placeholder

I have a problem with understanding? I cited you Professor Sarah Gilbert herself, who says that you're risk of getting a blood clot is greater from contracting covid than it is from being vaccinated. I cited a peer reviewed study that shows the same. Yet you continue to spread falsehoods.

But, of course, you have to survive Covid, in order to benefit from being infected. And what don't you understand about the fact that the vast majority of those dying from it in countries that have high levels of vaccination are the unvaccinated? What don't you understand about the fact that hospital ICU's are being overwhelmed with unvaccinated covid patients?

You may not be twisting what Professor Gilvert said, but you are also not understanding it. The key word is "eventually". First off, here's what Professor Gilbert says about blood clots and vaccination: AstraZeneca shot co-creator says recipients 'more likely to get blood clots from COVID than from the vaccine' Now her biggest concern is vaccine hesitancy because "we can't hide from the virus anymore". "I think it's natural to be concerned about reactions to a vaccine, but there's now very, very clear evidence that taking the vaccine is much safer than getting infected with COVID," Professor Gilbert said. "You're much more likely to have blood clots if you get infected with COVID than if you take the vaccine. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-07/astrazeneca-sarah-gilbert-says-clots-more-likely-from-covid-than/100440904 Secondly, you may not be twisting what she says about the virus lessening in virulence over time, but you are misunderstanding it. The key word you don't seem to get is "eventually.". She notes that it's the tendency of pandemics to lessen in severity over time. Some day, covid will be like the common cold. That day has yet to come.

You're argument is standard of the doublethink of anti-covid vaxxers. On the one hand, you cite the small odds of being seriously ill with covid. On the other hand, you cite the vastly smaller odds of suffering a blood clot from vaccination. On top of which, not getting vaccinated puts you at greater risk for those blood clots. You're more likely to get a blood clot after COVID infection than with the vaccine The risks of getting a blood clot if you contract COVID-19 is far greater than if you receive the Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca vaccines, according to a new BMJ study. The peer-reviewed study analyzed 30 million people vaccinated in England between December 2020 and April 2021. Researchers accounted for the hospitalization rates or death from blood clots, as well as other blood disorders, within 28 days of either a positive coronavirus test or receiving the first dose of the vaccine. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/08/27/blood-clot-risk-doubles-after-covid-infection-compared-vaccine/5615119001/

Hospitals overwhelmed by COVID are turning to ‘crisis standards of care.’ What does that mean? Long-feared rationing of medical care has become a reality in some parts of the United States as the delta variant drives a new wave of coronavirus cases, pushing hospitals to the brink. Idaho last week activated statewide crisis standards of care, in which health systems can prioritize patients for scarce resources — based largely on their likelihood of survival — and even deny treatment. The decisions affect COVID and non-COVID patients. https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2021/09/22/hospitals-overwhelmed-by-covid-are-turning-to-crisis-standards-of-care-what-does-that-mean/ Alabama heart patient dies after hospital contacts 43 ICUs in 3 states, family says “He would not want any other family to go through what his did,” his family said. An Alabama antiques dealer died this month of a "cardiac event" after the emergency staff at his local hospital contacted dozens of intensive care units in three states and was unable to find him a bed as Covid-19 cases surged, his family said. The man, Ray DeMonia, who ran DeMonia's Antiques and Auctions for four decades, died Sept. 1, three days before his 74th birthday, his family said in an obituary published this month. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/alabama-heart-patient-dies-after-hospital-contacts-43-icus-3-n1279025 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-hospitals-near-you.html?.?mc=aud_dev&ad-keywords=auddevgate&gclid=CjwKCAjwy7CKBhBMEiwA0Eb7aiv9KbAd2vAJh2-vzetF4KuAQ3VtVLEghFww0UOnfsPmro9DnwSwWxoC4A0QAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

So, it's only people with no kids who support vaccinating children with covid? Ya got some evidence to support that nonsense? As for quoting people in white lab coats, that's actually a tactic employed by anti-vaxxers who cite all sorts of fringe doctors to support their claims. Those who support childhood vaccinations cite the overwhelming majority of virologists and epidemiologist, regardless of what these actual experts happen to be wearing.

AZ is that cheap (I thought it was $3-$4) because Oxford University stipulated that the price of the vaccine had to be kept low. At least in the first phase.

My mistake. Actually, Actually, it was rejected by Frontiers in Pharmacology after being provisionally posted before ultimately being rejected. "The FLCCC’s paper (also posted on the organization’s website) reviewed epidemiological and clinical evidence on ivermectin’s use in people infected with and exposed to SARS-CoV-2. In it, the authors argued that health agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) should update their recommendations to include the drug.After being contacted by The Scientist, the journal posted a statement from Frontiers’s chief executive editor, Frederick Fenter, saying that “Frontiers takes no position on the efficacy of ivermectin as a treatment of patients with COVID-19, however, we do take a very firm stance against unbalanced or unsupported scientific conclusions.” During review of the article in what the journal refers to as “the provisional acceptance phase,” Fenter says in the statement, members of Frontiers’s research integrity team identified “a series of strong, unsupported claims based on studies with insufficient statistical significance, and at times, without the use of control groups.” https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/frontiers-removes-controversial-ivermectin-paper-pre-publication-68505

I remember when Trump supporters made similar predictions and similar promises to gloat. Where did they go? And how can we compel you to reappear a year from now? Ya gonna leave us your contact info?

False. Astra-Zeneca cost $3-$4 per dose. That was stipulated by Oxford when it gave permission for its research to be used. As for the $25 claim, where did you get that from?

Actually Astra Zeneca is far cheaper. $3-$4 per dose.

So far, you've been offering very dubious evidence. Anyone with a reasonable degree of acquaintance with the issue should know that the Journal of International Therapeutics ultimately rejected the so called "meta -analysis" of Ivermectin studies even though it was nothing of the sort.

Actually, if what you say is true about where Chinese tour groups dine, then there is an excellent reason why the Thai authorities should be focused on this sector of the tourism trade. Namely, that it benefits those who need it most.

False. Many countries have over 70% of their population vaccinated. What's more, the percentage of those eligible for vaccination who have been vaccinated is much higher since children have been mostly excluded. In the USA 76.6% of adults have been vaccinated. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-19-vaccine-doses.html If understanding this basic fact means that one is "retarded" I'll take that over whatever mental condition it is that leads some to believe otherwise.

Except of course, the mRNA vaccines are not gene therapy agents. They do nothing to alter the DNA of the vaccinated. Stop spreading falsehoods. And virtually the entire scientific community considers them to be vaccines.

This is not true. Other vaccines were available back then. But for some extremely strange reason, the Thai FDA only approved the Sinovac vaccine. This despite the fact that Sinovac hadn't completed phase 3 trials. In fact, to date, China hasn't released the raw data of these Phase 3 trials. It wasn't until months after the Sinovac vaccine got approved that the FDA greenlit other vaccines. This despite the fact that these vaccines had had their phase 3 trials completed and all raw data shared months earlier. Thailand also had the opportunity to order 10 million doses of the AZ vaccine at a much much cheaper rate per dose than the Sinovac vaccine. Thailand chose to order about 3 million doses instead.

or maybe to treat incoherence.

Here is another excellent article examining the alleged "meta-analysis" carried by anonymous parties who claim to be scientists. It's the motherlode for lots of ivermectin fans The anonymous meta-analysis that’s convincing people to use ivermectin What happens when you leave the analysis out of a meta-analysis? If you've looked into the controversy regarding the use of ivermectin for treating COVID-19, chances are you've come across links to a site called c19ivermectin.com (or one of its many relatives) that claims to host a regularly updated aggregation of all the latest studies into a single meta-analysis of the effects of the drug. We here at Ars have been asked—by email, in the comments, and via our feedback form—to check out c19ivermectin.com, which purports to provide evidence ivermectin is an effective therapy... https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/09/the-anonymous-meta-analysis-thats-convincing-people-to-use-ivermectin/

There's also the Chinese practice of lending corrupt governments huge loans to build pointless project and when the bills come due and can't be paid, exacting brutal concessions from them.

You mean unlike Chinese claims that the South China Sea belongs to them? How do you think countries that border on the South China Sea feel about that? Has the US built any islands there lately? Islands that are used as an excuse to encroach on the internationally recognized jurisdictions of other nations? And then there are the Chinese attacks in the Himalayas on Indian territory.

Epidemiologists say that this vaccine, which is almost universally adminstered to infants in developed nations at least, may be the reason, or one of the reasons, that children so strongly resist the covid virus.

Also a statistical correlation between tetanus/diptheria vaccinations and covid resistance. This is even stranger because these vaccines (they're usuallly administered as a combo) are meant to counter bacteria - not viruses. Old vaccines for COVID-19: Tetanus, diphtheria show promise https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/old-vaccines-for-covid-19-tetanus-diphtheria-show-promise Edit: forgot to include pertussis in that combination vaccine.

Well, there is talk about converting green hydrogen to ammonia and using that as a fuel. That solves the density problem. Ammonia—a renewable fuel made from sun, air, and water—could power the globe without carbon https://www.science.org/news/2018/07/ammonia-renewable-fuel-made-sun-air-and-water-could-power-globe-without-carbon New technique seamlessly converts ammonia to green hydrogen Researchers leverage renewable electricity for widespread, distributed hydrogen fuel production https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/11/201118141718.htm

Actually... Flu shots may protect against severe complications from COVID-19 Researchers from the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine say the largest study of its kind to date has discovered that the basic flu shot lowers the risk of stroke, sepsis, and blood clots in patients with COVID-19. Moreover, COVID patients who have been vaccinated against the flu are also less likely to need hospitalization or enter the intensive care unit. https://www.news10.com/news/flu-shots-may-protect-against-severe-complications-from-covid-19/

But it doesn't seem to be necessarily the case that when you come into contact with a virus it begins to replicate. It seems that vaccines can stop that from happening.