positive test result "shouldn't do that," Inglesby said. "It's exposing others in the work environment to the risk of COVID spread. CDC guidance on that would be valuable."

Biden has used his brief bout with the coronavirus as a sign that the administration is on top of the pandemic and has made the right moves by relying on vaccinations, testing and new antiviral drugs to lower the death rate. But across the country, hundreds of thousands of people a day are getting infected with the omicron subvariant BA.5 - the exact number is impossible to know - and they have a common, urgent need to know when they are no longer contagious.

The CDC's guidance has been under internal review in recent months. A revamped set of recommendations is expected to be rolled out in coming weeks, according to three administration officials and advisers who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive internal discussions. A draft of the updated guidance at the moment does not include a requirement to test negative before exiting isolation, they said.

The existing CDC guidance says patients can end isolation five days after their first day of symptoms, so long as their symptoms have improved and they have been fever-free for at least 24 hours without fever-reducing medication. The CDC encourages people who become very sick or have weakened immune systems to isolate for 10 days.

That leaves a negative test result as optional.

Robert Wachter, chair of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco, said people can easily misconstrue the CDC five-day guidance as a personal assurance of no longer being contagious.

"Unfortunately, people hear the 'five days' and think, 'Oh, it must be that I'm not infectious,' " Wachter said. "That's just wrong."

A recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine looked at how long people could shed virus that could be cultured in a laboratory - the best test of infectiousness. The result: People shed such virus for eight days, on average, before testing negative.

The CDC guidance "doesn't make sense," said Andrew Noymer, an epidemiologist at the University of California at Irvine. "They're telling people to go back to work while they're still contagious, essentially."

Wachter suggests that people test negative before heading out in public.

"The antigen test turns out to be an awfully good 'are you infectious' test," Wachter said. "If they're still testing positive on Day 6, 7 or 8, I don't want them hugging me in a room without a mask on."

Officials familiar with the crafting of covid policy say the administration has to take into account human behavior - what people can, and will, do in their daily lives to limit virus transmission.

The administration's decision not to push strongly for a negative test before ending isolation reflects an awareness that not everyone has access to tests or can extend time away from work, school, caregiving or other duties.

When CDC Director Rochelle Walensky was asked recently why the agency doesn't recommend that all Americans use successive negative tests to exit isolation, as Biden did, she said the president was in a special category.

The president received multiple rapid tests because he was being monitored for a Paxlovid "rebound" infection, which can occur days after initially testing negative. Biden tested negative Thursday and Friday mornings before a positive result Saturday morning indicated the rebound, sending him back into isolation, White House physician Kevin C. O'Connor said in a letter. Biden tested positive again Sunday and "as could be anticipated," remained positive Monday, O'Connor said.

Walensky said during a Washington Post Live interview that "I think we can all agree that the president's protocols likely go above and beyond and have the resources to go above and beyond what every American is able and has the capacity to do."

"As we put forward our CDC guidance, we have to do so, so that they are relevant, feasible, followable by Americans," she said, noting that some communities have fewer resources and greater work constraints.

She also noted that the guidance gives people the option to get a rapid test before ending isolation.

The five-day isolation period reflects an approximation of when people are most likely to be infectious. But these are averages, covering broad populations.

A positive result from a rapid antigen test, often called an at-home test, is the best indicator of how much virus is present and how likely you are to infect someone, said Michael Mina, a former Harvard University infectious-disease epidemiologist and immunologist who is an expert on rapid tests. Rapid antigen tests look for specific viral proteins to detect infection. Mina is chief science officer at a telehealth company that uses rapid testing, including for covid, to link patients to care.
"If you still have enough virus to see it on a rapid test, you know that you're still infectious," Mina said.

The California Department of Public Health, for example, requires a negative test on the fifth day after first testing positive, or later, to leave isolation.

Policymakers could help patients by releasing "clearer guidelines on using antigen tests" to leave isolation, like in Biden's case, said Amy Barczak, an infectious-disease expert at Massachusetts General Hospital. Her research suggests that one-quarter of people infected with an omicron variant could still be infectious after eight days.

The CDC guidance dates to the wave of illness caused by the omicron variant that began in December and sickened tens of millions of people in a matter of weeks, causing daily cancellation of thousands of commercial airline flights and leading to staff shortages in all sectors of the economy. Under immense pressure to keep essential services from being hobbled, and amid signs that omicron was less likely to cause severe disease in a largely vaccinated population, the CDC shortened its recommended isolation period from 10 days to five.

Rapid tests were in short supply at that point, but then the federal government expanded its acquisition of tests, with millions now available. Since this spring, Americans have been able to go to a government website, covid.gov, order free rapid antigen tests and have them shipped to their homes. At drugstores and at online retailers, a package of two tests generally costs about $25, depending on the location. Private insurance is supposed to cover purchases of at-home tests.
Some elements of the CDC guidance may prove confusing.

The CDC says that people who choose to take a coronavirus test after Day 5 and get a positive result should extend their isolation to 10 days. But the agency does not directly recommend taking a test after Day 5. The guidance as written says, in effect, you can take a test after five days but be prepared to handle the result. People for whom isolation is a hardship may see no incentive to learn whether they are still shedding virus.

Experts say the CDC should recommend what's best for public health.

"That's kind of the feeling they're giving off right now: . . . 'It's an okay idea, but we don't want to actually recommend it,' " Mina said. "It should be the other way around."

The expected release by the CDC of revamped covid guidance in coming weeks is prompted by a desire to provide clarity, according to administration officials and others familiar with the discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the guidance is not final.

"We just know that people are hungry for guidance in this moment," one CDC adviser said.

The new guidelines are intended to help consumers determine covid risk by evaluating several factors, including whether they will be around people with frail immune systems or other underlying conditions, whether they will be outdoors or indoors, and the quality of the ventilation.

CDC has more than 600 websites related to its covid response, each with different messages on testing, ventilation and masking in different settings, the adviser said. The agency wants to share "important messages that everyone needs to hear in all settings across the country . . . and then make sure that all of the other guidance underneath it reflects those key messages."

In the meantime, people testing positive at home past Day 5 are trying to figure out whether it's safe to go back to work or resume other activities.

How quickly a rapid test turns positive can help guide behavior, Mina said.

"If you have a really dark line that shows up in five seconds before the control line even shows up . . . you probably really want to stay in isolation," Mina said. "If you start to see the line in 10 seconds, and it gets really, really dark, you are teeming with virus."

If there is a weaker or fainter line, "it's likely that you have less virus there, but you still do have virus. And there's no way to define the cutoff at which you're likely to transmit to other people," Barczak said.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Biden still in isolation, feeling 'well,' but continues to test positive in rebound COVID case
TAL AXELROD - ABC News
Mon, August 1, 2022, 3:27 PM

President Joe Biden "continues to feel well" and is still in isolation after experiencing a rebound case of COVID-19, according to a letter from White House physician Dr. Kevin O'Connor on Monday.

O'Connor wrote in a memo released by the White House that Biden tested positive on an antigen test Monday morning, a result he said "could be anticipated." Biden had previously tested negative Tuesday evening, Wednesday morning, Thursday morning and Friday morning before again testing positive on Saturday.

"The President will continue his strict isolation measures as previously described," O'Connor wrote.

"He will continue to conduct the business of the American people from the Executive Residence," O'Connor added. "As I have stated previously, the President continues to be very specifically conscientious to protect any of the Executive Residence, White House, Secret Service and other staff whose duties require (albeit socially distanced) proximity to him."

Biden had first tested positive for COVID-19 on July 21 and ultimately reemerged from isolation last Wednesday after testing negative. However, he had been treated with Paxlovid, an effective coronavirus treatment that at times produces a so-called rebound case after a patient finishes a course of it. High-risk patients still face drastically diminished risks of hospitalization after taking Paxlovid.

The letter did not specify any symptoms Biden is feeling, but the president has been asymptomatic since testing positive again Saturday, according to O'Connor's past memos, and White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Monday there have been no reoccurring symptoms. Biden previously had a runny nose, cough, sore throat, a slight fever and body aches after testing positive the first time, and the president has resumed taking the medication he was receiving prior to his initial positive test.

When asked if Biden was setting blocks of time to rest to fight his infection, Jean-Pierre said Biden "has been working eight-plus hours a day."

"That is a schedule that he continues to keep. Instead of doing it in the Oval Office, he's doing it in the White House residence."

Biden had six close contacts before testing positive for COVID for a second time, though the White House has not announced any positive cases from any of those people. Jean-Pierre confirmed again Monday that there have been no positive test results from those contacts.

The rebound case comes after Biden last week gave a speech from the Rose Garden praising vaccines and therapeutics.
"We got through COVID with no fear, I got through it with no fear, a very mild discomfort because of these essential, life-saving tools," Biden said. "You don't need to be president to get these tools used for your defense."

Biden's positive test result has interfered with his travel plans across the country in which he had planned on touting newly passed legislation to invest in production of semiconductors and computer chips. The president has also highlighted a recent agreement between Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., on a bill to reduce drug prices, combat climate change and close corporate tax loopholes.

It is unclear precisely when will resume his travel. When asked about future trips to tout the latest legislative progress, Jean-Pierre on Monday noted that there are no recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention regarding travel after a rebound infection.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


'Living with COVID': Where the pandemic could go next
Jennifer Rigby and Julie Steenhuysen
Mon, August 1, 2022, 2:04 AM

LONDON/CHICAGO (Reuters) - As the third winter of the coronavirus pandemic looms in the northern hemisphere, scientists are warning weary governments and populations alike to brace for more waves of COVID-19.

In the United States alone, there could be up to a million infections a day this winter, Chris Murray, head of the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), an independent modeling group at the University of Washington that has been tracking the pandemic, told Reuters. That would be around double the current daily tally.

Across the United Kingdom and Europe, scientists predict a series of COVID waves, as people spend more time indoors during the colder months, this time with nearly no masking or social distancing restrictions in place.

However, while cases may surge again in the coming months, deaths and hospitalizations are unlikely to rise with the same intensity, the experts said, helped by vaccination and booster drives, previous infection, milder variants and the availability of highly effective COVID treatments.

"The people who are at greatest risk are those who have never seen the virus, and there's almost nobody left," said Murray.

These forecasts raise new questions about when countries will move out of the COVID emergency phase and into a state of endemic disease, where communities with high vaccination rates see smaller outbreaks, possibly on a seasonal basis.

Many experts had predicted that transition would begin in early 2022, but the arrival of the highly mutated Omicron variant of coronavirus disrupted those expectations.

"We need to set aside the idea of 'is the pandemic over?'" said Adam Kucharski, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. He and others see COVID morphing into an endemic threat that still causes a high burden of disease.

"Someone once told me the definition of endemicity is that life just gets a bit worse," he added.
The potential wild card remains whether a new variant will emerge that out-competes currently dominant Omicron subvariants.

If that variant also causes more severe disease and is better able to evade prior immunity, that would be the "worst-case scenario," according to a recent World Health Organization (WHO) Europe report.

"All scenarios (with new variants) indicate the potential for a large future wave at a level that is as bad or worse than the 2020/2021 epidemic waves," said the report, based on a model from Imperial College of London.

CONFOUNDING FACTORS

Many of the disease experts interviewed by Reuters said that making forecasts for COVID has become much harder, as many people rely on rapid at-home tests that are not reported to government health officials, obscuring infection rates.
BA.5, the Omicron subvariant that is currently causing infections to peak in many regions, is extremely transmissible, meaning that many patients hospitalized for other illnesses may test positive for it and be counted among severe cases, even if COVID-19 is not the source of their distress.

Scientists said other unknowns complicating their forecasts include whether a combination of vaccination and COVID infection – so-called hybrid immunity – is providing greater protection for people, as well as how effective booster campaigns may be.

"Anyone who says they can predict the future of this pandemic is either overconfident or lying," said David Dowdy, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Experts also are closely watching developments in Australia, where a resurgent flu season combined with COVID is overwhelming hospitals. They say it is possible that Western nations could see a similar pattern after several quiet flu seasons.

"If it happens there, it can happen here. Let's prepare for a proper flu season," said John McCauley, director of the Worldwide Influenza Centre at the Francis Crick Institute in London.

The WHO has said each country still needs to approach new waves with all the tools in the pandemic armory – from vaccinations to interventions, such as testing and social distancing or masking.

Israel's government recently halted routine COVID testing of travelers at its international airport, but is ready to resume the practice "within days" if faced with a major surge, said Sharon Alroy-Preis, head of the country's public health service.
"When there is a wave of infections, we need to put masks on, we need to test ourselves," she said. "That's living with COVID."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


White House Identifies 6 Close Contacts Associated With Biden’s ‘COVID Rebound’ Case
By Jack Phillips
August 1, 2022

The White House on Monday afternoon said that President Joe Biden had close contact with several individuals as he continues to test positive for COVID-19.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed to reporters that six close contacts were reported. She did not identify those people, while adding that Biden has a lingering cough but is not experiencing fatigue, aches, or fever.

“He’s feeling fine,” Jean-Pierre said, adding, “Many of us have had COVID, and they tend to be lingering symptoms, and that’s what I’m talking about.”

After the diagnosis, Biden has been “working eight-plus hours a day,” the press secretary continued. “That is a schedule he continues to keep. Instead of doing it in the Oval Office, he’s doing it in the residence.”

Biden tested positive for the virus again on Saturday after several days of negative tests. His doctor, White House physician Kevin O’Connor said that the second positive test was due to him taking the Pfizer-made drug Paxlovid.

The president will continue to be under strict isolation for now, O’Connor said in a Monday morning memo. Per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, Biden has to quarantine for at least five days after testing positive for the virus.

“Given his rebound positivity, which we reported Saturday, we continued daily monitoring,” he said. “This morning, as could be anticipated, his SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing remained positive.” SARS-CoV-2 is another name for the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus that causes COVID-19.

About a week ago, the president briefly emerged from quarantine following a negative test, delivering remarks at a White House Rose Garden event.

With the positive test, it means that Biden won’t attend a scheduled event in Saginaw County, Michigan, the White House said in a pool report. It’s not clear if his trip will be rescheduled.

Like Biden, White House medical adviser Anthony Fauci said in June that he tested positive for COVID-19 as he was taking Paxlovid. Fauci said he tested negative for the virus for four straight days before he got a positive test.

Federal health officials have sent an alert to health providers and doctors about Paxlovid-associated “COVID rebound,” or when a patient again tests positive or experiences COVID-19 symptoms after testing negative for the virus. With Biden’s rebound case, some scientists have speculated whether clinical data and studies around the phenomenon are accurate.

Before the rebound, Biden tested positive for COVID-19 on July 17. He received two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in early 2021, his first booster shot in September, and his second booster dose in March 2022.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-3uX8J13WA
Infections, high but declining
17 min 33 sec

Aug 1, 2022
Dr. John Campbell

Covid symptoms continue to evolve, sore throat now most common. US, proportions of circulating variants https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-trac... BA.5 81.9% (78.7%) BA.4 12.9% (17.2%) BA2. 12.1 5% (3.4%) BA.2 0.3% BA.1 0% BA. 2.75 (24 UK cases) UK, Technical briefing data https://assets.publishing.service.gov... Zoe data
... R = 0.9 About one in 17 currently infected Declining in all areas of UK Most infections are new BA.5 is infecting recent BA.2 infections Symptoms UK, increase in urinary frequency List of covid symptoms Sore throat, 59% Headache, 49% Cough, no phlegm 43% Blocked nose, 42% Runny nose, 40% Cough with phlegm, 39% Hoarse, 39% Sneezing, 32% Fatigue, 30% Muscle pains 24% Dizzy, 19% Swollen neck glands, 15% Altered smell, 15% Sore eyes, 14% Chest pain / tightness, 13% Fever, 13% Loss of smell, 12% Shortness of breath, 11% Earache, 11% Chills or shivers, 10% Health study data Symptomatic cases, 176,147 Current symptomatic prevalence, 3, 480, 836 Zoe Health Study - COVID Data UK, latest data England Summary | Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK UK, ONS https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulati... Decrease from 20th July 4.83% in England (1 in 20 people) 5.14% in Wales (1 in 19 people) 6.18% in Northern Ireland (1 in 16 people) 5.17% in Scotland (1 in 19 people) Antibody levels The presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 suggests that a person has previously been infected with COVID-19 or vaccinated. 179ng/ml level 800ng/ml theshold US data https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-trac... US hospital data Current 7 day average, 6,186 admissions Down 2.7% on the week
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjxXgKF5oY8
Why are people afraid of Geert Vanden Bossche speaking up?
7 min 33 sec

Streamed live 14 hours ago
Vejon Health

This most recent recording with Geert Vanden Bossche in July 2022 may be too controversial for sharing on main stream social media. He looks at the current evolution of the pandemic and what is likely to happen next. For those who have heard him speak in the past, his predictions have largely been correct.
Worrying times ahead according to Geert.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


SARS-CoV-2 and vaccine uptake among First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples in urban areas
by Canadian Medical Association Journal
August 2, 2022

Despite prioritizing Indigenous populations for SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, vaccine uptake was low among First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples in Toronto and London, Ontario, according to new research published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).

As more than half of Indigenous Peoples in Canada live in urban areas, it is critical to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which exacerbated existing health inequities, on these populations.

"Dense and multigenerational social networks; barriers in access to culturally safe health care; and a disproportionate burden of poverty, chronic disease and inadequate housing create conditions for the spread of SARS-CoV-2 among First Nations, Inuit and Métis living in urban areas in Canada," writes Dr. Janet Smylie, St. Michael's Hospital, a site of Unity Health Toronto, and the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, with coauthors.

To fill gaps in understanding, a team of Indigenous and allied researchers co-led by Dr. Janet Smylie, Cheryllee Bourgeois, Seventh Generation Midwives Toronto and Dr. Michael Rotondi, York University, in partnership with Indigenous agencies, aimed to generate data on rates of SARS-CoV-2 testing and vaccination, and incidence of infection among First Nations, Inuit and Métis living in Toronto and London, Ontario. They included data on population-representative samples of 723 and 364 people over age 15 in each city respectively. The rate for 2-dose vaccination among First Nations, Inuit and Métis in Toronto was 58% compared with 79% for the overall population. In London, 2-dose completion was 61% for Indigenous populations compared with 82% for the overall population.

As well, vaccination rates among First Nations, Inuit and Métis in Toronto and London lagged behind overall vaccination rates among First Nations living on and off reserve in Ontario and national rates for First Nations on reserve. The authors suggest these differences in vaccination rates could be because of delayed access to vaccines in cities as well as Indigenous peoples' mistrust of vaccines and of the urban hospitals leading Ontario's vaccination campaigns.

"Multigenerational colonial policies that aimed to assimilate First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples and appropriate land and resources have led to inequities across most major health outcome for First Nations, Inuit and Métis living in urban, rural and remote geographies compared with non-Indigenous people in Canada, as well as striking gaps in access to equitable and culturally safe health care," write the authors.

With new variants arising, these lower vaccination rates are concerning.

"There is a time-sensitive need to amplify Indigenous-focused COVID-19 response measures to prevent widespread SARS-CoV-2 infection among those who are not vaccinated with a subsequent surge in hospital admissions and mortality caused by COVID-19 among First Nations, Inuit and Métis," they write.

Testing rates for SARS-CoV-2 among First Nations, Inuit and Métis were higher in Toronto (54%) than local and provincial rates. Community partnerships and outreach and culturally safe access to testing and vaccination can help lessen the burden of COVID-19 on these populations.

"Localized by-community-for-community approaches have successfully engaged First Nations, Inuit and Métis living in cities in the COVID-19 response and could be used to further improve access to trusted COVID-19 information sources and culturally safe vaccination opportunities," they suggest.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Variant type and patient sex affect molnupiravir efficacy, study finds
by Georgia State University
August 1, 2022

SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and the biological sex of patients affect the efficacy of molnupiravir, the first orally available drug approved for outpatient use against COVID-19, according to a new study led by researchers in the Center for Translational Antiviral Research in the Institute for Biomedical Sciences at Georgia State University.

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has triggered recurring infection waves worldwide because of the limited longevity of vaccine-induced immunity, hesitancy of various populations to vaccinate and variants of concern (e.g., alpha, beta, gamma, delta and omicron) that are increasingly contagious or aren't sensitive to vaccines. Omicron has quickly replaced delta as the dominant circulating strain after first appearing in November 2021.

While oral antivirals such as molnupiravir promise to improve disease management, the efficacy and potency of molnupiravir against variants of concern are either questioned or unknown. Though omicron appears to be milder than previous variants, there's an urgent need for therapeutics to improve disease management because of record-high daily infection rates and elevated hospitalization numbers.

The study published in the journal Nature Communications tested molnupiravir against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern in cultured cells, human airway epithelium organoids, ferrets and a dwarf hamster model of severe COVID-19-like lung injury. The analysis found molnupiravir equally inhibited variants of concern in cells and organoids, and treatment reduced shedding and prevented transmission in ferrets.

In addition, the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to cause disease in dwarf hamsters was dependent on the variant of concern and was highest for the delta, gamma and omicron variants. All hamsters treated with molnupiravir survived, showing reduction in lung virus load from one order of magnitude for delta to four orders of magnitude for gamma. The effect of treatment varied in individual hamsters infected with omicron, and viral load reduction was significant in males but not females.

"We established in this manuscript a novel SARS-CoV-2 animal model that gives high viral load of omicron, which is currently the variant of concern. None of the other models have done that," said Richard Plemper, senior author of the study, director of the Center for Translational Antiviral Research and Distinguished University Professor in the Institute for Biomedical Sciences at Georgia State. "We show that dwarf hamsters provide a robust experimental system to explore degrees of pathogenicity of different SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Unexpectedly, molnupiravir efficacy against omicron was variable between individual dwarf hamsters. Biological sex of the animals emerged as a correlate for therapeutic benefit of molnupiravir use against omicron, with treated males faring better overall than females. By contrast, biological sex had no effect on treatment benefit when dwarf hamsters were infected with gamma or delta, which matched human trial data reported for these variants of concern."

Scientists have lacked an efficacy model that mirrors the acute lung injury of life-threatening COVID-19 and a relevant experimental platform to test the effect of molnupiravir on mitigating lung damage caused by different variants of concern. This discovery could enable researchers to explore the impact of treatment on disease outcome.

"Without controlled clinical data assessing the efficacy of molnupiravir against omicron, it's unclear to what degree the results in dwarf hamsters extend to human therapy," Plemper said. "However, our study demonstrates that pharmacological mitigation of severe COVID-19 is complex and attempts to predict drug efficacy based on unchanged ex vivo inhibitory concentrations alone may be premature. The dwarf hamster-based results illuminate that variant of concern-specific differences in treatment effect size may be present in vivo, alerting the need to continuously reassess therapeutic benefit of approved antivirals for individual patient subgroups as SARS-CoV-2 evolves and potential future variants of concern may emerge."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Having kids around might shield you from severe COVID: Study
by Steven Reinberg
August 1, 2022

Folks with young kids at home may be less likely than others to develop severe COVID-19, a new study suggests.

Children bring home colds from day care and school and give them to their parents, and it's thought those lower-level infections may ultimately defend Mom and Dad from the worst of COVID. Both common colds and COVID-19 are coronaviruses, so the theory goes that getting one might offer some protection from the other, researchers said.

"One hypothesis that people batted around was maybe people that had a lot of common colds in the past few years may have some built-up immunity to cope with COVID-19, and then either not get an infection at all or get only a mild infection and not a severe one," said lead researcher Dr. Matthew Solomon, a cardiologist in the research division at Kaiser Permanente Northern California in Oakland.

"This idea of the kind of built-up immunity really resonated with a lot of people. And we thought, well, maybe we can look in our database and see if we can identify a signal of that," Solomon said.

This study can't prove that having a common cold protects you from severe COVID-19, only that it may confer some immunity. But the research team said the concept merits further exploration.

For the study, Solomon and his colleagues scoured the medical records of more than 3 million adults seen at Kaiser Permanente Northern California from February 2019 through January 2021.

They found adults without kids who had COVID-19 were 49% more likely to be hospitalized and 76% more likely to stay in an intensive care unit than COVID patients who had children ages 5 and under.

The study was done before COVID vaccines were available, so the researchers can't tell what effect vaccination might have on any possible immunity that colds may confer.

Also, Solomon said that just because you've caught colds from your kids doesn't mean that either you or they won't get COVID-19. Vaccination remains the best protection, he said.

"Having small children does not confer absolute protection," Solomon said. "Our study is just suggestive of this effect. This is one small piece of a very large puzzle that scientists are working to unravel. Why do some people get COVID very badly and others do not? This is just one small piece of a very complex issue."

Infectious disease expert Dr. Marc Siegel said the notion that one coronavirus can protect you from another isn't new, and this study provides some evidence it might be true.

He too stressed the study doesn't show that you won't get COVID-19, only that it might not be severe. "It adds to the idea that the more immunity you can get, the better," said Siegel, a clinical professor of medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York City. He was not part of the study.

Still, it's not clear if any immunity conferred by common colds applies to all strains of COVID, especially the current more contagious strains, Siegel said. These include the Omicron subvariants BA.5 and BA.4, which are spreading in the United States.

The best protection is getting vaccinated against COVID-19 and having your kids vaccinated, too, he said.

"Exposure to different coronaviruses may help to provide a level of immunity that decreases severity," Siegel said. "That together with vaccination and prior infection is a good cocktail for decreasing severity. It doesn't mean we don't need more focused or extensive vaccines. It doesn't mean that the current vaccine isn't helpful—immunity is what matters no matter how you get it."

The report was published online July 27 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

The lining of children's noses may provide protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection
by Public Library of Science
August 1, 2022

SARS-CoV-2 causes a broad range of clinical symptoms, including potentially fatal acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). A study by Kirsty Short at University of Queensland, Queensland, Australia, and colleagues, published August 1 in the open access journal PLOS Biology , suggests the nasal epithelium (the lining of the nose) of children inhibits infection and replication of the ancestral strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the Delta variant, but not the Omicron variant.

Children have a lower COVID-19 infection rate and milder symptoms than adults. However, the factors driving this apparent pediatric resistance to COVID-19 infections are unknown. In order to better understand lower infection and replication of ancestral SARS-CoV-2 virus in children, researchers obtained samples of primary nasal epithelium cells (NEC) from 23 healthy children aged 2-11 and 15 healthy adults aged 19-66 in Australia. They exposed the cells of adults and children to SARS-CoV-2 and then observed the infection kinetics and antiviral responses in children compared to adults.

The researchers found that ancestral SARS-CoV-2 replicated less efficiently and was associated with a heightened antiviral response in the nasal epithelial cells of children. This lower viral replication rate was also observed with the Delta variant, but not the more recent Omicron variant. The study had several limitations, however, including a small sample size, so future clinical studies will be needed to validate these preliminary findings in a larger population and to determine the role of other factors, such as antibodies in protecting children from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additionally, pediatric protection from emerging variants has yet to be quantified.

According to the authors, "We have provided the first experimental evidence that the pediatric nasal epithelium may play an important role in reducing the susceptibility of children to SARS-CoV-2. The data strongly suggest that the nasal epithelium of children is distinct and that it may afford children some level of protection from ancestral SARS-CoV-2."

Short adds, "We use nasal epithelial cells from children and adults to show that the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Delta, but not Omicron, replicate less efficiently in pediatric nasal epithelial cells."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)



New trial shows nasal spray reduces infection of COVID-causing virus by 62%
by Queen Mary, University of London
August 1, 2022

A new clinical trial led by Queen Mary University of London and Barts Health researchers has shown that the pHOXWELL nasal spray can reduce infection with SARS-CoV-2—the virus that causes COVID-19—by 62%. The research was published in the Journal of Clinical Virology.

The trial was carried out in India between April to July 2021. It involved 556 participants—275 used pHOXWELL and 281 used a placebo—three times a day. After 45 days, the researchers measured how many antibodies against COVID-19 each person in both groups had.

The team found that the nasal spray was safe and that after 45 days, 13.1% of those in the group that used it had antibodies against the COVID-19 virus, compared to 34.5% in the group who received the placebo. This shows that using pHOXWELL dramatically reduces the chances of developing COVID-19.

Researchers also found that people who used the nasal spray were less likely to experience symptoms than those given the placebo. No serious side effects were reported in either group and participants noted that the nasal spray was easy to use.

Professor Rakesh Uppal, Professor of Cardiovascular Surgery at Queen Mary University of London, Director of Barts Life Sciences said: "pHOXWELL presents a significant breakthrough in preventing people developing COVID-19. We now have an effective tool, previously missing, to fight this virus, and is designed to offer extra protection against COVID-19, in addition to vaccines, face masks and washing our hands."

"I'm immensely proud of everyone involved in this trial and am extremely grateful to the participants who gave their time to be involved."

The researchers' aim is to soon begin producing and distributing the treatment in India initially. Following this, they will look to expand into other countries.

The treatment will be especially beneficial in parts of the world where uptake of the vaccine remains low and there is a shortage of personal protective equipment for those who require it. It comes as COVID-19 infection continues to cause a huge burden on global health and a significant strain on the world economy.

pHOXWELL offers 6-8 hours of protection with two sprays per nostril. It is also designed to be effective against other airborne respiratory viruses.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
So that article interested me. If this works, it's an easy solution. I went hunting to find what's in the spray, and finally found an article with the ingredient list. (that took however long between the last post and this one). I suspected it contained xlyitol and I was right! You can get xylitol in Xlear nasal spray which is on the market in the USA and can be bought through any online pharmacy or Amazon. Search this thread for articles I posted back in 2020 about studies on Xlear and xylitol sprayed in the nose. This new drug has a lot more than xylitol so may be even more effective. something to keep an eye out for sure.



(fair use applies)
EXCERPT

Evaluating the efficacy and safety of a novel prophylactic nasal spray in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection: A multi-centre, double blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial.

[...]

The test formulation combines natural virucidal agents with a patented system designed to alter the optimal acidic environment required for cell invasion, hence preventing viral entry into the nasal epithelium.

[...]

The components of the test spray include sterile water, polyethylene glycol 400, poloxamer 188, xylitol, disodium hydrogen phosphate, sodium chloride, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, ginger oil, eucalyptus oil, basil oil, clove oil, sodium hydrogen carbonate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, sodium hyaluronate, calcium chloride dihydrate, benzalkonium chloride, magnesium chloride hexahydrate, potassium chloride, glycerol, and zinc chloride.

[...]
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


T-cells more important in the fight against the COVID-19 virus than initially thought
by Leiden University
August 1, 2022

A COVID-19 vaccine that specifically instructs the immune system to produce T-cells rather than antibodies is shown to provide good protection in a mouse model, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) researchers report in Nature Communications. According to them, the alternative vaccine may offer a solution for people with a weakened immune system, since these individuals don't respond as well to the current ones available.

Ever since the pandemic set off in 2019, most of us have at least heard about 'antibodies.' They bind to the spike proteins of the virus which causes COVID-19, preventing it from infecting our cells. COVID-19 vaccines, therefore, mainly aim to stimulate the production of antibodies. Less known is that we can also stimulate the so-called CD8 T-cells of our immune system. "And that shouldn't be the case," says immunologist Ramon Arens, "because these cells roam our bodies like true knights in order to eliminate each cell that has been infected."

The recent study published in Nature Communications demonstrates the importance of T-cells and emphasizes they deserve more attention. "We showed that a vaccine that specifically stimulates CD8 T-cells protect mice very well against an otherwise deadly COVID-19 infection—provided we vaccinate them three times," Arens notes. And that is not all: T-cell-stimulating vaccines may offer more resistance to novel virus variants, as well as longer protection compared to current COVID-19 vaccines.

Common spikes

For this study, Arens and colleagues produced a peptide vaccine in cooperation with ISA Pharmaceutical and Immunetune. It contains a very small part of the virus spike protein that is specifically recognized by CD8-T cells. "Especially after the third vaccination dose, we saw an enormous increase in the number of CD8-T cells. T-cells were also located in parts of the body where we wanted to see them—such as in the lungs of the mice—indicating the virus is being attacked immediately once it enters their system." The part of the spike protein contained within the vaccine is also found in spike proteins of other SARS viruses. This indicates that it may play an important role in the functioning of the virus and thus will not mutate quickly. Arens says that "as a result, this vaccine is probably effective against old and new variants of the virus."

Antibodies vs. immune cells

This is the first study describing that CD8 T-cells, stimulated by a vaccine (and without the help of other immune cells and antibodies), offer protection against the virus that causes COVID-19. "However, we are not suggesting that antibodies are no longer needed," says Arens. "Despite focusing on antibodies, current vaccines also increase T-cells. You really need both to fight the virus, so combining vaccines could be a potentially good option."

Promising alternative

These findings are particularly interesting for individuals with a weakened immune system, such as patients who undergo transplants or who have reduced B cells (the factories that make antibodies). Researchers are also considering broader applications for the technology. Arens says that "in general, I think booster vaccinations that elicit a strong CD8 T-cell response are a promising strategy to improve future vaccination programs." Now, Arens and colleagues are investigating the role of T-cells in current mRNA vaccines to find out whether the new vaccine would work in humans. To this end, they have initiated collaborations with a number of companies and hope to eventually bring a product to the market.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Why is COVID virus now so infectious? Evidence that VAX antibodies can/may bind to N-terminal domain on spike & induces open conformation of RBD & enhances the binding capacity of the spike to ACE2
and thus infectivity of SARS-CoV-2; additional mutational analysis revealed that all of the infectivity-enhancing antibodies recognized a specific site on the NTD; Liu & Arase et al. CELL publication
Dr. Paul Alexander
6 hr ago

A reader pointed out a key question and I have edited the title for we are strongly inferring that the vaccinal antibodies operate similarly (the antigenic-specific non-neutralizing vaccinal antibodies)…see also Yahi et al. that helps with this picture: Infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants. A potential risk for mass vaccination?

A key passage:

‘Using molecular modeling approaches, we show that enhancing antibodies have a higher affinity for Delta variants than for Wuhan/D614G NTDs. We show that enhancing antibodies reinforce the binding of the spike trimer to the host cell membrane by clamping the NTD to lipid raft microdomains. This stabilizing mechanism may facilitate the conformational change that induces the demasking of the receptor binding domain. As the NTD is also targeted by neutralizing antibodies, our data suggest that the balance between neutralizing and facilitating antibodies in vaccinated individuals is in favor of neutralization for the original Wuhan/D614G strain. However, in the case of the Delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity. Thus, ADE may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain spike sequence (either mRNA or viral vectors).’

Key finding of Liu et al.’s study:

“In this study, we found a non-canonical, Fc-receptor-independent ADE mechanism. The antibodies against a specific site on the NTD of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were found to directly augment the binding of ACE2 to the spike protein, consequently increasing SARS-CoV-2 infectivity.”



SOURCE:

An infectivity-enhancing site on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targeted by antibodies

Antibodies against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, the effects of antibodies against other spike protein domains are largely unknown. Here, we screened a series of anti-spike monoclonal antibodies from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and found that some of antibodies against the N-terminal domain (NTD) induced the open conformation of RBD and thus enhanced the binding capacity of the spike protein to ACE2 and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2. Mutational analysis revealed that all of the infectivity-enhancing antibodies recognized a specific site on the NTD. Structural analysis demonstrated that all infectivity-enhancing antibodies bound to NTD in a similar manner. The antibodies against this infectivity-enhancing site were detected at high levels in severe patients. Moreover, we identified antibodies against the infectivity-enhancing site in uninfected donors, albeit at a lower frequency. These findings demonstrate that not only neutralizing antibodies but also enhancing antibodies are produced during SARS-CoV-2 infection.
.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


First, it’s the VACCINE, stupid! Nigeria vs Japan as to COVID cases & deaths, now; look at rates, look at vaccine rates; why do you think Nigeria looks like this re COVID & Japan looks like that?
Why do other African nations look same as Nigeria? Look at South Africa data below too. Niger? India made a serious mistake turning to vaccine after it withstood so well with early/prophylactic drugs.
Dr. Paul Alexander
15 hr ago

Did African nations like Nigeria, poorer, not taking the vaccine, did they actually buy time for the immune system to be properly developed, for the innate immunity (innate antibodies) in kids to be developed? For the training of the natural killer cells (NK cells) of the innate immune system to be trained to properly clear out virus? To differentiate self from non-self components? Did African nations actually WIN? I say YES!

Stay strong Africa, none of these fraud COVID vaccines, NONE!











 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Australia & New Zealand, held as the MODELs of pandemic response, yet today are a complete failure! all lied to in REDEFINITION of 'VACCINATED'; counted 'vaccinated' as unvaccinated; NSW, J. Smalley
See 5 graphs that tell an Australian story of how catastrophic their lockdown lunacy down under was and how they suffered their people (see New Zealand); Smalley's hospitalization graph is stunning
Dr. Paul Alexander
23 hr ago

It is the antigenic-specific, high-affinity, high-specificity non-neutralizing vaccinal antibodies that is driving the failure (selection of infectious variant after variant and enhanced infection in the vaccinated) and not the virus. It is the vaccine, stupid! Not the virus!

We are saying that it is a lie that the vaccine reduces severity etc. for we have data to show that 3rd and 4th shots (boosters) land you up in the hospital e.g. NSW Australian data. Your risk is massive relative to unvaccinated.
It is also the redefinition of what being ‘vaccinated’ means that helped portray a deception and lie so horrible. These beasts in nations like Australia, US, Canada redefined what ‘vaccinated’ was and called those up to 15 days post shot ‘unvaccinated’ and thus counted them as ‘unvaccinated’ for hospitalizations and deaths. They lied to you placing the ‘vaccinated’ (those as an example who got infected or hospitalized or died at day 1 or day 5 or day 14) into the unvaccinated bin. This was the fraud to scare you into vaccinating. CDC, NIH, FDA, WHO and Australia and New Zealand governments are criminal, their health officials. So that you as unvaccinated would run off and get the shot and force it on your healthy children who have near zero risk. You did! Look at what has happened now! You are on the booster treadmill, cannot get off and you are at risk of even death.

Do NOT vaccinate your children with these fraud failed, deadly vaccines. I beg you! Read, talk, share. Read all we have written.

Paxlovid does not work, a money grab by Pfizer. Do not listen to shills like FOX’s Siegal, he remains a shill for the vaccine etc. Not credible IMO. Lost that.

Australia:

Let me re-run some key Australian graphs as of today July 31st 2022 and as you can see, the death curve follows the case curve; key to look at is that the waves are not getting back to baseline and this means there is massive infectious pressure ongoing (that the sub-optimal vaccinal antibody immune pressure can bump up against) as there is massive virus hanging out there, no herd immunity:

Infection/cases:



Deaths:



Vaccine rates:



Excess mortality:



Also, let us look at some superb work by Smalley.

Smalley (Dead man talking); this graph by Smalley is stunning, simple, elegant, but tells the story about Australia and it is repeated globally. This is about hospitalizations and not the rates post shots. Joel Smalley does good, great work!
‘You are 37 times more likely to be hospitalized if vaccinated than if you are not’. This is what the graph and data is showing you.

You can clearly see a dose response in hospitalizations, dose-dependent in the Australia NSW data (see legend for bar colorations):



Risk of death by dose NSW data:



My prior stack on Australia’s devastating response:


New Zealand:

New Zealand, as we see, the same behavior to the COVID pandemic and gene injection as Australia, and waves not getting back to baseline; high infection, deaths, vaccine rate, excess mortality; FAILURE; the New Zealand population was LIED to as to this fraud failed COVID gene injection! Deaths numerically are small relative but still increased & increasing; we need the hospitalization data; they locked down too long & too hard and have no base natural immunity protection and vaccinated persons will get infected and re-infected over and over again and get sick and some will die!





 
Top