@Rob1110 said: @Wylaff - agree, 100%. History isn't always pretty and we have to learn from it. I completely understand why people have concerns and don't always trust government or even science. To make matters worse, science has become highly politicized and there is definitely corruption. That, compounded with the fact that scientific papers aren't always widely available and the data isn't always easily digestible by the masses.
Even is the data is available and digestible, does it mean anything if "up to one third admitted a variety of other questionable research practices including “dropping data points based on a gut feeling”, and “changing the design, methodology or results of a study in response to pressures from a funding source”." Is there a larger or more aggressive funding source that Fauci?
"Cooking isn't about struggling; It's about pleasure. It's like sǝx, with a wider variety of sauces."
At any given time the urge to sing "In The Jungle" is just a whim away... A whim away... A whim away...
pre print and not peer-reviewed but interesting; dandelion has long been used as a 'spring tonic'.
Common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) efficiently blocks the interaction between ACE2 cell surface receptor and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein D614, mutants D614G, N501Y, K417N and E484K in vitro
@Amos_Umwhat said:
So, question your government? Oh yes, absolutely. Question the science?? Certainly, but do your due diligence, follow up. 96% effective? I'll take it over 0% every time. What if my chance of winning the lotto was 96%? Would I place a bet? I think so. What if my chance of winning was 1: 456,000,000? Would I place a bet? No, but millions of people do.
Sounds like you're saying if you get COVID you have 0% of surviving?
>
That's silly. Read it again. I'm saying that if you get the vaccine it's 96% effective. (Actually more), if you DON'T get it, it's 0% effective. Because you didn't get it.
Your response is kind of like the kid who says his textbook let him down, didn't help him pass the test. Did he read it? No, he slept with it under his pillow every night though.
@skydiverD : my son is a doctor, currently working at a Covid site in Northern California, he agrees 100% with all of @Rob1110 's "internet research", and has been sending the actual research links to people he knows who remain in denial. From medical journals. Not National Enquirer, or wherever y'all are digging up this nonsense.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
It would be interesting to find out the number of doctors and nurses who are on the other side of the accepted practices regarding all things COVID; how many are going to put their livelihood on the line, and how many are 'toeing the party line' because they know what would happen if they didn't. I mean the nurses you see on the news who say they'd rather be fired than be vaxxed and the doctors who agree... they're not dolts... are they simply basing their convictions on hearsay and conspiracies?
This gets into "prove a negative" arguments. "Covid vaccines are safe until they're not." I could say "I have 1 million dollars." You can't prove I don't. It's up to you to prove it. No matter where you look, I can still come back with "well, you just haven't found it yet."
Like Trump's tax returns?
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
This is starting to become like atheists vs. believers.
I do believe in God, and for me the proof is everywhere and obvious. For those who can't see it, I can only point to it, I can't "make" them believe it.
So, I've pointed to it. It's up to y'all to open your eyes, I can't do that for you.
Peace to you and yours.
Amos out.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
@Amos_Umwhat said:
So, question your government? Oh yes, absolutely. Question the science?? Certainly, but do your due diligence, follow up. 96% effective? I'll take it over 0% every time. What if my chance of winning the lotto was 96%? Would I place a bet? I think so. What if my chance of winning was 1: 456,000,000? Would I place a bet? No, but millions of people do.
Sounds like you're saying if you get COVID you have 0% of surviving?
>
That's silly. Read it again. I'm saying that if you get the vaccine it's 96% effective. (Actually more), if you DON'T get it, it's 0% effective. Because you didn't get it.
Your response is kind of like the kid who says his textbook let him down, didn't help him pass the test. Did he read it? No, he slept with it under his pillow every night though.
@skydiverD : my son is a doctor, currently working at a Covid site in Northern California, he agrees 100% with all of @Rob1110 's "internet research", and has been sending the actual research links to people he knows who remain in denial. From medical journals. Not National Enquirer, or wherever y'all are digging up this nonsense.
Watch yourself. I never even gave my opinion on the vaccine. Hint I’m vaccinated. I also never indicated whether or not I believed what rob was presenting. Only questioned what looked to me like a personal attack. So before you go accusing me of reading the National enquirer for my news, you might want to check yourself.
I’m out of this emotion overload thread.
How do you like my profile pic Taborski? @matkn293
@peter4jc - I need to watch the rest of the video but I'm on a call for work right now. From the first few seconds, I already like his approach. Everyone has every right to question things, to be concerned, even apprehensive. In the end, you have every right to feel how you feel. I've never meant to be accusatory or insult or demean anyone. Again, I'm simply looking to provide people with scientifically-backed data to allow people access to digestible information. His first few sentences are absolutely the right approach in telling people that they're allowed their emotions and what they're feeling is perfectly natural.
@Amos_Umwhat - and here we are. A non-atheist and an atheist having a debate. Not about theology (though I'm always up for that - regardless of what anyone says about religion at the dinner table) but the outcome can be the same. Regardless of my beliefs, I respect yours. Religion is one of those interesting topics because we can both provide our beliefs and we can both provide evidence to support our side of the argument. In the end, if religion makes you a better person, I'm all for it. I respect your belief and you seem like the type of guy that can respect others' beliefs as well. Cheers, brother!
@peter4jc - again, thank you for sharing the video. His patient and understanding approach is how more people on my side should approach conversations with people who are hesitant or concerned about the vaccine. I've shared this with my friend, who is half of the Unbiased Science duo.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
@Vision said: @Rob1110
I honestly thank you for at the very least giving us facts to consider. It’s enjoyable to read something written with a level head.
Not directed at you, @Vision... when we read 'facts' that we agree with, we find it enjoyable and level-headed... and when we disagree with the 'facts' we don't. It's human nature. If you/we suspect there are holes in some of the research, the funding, the billions of profits, then we decided we need new experts and listen to those we agree with.
@Amos_Umwhat said:
So, question your government? Oh yes, absolutely. Question the science?? Certainly, but do your due diligence, follow up. 96% effective? I'll take it over 0% every time. What if my chance of winning the lotto was 96%? Would I place a bet? I think so. What if my chance of winning was 1: 456,000,000? Would I place a bet? No, but millions of people do.
Sounds like you're saying if you get COVID you have 0% of surviving?
Science isn't perfect. It's the constant quest for knowledge and truth. Scientists can theorize and show supporting evidence but one, seemingly miniscule thing may change and throw that theory out the window. It sucks but that's science.
But then the media and government agencies, as well as you by the sound of it, want to call all those who don't agree with their findings and policies are labeled 'science deniers'. Science can and does change in its understanding, but those who disagree with the understanding de jour get tossed out the window.
@peter4jc
Even if it was directed at me I would have taken no offense. And obviously not directed at you but there are people who believe the earth is flat and they have “facts”. Show me the “facts” and I’ll at least take a look for myself. I’m not saying that “facts” are indeed “facts” but just something to consider.
@Amos_Umwhat - and here we are. A non-atheist and an atheist having a debate. Not about theology (though I'm always up for that - regardless of what anyone says about religion at the dinner table) but the outcome can be the same. Regardless of my beliefs, I respect yours. Religion is one of those interesting topics because we can both provide our beliefs and we can both provide evidence to support our side of the argument. In the end, if religion makes you a better person, I'm all for it. I respect your belief and you seem like the type of guy that can respect others' beliefs as well. Cheers, brother!
I can and do respect your beliefs. At least in part because they were once mine, I was quite the atheist for several years. Events in my life which I won't discuss here led me to another point of view. I now know that God is both real, and utterly incomprehensible in "his" totality to the mind of man. I have the same ability to completely understand God as my cat has of understanding Wall Street finance. Thus, I did what I thought I could never do, made the Leap of Faith. All good here.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I really have enjoyed this discussion from both sides. As someone not very smart you guys have really helped out except for on. @Vision why did you have to bring up the flat earth discussion? Worse thread on here!
@Patrickbrick said:
Why is it that all we see is: may, possibly, could, perhaps, it’s possible, it’s likely, in everything written about this stuff. “If, if’s and but’s were candies and nuts, then every day would be Christmas.” Even the “experts” seem to speculate a lot. I have no side of this fence I’m just pointing out facts.
If bütts were nuts I'd be shïtting out of my balls. Ouch.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
@genareddog said:
I really have enjoyed this discussion from both sides. As someone not very smart you guys have really helped out except for on. @Vision why did you have to bring up the flat earth discussion? Worse thread on here!
@Rob1110 said: @Wylaff - agree, 100%. History isn't always pretty and we have to learn from it. I completely understand why people have concerns and don't always trust government or even science. To make matters worse, science has become highly politicized and there is definitely corruption. That, compounded with the fact that scientific papers aren't always widely available and the data isn't always easily digestible by the masses.
Even is the data is available and digestible, does it mean anything if "up to one third admitted a variety of other questionable research practices including “dropping data points based on a gut feeling”, and “changing the design, methodology or results of a study in response to pressures from a funding source”." Is there a larger or more aggressive funding source that Fauci?
I've been a data analyst for 27 years and I have routinely dropped data points based on a gut feeling or some other immeasurable intangible reason. These guys just got the press for it that's all.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
@Amos_Umwhat said:
So, question your government? Oh yes, absolutely. Question the science?? Certainly, but do your due diligence, follow up. 96% effective? I'll take it over 0% every time. What if my chance of winning the lotto was 96%? Would I place a bet? I think so. What if my chance of winning was 1: 456,000,000? Would I place a bet? No, but millions of people do.
Sounds like you're saying if you get COVID you have 0% of surviving?
>
That's silly. Read it again. I'm saying that if you get the vaccine it's 96% effective. (Actually more), if you DON'T get it, it's 0% effective. Because you didn't get it.
Your response is kind of like the kid who says his textbook let him down, didn't help him pass the test. Did he read it? No, he slept with it under his pillow every night though.
@skydiverD : my son is a doctor, currently working at a Covid site in Northern California, he agrees 100% with all of @Rob1110 's "internet research", and has been sending the actual research links to people he knows who remain in denial. From medical journals. Not National Enquirer, or wherever y'all are digging up this nonsense.
Will you marry me? I love this guy!
And whoever flagged him.....c'mon man!
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
The guy's name is z dogg? With two g's? I'm guessing he has appointments available for patients lol
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
So if I'm putting all of the information together, we have people who "don't wanna vax" because there are no long term studies, they won't die, and the vaccination effectiveness rates are too low for them.
Then, the same people who then get covid want to treat it with a drug that has fewer studies and is less effective, percentage-wise, in treating symptoms than the vaccine is at preventing them.
I'm the crazy one?
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
Newswise — CLEVELAND—A new, multi-institutional study led by Case Western Reserve University—in partnership with Brown University—found that COVID-19 antibodies produced by the Pfizer vaccine decreased sharply in senior nursing home residents and their caregivers six months after receiving their second shots.
David Canaday, professor at the School of Medicine, and the research team studied blood samples of 120 Ohio nursing home residents and 92 health care workers. In particular, they looked at humoral immunity—also called antibody-mediated immunity—to measure the body’s defenses against the coronavirus.
The researchers, including a lab team at Harvard University, found that individuals’ antibody levels decreased more than 80% after six months; the results were the same in seniors (median age 76) and caregivers (median age 48) and old alike, according to the study.
After presenting their unpublished results directly to the senior staff at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), researchers were urged to get the data out in the public domain as soon as possible “so we could enter conversation and the decision-making process for booster vaccine recommendations,” Canaday said. As a result, the researchers published the findings on medRxiv, an online preprint server for health sciences studies co-founded by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL), Yale University and the BMJ, a global healthcare knowledge provider, while the study is under review at a traditional peer-reviewed journal.
The sharp decline is particularly problematic for the seniors, because earlier research by Canaday and his colleagues found that within two weeks of receiving the second dose of vaccine and being considered “fully vaccinated,” seniors who had not previously contracted COVID-19 already showed a reduced response in antibodies that was substantially lower than the younger caregivers experienced. By six months after vaccination, the blood of 70% of these nursing home residents had “very poor ability to neutralize the coronavirus infection in laboratory experiments,” Canaday said.
The new research is part of a $2.3 million grant from the National Institutes of Health to CWRU and Brown University. That work led to another $4.9 million grantawarded in early August, from the CDC to Canaday and two other principal investigators—Stefan Gravenstein and Elizabeth White, at Brown University—to examine how long immunity lasts in nursing home residents and to research booster vaccines.
The results, Canaday said, support the CDC’s recommendation for booster shots—especially for the elderly—due to fading immunity. And that boosters are even more important as the Delta variant spreads nationwide.
Early in the pandemic, higher COVID-19 mortality among nursing home residents led to making them a priority for vaccination. Most nursing home residents received the Pfizer vaccine under the emergency use authorizations because it was the first available vaccine on the market.
In addition to Case Western Reserve, Brown and Harvard universities, the research team included collaboration with the Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center; Ragon Institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and the Marcus Institute for Aging Research, both in Boston; and the Providence Veterans Administration Medical Center, in Providence, R.I.
Our leaders, (government, media, big tech) haven't been very honest with us from the beginning of this pandemic. From the source of the coronavirus to therapeutics to the failure of the vaccine in the most vaccinated country in the world, Israel. You just don't get much 'science to these questions, in fact they are rarely touched by our mainstream talking heads.
And how in the hell did Ivermectrin, one of the most tested and widely prescribed drugs in the world, used for many ailments become nothing more than a horse de-wormer. In the interior of Africa, Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are what they have so that's what they use, they have never had the spikes in infections the civilized vaccinated countries have.
It's Monday, time to take my hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
Rutgers’ policy differentiates between a “fully online degree-granting program” and “classes that are fully remote” but part of a course where other students are on campus, as in Hollar’s case.
Devlin told the site that staff “continue to work” helping students apply for waiver requests for medical or religious reasons — while conceding they “should expect a two-to four-week turnaround, during which time they will not have access to university systems.”
The kid intentionally tested the system hoping he would get press, which he did. Mission accomplished.
Disclaimer: All trolling is provided for the sole entertainment purposes of the author only. Readers may find entertainment and hard core truths, but none are intended. Any resulting damaged feelings or arse chapping of the reader are the sole responsibility of the reader, to include, but not limited to: crying, anger, revenge pørn, and abandonment or deletion of ccom accounts. Offer void in Utah because Utah is terrible.
interesting paper on the benefit of ivermectin:
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines
Comments
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005738#:~:text=It found that, on average,data points based on a
Even is the data is available and digestible, does it mean anything if "up to one third admitted a variety of other questionable research practices including “dropping data points based on a gut feeling”, and “changing the design, methodology or results of a study in response to pressures from a funding source”." Is there a larger or more aggressive funding source that Fauci?
At any given time the urge to sing "In The Jungle" is just a whim away... A whim away... A whim away...
pre print and not peer-reviewed but interesting; dandelion has long been used as a 'spring tonic'.
Common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) efficiently blocks the interaction between ACE2 cell surface receptor and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein D614, mutants D614G, N501Y, K417N and E484K in vitro
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.19.435959v1.full
That's silly. Read it again. I'm saying that if you get the vaccine it's 96% effective. (Actually more), if you DON'T get it, it's 0% effective. Because you didn't get it.
Your response is kind of like the kid who says his textbook let him down, didn't help him pass the test. Did he read it? No, he slept with it under his pillow every night though.
@skydiverD : my son is a doctor, currently working at a Covid site in Northern California, he agrees 100% with all of @Rob1110 's "internet research", and has been sending the actual research links to people he knows who remain in denial. From medical journals. Not National Enquirer, or wherever y'all are digging up this nonsense.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
It would be interesting to find out the number of doctors and nurses who are on the other side of the accepted practices regarding all things COVID; how many are going to put their livelihood on the line, and how many are 'toeing the party line' because they know what would happen if they didn't. I mean the nurses you see on the news who say they'd rather be fired than be vaxxed and the doctors who agree... they're not dolts... are they simply basing their convictions on hearsay and conspiracies?
Like Trump's tax returns?
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
This is starting to become like atheists vs. believers.
I do believe in God, and for me the proof is everywhere and obvious. For those who can't see it, I can only point to it, I can't "make" them believe it.
So, I've pointed to it. It's up to y'all to open your eyes, I can't do that for you.
Peace to you and yours.
Amos out.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
This guy seems to make some reasoned arguments, Dr. Zubin Damania, or ZDoggMD on facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/ZDoggMD/videos/6293553930685408
Watch yourself. I never even gave my opinion on the vaccine. Hint I’m vaccinated. I also never indicated whether or not I believed what rob was presenting. Only questioned what looked to me like a personal attack. So before you go accusing me of reading the National enquirer for my news, you might want to check yourself.
I’m out of this emotion overload thread.
@peter4jc - I need to watch the rest of the video but I'm on a call for work right now. From the first few seconds, I already like his approach. Everyone has every right to question things, to be concerned, even apprehensive. In the end, you have every right to feel how you feel. I've never meant to be accusatory or insult or demean anyone. Again, I'm simply looking to provide people with scientifically-backed data to allow people access to digestible information. His first few sentences are absolutely the right approach in telling people that they're allowed their emotions and what they're feeling is perfectly natural.
@Amos_Umwhat - and here we are. A non-atheist and an atheist having a debate. Not about theology (though I'm always up for that - regardless of what anyone says about religion at the dinner table) but the outcome can be the same. Regardless of my beliefs, I respect yours. Religion is one of those interesting topics because we can both provide our beliefs and we can both provide evidence to support our side of the argument. In the end, if religion makes you a better person, I'm all for it. I respect your belief and you seem like the type of guy that can respect others' beliefs as well. Cheers, brother!
in is out
trust in doubt
@peter4jc - again, thank you for sharing the video. His patient and understanding approach is how more people on my side should approach conversations with people who are hesitant or concerned about the vaccine. I've shared this with my friend, who is half of the Unbiased Science duo.
@skydiverD , PM to you.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Got it @Amos_Umwhat
All good my man!
@peter4jc
Even if it was directed at me I would have taken no offense. And obviously not directed at you but there are people who believe the earth is flat and they have “facts”. Show me the “facts” and I’ll at least take a look for myself. I’m not saying that “facts” are indeed “facts” but just something to consider.
I can and do respect your beliefs. At least in part because they were once mine, I was quite the atheist for several years. Events in my life which I won't discuss here led me to another point of view. I now know that God is both real, and utterly incomprehensible in "his" totality to the mind of man. I have the same ability to completely understand God as my cat has of understanding Wall Street finance. Thus, I did what I thought I could never do, made the Leap of Faith. All good here.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I really have enjoyed this discussion from both sides. As someone not very smart you guys have really helped out except for on. @Vision why did you have to bring up the flat earth discussion? Worse thread on here!
If bütts were nuts I'd be shïtting out of my balls. Ouch.
Man! I didn’t know that was a thing. 😮
I've been a data analyst for 27 years and I have routinely dropped data points based on a gut feeling or some other immeasurable intangible reason. These guys just got the press for it that's all.
Will you marry me? I love this guy!
And whoever flagged him.....c'mon man!
The guy's name is z dogg? With two g's? I'm guessing he has appointments available for patients lol
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ivermectin-explained-why-called-horse-185600769.html
MOW badge received.
So if I'm putting all of the information together, we have people who "don't wanna vax" because there are no long term studies, they won't die, and the vaccination effectiveness rates are too low for them.
Then, the same people who then get covid want to treat it with a drug that has fewer studies and is less effective, percentage-wise, in treating symptoms than the vaccine is at preventing them.
I'm the crazy one?
Newswise — CLEVELAND—A new, multi-institutional study led by Case Western Reserve University—in partnership with Brown University—found that COVID-19 antibodies produced by the Pfizer vaccine decreased sharply in senior nursing home residents and their caregivers six months after receiving their second shots.
David Canaday, professor at the School of Medicine, and the research team studied blood samples of 120 Ohio nursing home residents and 92 health care workers. In particular, they looked at humoral immunity—also called antibody-mediated immunity—to measure the body’s defenses against the coronavirus.
The researchers, including a lab team at Harvard University, found that individuals’ antibody levels decreased more than 80% after six months; the results were the same in seniors (median age 76) and caregivers (median age 48) and old alike, according to the study.
After presenting their unpublished results directly to the senior staff at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), researchers were urged to get the data out in the public domain as soon as possible “so we could enter conversation and the decision-making process for booster vaccine recommendations,” Canaday said. As a result, the researchers published the findings on medRxiv, an online preprint server for health sciences studies co-founded by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL), Yale University and the BMJ, a global healthcare knowledge provider, while the study is under review at a traditional peer-reviewed journal.
The sharp decline is particularly problematic for the seniors, because earlier research by Canaday and his colleagues found that within two weeks of receiving the second dose of vaccine and being considered “fully vaccinated,” seniors who had not previously contracted COVID-19 already showed a reduced response in antibodies that was substantially lower than the younger caregivers experienced. By six months after vaccination, the blood of 70% of these nursing home residents had “very poor ability to neutralize the coronavirus infection in laboratory experiments,” Canaday said.
The new research is part of a $2.3 million grant from the National Institutes of Health to CWRU and Brown University. That work led to another $4.9 million grantawarded in early August, from the CDC to Canaday and two other principal investigators—Stefan Gravenstein and Elizabeth White, at Brown University—to examine how long immunity lasts in nursing home residents and to research booster vaccines.
The results, Canaday said, support the CDC’s recommendation for booster shots—especially for the elderly—due to fading immunity. And that boosters are even more important as the Delta variant spreads nationwide.
Early in the pandemic, higher COVID-19 mortality among nursing home residents led to making them a priority for vaccination. Most nursing home residents received the Pfizer vaccine under the emergency use authorizations because it was the first available vaccine on the market.
In addition to Case Western Reserve, Brown and Harvard universities, the research team included collaboration with the Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center; Ragon Institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and the Marcus Institute for Aging Research, both in Boston; and the Providence Veterans Administration Medical Center, in Providence, R.I.
This has no bearing on whether or not you're crazy, Frank. Stop trying to deflect.
Our leaders, (government, media, big tech) haven't been very honest with us from the beginning of this pandemic. From the source of the coronavirus to therapeutics to the failure of the vaccine in the most vaccinated country in the world, Israel. You just don't get much 'science to these questions, in fact they are rarely touched by our mainstream talking heads.
And how in the hell did Ivermectrin, one of the most tested and widely prescribed drugs in the world, used for many ailments become nothing more than a horse de-wormer. In the interior of Africa, Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are what they have so that's what they use, they have never had the spikes in infections the civilized vaccinated countries have.
It's Monday, time to take my hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis.
Truth for Health Foundation has a guide for early treatment that may help keep you out of the hospital
https://www.truthforhealth.org/patientguide/patient-treatment-guide/
Interesting, DD.
Made me go look and found this:
https://news.northeastern.edu/2021/06/11/why-has-africa-suffered-fewer-covid-19-deaths-than-predicted/
https://nypost.com/2021/09/07/rutgers-bars-unvaccinated-student-from-attending-virtual-classes/
Of course there is this from the article itself
Rutgers’ policy differentiates between a “fully online degree-granting program” and “classes that are fully remote” but part of a course where other students are on campus, as in Hollar’s case.
Devlin told the site that staff “continue to work” helping students apply for waiver requests for medical or religious reasons — while conceding they “should expect a two-to four-week turnaround, during which time they will not have access to university systems.”
The kid intentionally tested the system hoping he would get press, which he did. Mission accomplished.
interesting paper on the benefit of ivermectin:
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/#R46