TallGuyJohninBKK

Smell loss was mostly found among those with original COVID or early variant infections Sense of smell—but not taste—was still impaired in some COVID patients at 1 year, according to a new study in JAMA Network Open. The US-based cross-sectional study compared 340 people with and 434 without prior COVID-19, recruited from February 2020 to August 2023 from the social media website Reddit. ... Almost a third with prior COVID had loss of smell Participants with a history of COVID-19 were more likely to experience some degree of smell loss compared with those without a history (30.3% vs 21.0%; odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18 to 2.27). Moderate to severe loss of smell was likewise higher in those with previous COVID-19 (8.5% vs 2.8%; OR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.65 to 6.53). (more) https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/impaired-sense-smell-still-common-1-year-after-covid-19 Findings In this cross-sectional study of 340 individuals with and 434 individuals without prior COVID-19, taste function did not differ between individuals who had contracted COVID-19 one year earlier and those who had not, whereas some olfactory dysfunction was present in 30.3% of individuals with prior COVID-19 but only 21.0% of individuals with no history of infection. Deficits were greatest for individuals with the original untyped and Alpha variant infections. Meaning These findings suggest that long-term taste loss perceived by many patients with COVID-19 likely reflects the loss of flavor sensations from odorant molecules reaching a damaged olfactory epithelium via the nasopharynx rather than the taste buds. ... In post hoc analyses, the mean UPSIT score among individuals with Omicron variant infection (35.19 [95% CI, 34.54-35.84]) was significantly higher than those of individuals with the original (33.11 [95% CI, 31.81-34.41]) and Alpha (32.30 [95% CI, 30.83-33.77]) variant infections (P values = .001). Test scores of participants with the original and Alpha variant infections were the only ones to differ significantly from test scores of participants with no history of COVID-19. (more) https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2817869

The legal battle between the entities extends beyond the UK Pfizer and its Germany partner BioNTech have urged London’s High Court to invalidate competitor Moderna‘s patents over technology instrumental in the Covid-19 vaccines development as the latest phase of a global legal fight that started [Tuesday] (23 April), reported Reuters. In September 2022, US pharma company Pfizer and BioNTech filed a lawsuit against Moderna at London’s High Court, seeking to cancel patents held by Moderna. However, days after the filing of the lawsuit, Moderna hit back, levelling allegations that its patents had been infringed. The dispute centres on messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology, which has been instrumental in the fight against the pandemic. ... Meanwhile, the legal battle between Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna extends beyond the UK, with parallel proceedings in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and the US, as well as at the European Patent Office. (more) https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/news/pfizer-biontech-legal-uk/

Data for U.S. adults thru early February 2024 While the risks associated with COVID-19 generally have decreased over time due to prior exposure to the vaccines and the virus, some people remain at elevated risk, such as the elderly and immunocompromised. The updated COVID-19 vaccines and, in some cases, a new monoclonal antibody can provide increased protection for this group. “At this point, many people have had multiple vaccines and we are seeing a lot less severe and life-threatening illness, especially in people who have had recent vaccination,” Dr. Camille Kotton, clinical director of Transplant and Immunocompromised Host Infectious Diseases at Massachusetts General Hospital, told us. “Nonetheless, we are still seeing significant severe disease, hospitalization, even life-threatening disease, especially in people over the age of 65 or who are immunocompromised.” We spoke with Kotton, who is also a member of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, about the current state of affairs for people at elevated risk of severe disease from COVID-19 and the tools they can use to protect themselves. (more) https://www.factcheck.org/2024/04/scicheck-qampa-on-reducing-covid-19-risk-for-elderly-immunocompromised/

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday voted to restore “net neutrality” rules that prevent broadband internet providers such as Comcast and Verizon from favoring some sites and apps over others. The move effectively reinstates a net neutrality order the commission first issued in 2015 during the Obama administration. In 2017, under then-President Donald Trump, the FCC repealed those rules. The measure passed Thursday on a 3-2 vote split along party lines, with Democratic commissioners in favor and Republicans opposed. (more) https://apnews.com/article/net-neutrality-fcc-broadband-regulation-cc8421bc4f11a3e0f6ffc22c358fbfd0 https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-restores-net-neutrality

Not only that, but a multi-time FAILED Republican candidate for Congress... and former SEC prosecutor, which of course gives him great expertise into Trump hush money criminal charges. 🤣 "Demos vied in 2010 for the Republican nomination to compete for the congressional seat of Democrat Tim Bishop on Long Island in New York State in the November 2010 election, coming in second in the primary." ... Citing his impending wedding, Demos withdrew from the race May 25, 2012.[32] ... On October 6, 2013, he announced he would seek the Republican nomination to run against Congressman Tim Bishop.[33] On June 24, 2014 he lost the primary election to New York State Senator Lee Zeldin.[34] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Demos George G. Demos is a former United States Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement attorney and an Adjunct Professor at U.C. Davis School of Law where he teaches corporate and white collar crime. https://thehill.com/opinion/4617077-why-the-case-against-donald-trump-in-hush-money-trial-is-on-shaky-ground/

The latter part above is imagined nonsense. The medical and public health communities and credible research have been pretty clear and consistent about the safety status of COVID vaccines throughout the pandemic once the vaccines were deployed to the public. That with nearly 13 BILLION doses given in the world thus far, the vaccines have been proven to be safe, and that serious side effects can occur, but are very rare. And when side effects have been found, the rates often have been higher from getting COVID than they are from the vaccines themselves. You can find that message, and varying forms of it, in countless official places and countless reports around the world, because that's what the credible research has shown, and major public health agencies haven't denied that there are potential vaccine side effects. Examples: ICMRA statement on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines COVID-19 vaccines significantly reduce the risk of severe disease, hospitalisation and death from infection with SARS-CoV-2. Evidence from the more than 13 billions of vaccine doses given worldwide shows that COVID-19 vaccines have a very good safety profile in all age groups. The benefits of the approved vaccines far outweigh the possible risks. The vast majority of side effects are mild and temporary. However, safety monitoring (pharmacovigilance) systems have identified some very rare (occurring in less than 1 in 10,000 people) but serious side effects. https://icmra.info/drupal/strategicinitiatives/vaccines/safety_statement "The February 2024 publication of the largest peer-reviewed study of Covid-19 vaccine safety to date has inspired misleading social media claims that its findings show the jabs are unsafe. Study authors and independent experts say the research confirms that adverse reactions to vaccination are rare and pose far fewer risks than Covid-19 infection. ... Epidemiologist Anders Peter Hviid, one of the study authors, told AFP the findings confirm previous research and should not deter people from receiving Covid-19 shots. "What we take away is that the Covid-19 vaccination campaigns have been very effective in preventing severe disease," he said on February 23. "The few serious side effects that we have observed in this and other studies have been rare." https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.34K78ZW COVID-19 vaccines are safe. Since 2021, more than 13 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered globally. As with all vaccines, WHO and regulatory authorities continuously monitor the use of COVID-19 vaccines to identify and respond to any safety issues that might arise. Serious reactions to COVID-19 vaccines are extremely rare. Through this process, we establish that COVID-19 vaccines remain safe worldwide. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/covid-19-vaccines/advice What was labeled misinformation and conspiracy theories was when anti-vaxers have gone off the rails into disproven nonsense: --such as claiming VAERS reports equate to proven vaccine injuries (they don't) https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/scicheck-what-vaers-can-and-cant-do-and-how-anti-vaccination-groups-habitually-misuse-its-data/ --such as claiming every time someone noteworthy dies that it's because of COVID vaccinations. No, those deaths haven't been caused by vaccination. https://apnews.com/article/vaccine-died-suddenly-misinformation-a8e3a80a015ba9bf78b6bd4f3c271f58 And legions of anti-vax crackpots who regularly make false and disproven claims about COVID vaccines and/or misreport and mischaracterize research that has been done. https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.32JG7UE https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/published-studies-misrepresented-peter-mccullough-false-claim-covid-vaccines-sudden-cardiac-death/ https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/misleading-data-used-claim-covid-vaccines-do-more-harm-than-good-2024-03-21/

Not all countries are reporting their COVID deaths to the WHO any more... Many aren't, so the WHO data on that is only a partial glimpse, as the WHO notes on every report they issue on such things these days. And, while Thailand's reported weekly "official" COVID deaths number remains small, that doesn't erase the latest report of more than 1,000 weekly COVID hospitalizations in Thailand, a figure that has doubled over the past six weeks. Nor the fact that Thailand currently has nearly 300 COVID patients hospitalized in serious condition, as reported by the MoPH and cited in the OP report in this thread. From the OP:

Many adolescent deaths occur from causes that cannot necessarily be prevented by modern medicine -- suicides, traffic crashes, gun violence, cancers, etc. Others, in the case of COVID, often could have been prevented, especially with the arrival of COVID vaccines that greatly reduce the risk of COVID hospitalization and death for those who choose to get vaccinated -- as cited in the OP study above.

Folks here seem to be missing the clearly stated fact that the OP study here is ONLY talking about whether hospitals themselves should require masking for people entering and working in their facilities as a means to prevent COVID spread among a vulnerable hospitalized population. It's not talking about masking for the public at large. Also, various court rulings have upheld the government's right to enforce mask mandates in various settings during public health emergencies: Not wearing mask during COVID-19 outbreak isn’t protected by free speech, court rules 02/06/24 https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4452492-not-wearing-mask-during-covid-19-outbreak-isnt-protected-by-free-speech-court-rules/ Supreme Court turns away House GOP lawmakers’ appeal over mask rule violations 02/20/24 https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4478298-supreme-court-turns-away-house-gop-lawmakers-appeal-over-mask-rule-violations/

More than 1,600 COVID deaths of adolescents (ages 0-17) in the U.S. up through June 2023: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/

Here's a major reason: Misinformation and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy 2023 Jan 4 "COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has emerged as a major public health challenge. Although medical and scientific misinformation has been known to fuel vaccine hesitancy in the past, misinformation surrounding COVID-19 seems to be rampant, and increasing evidence suggests that it is contributing to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy today." "During the COVID-19 pandemic, anti-vaccine beliefs have been at an all-time high, and vaccine hesitancy has become a major threat to public health [1]. The World Health Organization has labeled the increased virulence of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic an “infodemic” " https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9659512/ And because the COVID death and hospitalization numbers have in fact lessened from what they were earlier in the pandemic, leading people to wrongly believe that they no longer are at risk and thus in need of vaccination. Almost 1,000 people per week in the U.S. were dying of COVID until recently, and nearly 100 per week in the UK, as reported in news threads here in this forum. So the risk remains, especially -- but not exclusively -- for older people and those with chronic conditions.

Ruiz, the Democrat ranking member of this House subcommittee, went further in his actual comments regarding this latest development, as quoted in other news reports on the announcement: "Dr. Fauci is a dedicated public servant who stepped up for our nation during the darkest days of the COVID-19 pandemic. But for fourteen months, the Republican Majority has dedicated time and taxpayer dollars to a politically motivated probe to vilify him,” said Ruiz, calling on the majority in the subcommittee to release the transcripts from the January meeting. “Nearly half a million pages of documents and more than a dozen transcribed interviews with current and former federal public health officials and researchers — including 14 hours of testimony from Dr. Fauci himself — have failed to uncover any evidence that he sought to cover up the pandemic’s origins or suppress the lab leak theory.” https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4619450-fauci-to-testify-before-congress-for-the-first-time-since-stepping-down/ The Republicans have claimed Fauci said all kinds of things during his closed-door testimony on January 8-9 -- claims that Democrats on the subcommittee dismissed as distortions of what he actually said and disinformation. But now 3-1/2 months later, still no transcript of Fauci's actual January testimony from the Republican-led subcommittee. Why? https://thehill.com/homenews/4398661-democrats-accuse-gop-of-distorting-faucis-testimony-from-hours-long-meeting/ And yet, the Republican chair of the subcommittee somehow managed to issue two different very detailed news releases describing Fauci's supposed comments during the closed door sessions in January immediately after those sessions occurred. Hmmm.... Jan. 8: https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-releases-statement-following-first-day-of-dr-faucis-testimony/ Jan. 10: https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-releases-statement-following-dr-faucis-two-day-testimony/

Not quite.... The forum has rules limiting the amount of content that can be quoted in a single post, so I couldn't quote all of the pertinent details from the news article and study in my OP post above. If you had read the full news article linked above, you would have found the following re the youngest age group in California and how they benefited from COVID vaccination: "Though there was no evidence in case reduction in the youngest kids, vaccination prevented an estimated 168 hospitalizations among children aged 6 to 59 months during the 225-day evaluation period." The study said that was a reduction of 24.4% because of the vaccinations in that age group. And if you would have read the study linked above, you would have seen the authors explain that COVID vaccinations were only approved in the U.S. for children ages 6 months to 59 months last and long after the other youngster population groups, meaning few in that group were vaccinated during the period of the study, limiting the potential impact. "On May 10, 2021, the first mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was approved for use in adolescents aged 12 to 15 years. Vaccines were subsequently approved for children aged 5 to 11 years on October 29, 2021, and for children aged 6 to 59 months on June 17, 2022 (Figure 1).2" [emphasis added] The study noted that in part because of that, at the time of the study, vaccination coverage in California among the various youngster age groups was 53.5% among adolescents aged 12 to 15 years, 34.8% among children aged 5 to 11 years, but only 7.9% among those aged 6 to 59 months, because of the later start. The study authors also wrote: "The postvaccine evaluation period for this [youngest] age group did not include a surge in COVID-19 cases as it did for the other age groups," potentially limiting their ability to detect case reductions. And they noted that the study's evaluation period for the youngest age came more during the Omicron variant period, when the original version of COVID vaccines began to have less effectiveness in preventing infections compared to that for the prior variants. So there were multiple reasons for them not finding a statistical reduction in COVID cases for the youngest age group (low vaccination rate, lack of a COVID surge during their evaluation period, etc., and the vaccine not benefiting them was NOT among them, especially given that they did find a 24% reduction in COVID hospitalizations for them. And for those here who often like to falsely claim that children don't have any risk from COVID, the study reported that up through February 2023 in California, there were 1443 COVID hospitalizations among children younger than 6 months.

Implementing the recent stronger standard for fine particulate pollution revealed that 131 million Americans breathe unhealthy, polluted air where they live, according to a press release from the American Lung Association. ... This message from the American Lung Association comes with its yearly State of the Air report that presents data on air pollution levels across the U.S., with this year’s containing information from 2020 to 2022. ... Compared with last year’s report, Pruitt said the number of people living with unhealthy air went up by 11 million. (more) https://www.healio.com/news/pulmonology/20240424/2024-state-of-the-air-report-39-of-americans-breathe-polluted-unhealthy-air-daily https://www.lung.org/getmedia/dabac59e-963b-4e9b-bf0f-73615b07bfd8/State-of-the-Air-2024.pdf 2024 ‘State of the Air’ Report Reveals Most ‘Hazardous’ Air Quality Days in 25 Years The American Lung Association’s new “State of the Air” report reveals that spikes in deadly particle pollution are the most severe they’ve been in the history of the report. According to the new report, people in the U.S. experienced the most days with “very unhealthy” and “hazardous” air quality due to particle pollution in 25 years. In total, the report finds that 131 million people (39%) are living in areas with unhealthy levels of air pollution. The Lung Association’s 25th annual “State of the Air” report grades exposure to unhealthy levels of ground-level ozone air pollution (also known as smog) and short-term spikes and annual average of particle pollution (also known as soot) over a three-year period. This year’s report includes the most recent quality-assured air quality data from 2020-2022 and is updated to reflect the new annual particle pollution standard that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized in February 2024. https://www.lung.org/media/press-releases/sota-2024

HOUSTON — Ending universal masking and admission testing of all hospitalized patients was associated with an increase in hospital-onset COVID-19 at five Massachusetts hospitals, researchers found. “What prompted the study was our published viewpoints that the use of universal masking and testing continues to have value in hospitals where there is a high concentration of vulnerable patients during times of substantial respiratory virus transmission,” Theodore R. Pak, MD, PhD, an infectious diseases fellow at Massachusetts General Hospital, told Healio. ... Pak concluded, “As evidence mounts about the continued impact of hospital-onset respiratory viruses (both in terms of frequency and outcomes), given what we've learned about the efficacy of testing and masking for infection control during the waves of the COVID pandemic and the findings of this study, we would be remiss not to consider the value of these measures during either the next winter or any other future period with high respiratory virus transmission.” (more) https://www.healio.com/news/infectious-disease/20240423/hospitalonset-covid19-surged-after-end-of-universal-screening-masking

JAMA Network Open has published a new study showing that, from April 1, 2020, to February 27, 2023, in California, an estimated 146,210 COVID-19 cases were averted by vaccination in teens aged 12 to 15 years, representing a 37% reduction. Researchers also estimated that 230,134 cases were averted in kids aged 5 to 11 years, a 24% reduction. ... Biggest reduction in teens From April 2020 to February 2023, California recorded 3,913,063 pediatric COVID-19 cases and 12,740 hospitalizations. During those times, statewide vaccine coverage reached 53.5% among adolescents aged 12 to 15 years, 34.8% among children aged 5 to 11 years, and 7.9% among those aged 6 to 59 months. (more) https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/teen-vaccination-cut-covid-19-cases-37-california-new-data-show Conclusions and Relevance The findings of this case series analysis of 3 913 063 cases suggest reduced pediatric SARS-CoV-2 transmission following immunization. These results support the use of COVID-19 vaccines to reduce COVID-19 incidence and hospitalization in pediatric populations. ... Descriptive Results Between April 1, 2020, and February 27, 2023, a total of 3 913 063 COVID-19 cases were reported in California among individuals aged 18 years or younger. Of these, 47 174 cases (1.2%) were among children younger than 6 months, 517 447 (13.2%) in children aged 6 to 59 months, 1 590 806 (40.7%) in children aged 5 to 11 years, and 1 511 690 (38.6%) in adolescents aged 12 to 15 years. A total of 12 740 hospitalizations were reported: 1443 (11.3%) were among children younger than 6 months, 3428 (26.9%) in children aged 6 to 59 months, 2536 (19.9%) in children aged 5 to 11 years, and 3921 (30.8%) in adolescents aged 12 to 15 years. ... Prior work has similarly reported a high impact of widespread administration of mRNA vaccines in adult populations. In California, COVID-19 vaccines were estimated to avert more than 1.5 million cases, 72 000 hospitalizations, and 19 000 deaths statewide during the first 10 months of vaccination (through October 16, 2021).17 In the US, each 10% increase in vaccination coverage among individuals aged 18 years or older at the county level was associated with an 8% reduction in mortality and a 7% reduction in incidence.18 (more) https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2817868

British Heart Foundation Covid vaccines: your questions answered Updated 31 January 2024 Is the coronavirus vaccine safe? Yes. Vaccines are only approved for use after being tested on tens of thousands of people. All of the approved vaccines are shown to be safe. In the UK, tens of millions of people have now had a Covid-19 vaccine, and reports of serious side effects have been very small. [emphasis added] The Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) continues to monitor Covid-19 vaccines to make sure they meet strict standards of safety, quality and effectiveness. https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/news/coronavirus-and-your-health/coronavirus-vaccine-your-questions-answered#safevaccine

And, the media is hardly "silent" on COVID these days:

We've hardly ended up years later "exactly where we were pre-covid." For example: https://data.who.int/dashboards/covid19/deaths?n=c AND

And then there's this: UK Health Security Agency: 16 April 2024 "Current vaccines provide good protection against severe disease and hospitalisation. UKHSA surveillance data relating to last spring’s programme shows that those who received a vaccine were around 50% less likely to be admitted to hospital with COVID-19 from 2 weeks following vaccination, compared to those who remained unvaccinated. According to World Health Organization data, 400,000 lives in England are estimated to have been saved up to March 2023 due to the COVID-19 vaccine programme." https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2024/04/16/whos-eligible-for-the-2024-covid-19-vaccine-or-spring-booster/ AND Covid vaccines saved more than 400,000 lives in England and Scotland, WHO says The study is the most comprehensive to date in showing how effective Covid vaccines have been, scientists say January 19, 2024 "Covid vaccines have saved more than 420,000 lives in England and Scotland, according to an analysis by the World Health Organisation (WHO). The study estimates that jabs saved 396,532 lives in England and 24,340 lives in Scotland between December 2020 and March 2023. As such, they reduced the death toll from Covid by 70 per cent during this period, the analysis found. (more) https://inews.co.uk/news/science/covid-vaccines-saved-lives-england-scotland-who-2862550

No correlation between vaccination coverage and the amount of excess mortality... What can explain the excess mortality in the U.S. and Europe in 2022? 02 Nov 2022 ... Third, the healthcare systems of many countries are still reeling from the COVID-19 pandemic. Many hospitals remain underfunded, underequipped, and understaffed, leading to suboptimal care for patients. But one thing we do know isn’t contributing to excess mortality is COVID-19 vaccines, contrary to claims by some. As we demonstrated earlier, there’s no correlation between vaccination coverage and the amount of excess mortality, nor is excess mortality positively correlated with the deployment of public COVID-19 vaccination campaigns. Therefore, the evidence available contradicts this claim. https://healthfeedback.org/what-can-explain-the-excess-mortality-in-the-u-s-and-europe-in-2022/

And then as to Bridgen's central claim: Fact Check: No evidence to link UK excess deaths to COVID-19 vaccines By Reuters Fact Check February 7, 2024 ... "For example, ONS data show all-cause deaths in England were higher among the unvaccinated than those who had received at least one dose, for every month in its April 2021 to May 2023 dataset. “There is no evidence COVID-19 vaccinations are linked to these estimated excess deaths,” a spokeswoman for the ONS said via email. Experts point to the long-term effects of surviving COVID infection, NHS delays and a lack of preventive care as explanations for the higher-than-average mortalities. ... VERDICT Misleading. There is no evidence linking COVID-19 vaccines to excess deaths in the UK. https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-link-uk-excess-deaths-covid-19-vaccines-2024-02-06/

The BBC also weighed in on Bridgen's COVID vaccine views as well in fact checking his past comments. Andrew Bridgen: What has suspended MP said about vaccines? 12 January 2023 ... "However in recent months, he has made increasingly misleading statements about vaccine safety. In December 2022, Mr Bridgen called in Parliament for a "complete suspension" of Covid vaccines based on what he described as, "robust data of significant harms and little ongoing benefit". This went against the overwhelming weight of evidence, from a number of different independent teams of researchers, that found that Covid vaccines' benefits far outweigh any known harms. (more) https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-64237949

And all of the above was widely ignored because everyone knows just who Bridgen is -- an anti-vax loon who was kicked out of his own Conservative political party for his nonsense, and someone whose past comments on COVID have repeatedly been shown to be misleading and/or wrong. Andrew Bridgen: MP expelled by Tories after Covid vaccine comments 26 April 2023 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-65402195 AND https://fullfact.org/can-i-trust/1244/andrew-bridgen/ AND Bridgen and Kruger have been down these same misinformation roads before in Parliament, and have been shown to be wrong and/or at best misleading. MPs' vaccine debate fact checked 10 November 2022 MPs recently debated an e-petition asking the government to conduct an investigation into whether Covid-19 vaccines are responsible for an alleged “increase in heart attacks and related health issues”. We looked at a number of claims made about vaccines or Covid-19 during the debate on 24 October and found a number of them were misleading or missing important context. We have taken a look at a selection of them below. We have checked many of the claims before, including about government advice on whether pregnant women should be vaccinated, that Pfizer never tested whether its vaccine stopped transmission and whether vaccine side effects are underreported to the Yellow Card scheme. (more) https://fullfact.org/health/vaccine-safety-westminster-debate/

The alleged extortion case will NOT "rock [the] Thai police force." Rather, it's just a little droplet in a huge pond of systemic corruption that will barely make a ripple.