In all this, consider those for whom life has truly sucked worse than a black hole:

Those deaf / hard of hearing folk (raises hand) who depend on lip-reading for communication

 

hopefully there may be treatment for that pretty soon.
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/rna-injection-restores-hearing-in-guinea-pigs-30855

 

https://www.jpost.com/health-and-wellness/article-693996

do they sugest that nocebo is the cause of increases in collapsing athletes 2021?
several reports from around the world have run stories on the sudden and big jump in SCD in 2021

https://www.rtnews.co.il/?view=article&id=49&catid=22

 

according to CDC data, some of placebo recipients did have adverse reactions. however none of severe reactions were among them, all severe reactions were real.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-...all vaccine recipients asked,(82.8% vs 70.6%).

according to FDA, of 42000 serious reactions to Pfizer, less than half recovered or were improving.

https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/fac...psing-or-dying-from-myocarditis-idUSL1N2SK160

Reuters also presented the videos to FIFA, world soccer’s governing body, which said: “FIFA is not aware of a rise in episodes of cardiac arrests as indicated in your email and no cases have been flagged in relation to individuals receiving a COVID vaccine.

“Generally speaking, FIFA is in regular contact with leading research centres and experts to do research on a variety of medical topics.”

Moreover, the Cardiac Risk in the Young (CRY) organisation, a British charity that funds medical research and supports families of young people affected by heart conditions, told Reuters they were “not aware” of any published or peer-reviewed researched into alleged links between sudden cardiac arrests in athletes and COVID-19 vaccines. “It’s important to understand that young sudden cardiac death (in both sportspeople and the general population) is tragically not a new phenomenon,” they said.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-...os-used-to-link-athlete-deaths-to-covid-shots

Deceptive Videos Used to Link Athlete Deaths to COVID Shots

They are highly effective at spreading misinformation using a strategy that sows doubt and bypasses critical analysis, capitalizing on emotion, according to Norbert Schwarz, a professor of psychology and marketing at the University of Southern California.
“It’s designed to foster that feeling that the vaccines may be risky,” Schwarz said. “You’re doing that with material that seems real, because it is real. All of these events actually happened, they just have nothing to do with the vaccines.”
The nearly four-minute montage that included West’s story originated on “The HighWire,” an online talk show hosted by Del Bigtree that is popular among the anti-vaccine community, and gradually became magnified via social media.
It takes the viewer through more than 50 cases of medical emergencies in rapid succession while eerie music plays and a beating heart pulses in the background, ending with somber images of medics and teammates rushing to fallen athletes.
After airing the video, Bigtree noted on his show that there is “no proof” vaccines were responsible for the cases — even while suggesting they might be.

 

https://www.the-sun.com/news/4512129/china-anal-swabs-covid-mandatory-winter-olympics/

BUM DEAL
China brings back anal swab testing for Covid in world’s most brutal lockdown two weeks before Winter Olympics begin

This is NOT people leaving the testing center.

 

https://www.ocregister.com/2022/01/...italized-with-covid-vs-for-covid-is-shifting/

Some patients showing up at hospitals have unrelated emergencies or are seeking care they delayed earlier because they were afraid of getting infected, Greene said. But then they test positive for the virus, adding to the reported COVID-19 hospitalizations.

“The way that we describe it is people are being hospitalized with COVID rather than for COVID,” Greene said.
...
Without tracking cases and hospitalizations, it would be unknown what percentage of people are developing antibodies, and knowing how the virus behaves is essential to develop protocols for “I hate to say it – the COVID season,” when the virus is endemic, he said.

 

Just a note: The fact that a paper has not been peer reviewed does not suggest that there is necessarily anything wrong with the paper, only that somebody thought it important to publicize it in a hurry. In “normal times” peer review can take from a few weeks to months. Often the reviewers do so in their spare time as volunteers.

 

Just a note: The fact that a paper has not been peer reviewed does not suggest that there is necessarily anything wrong with the paper, only that somebody thought it important to publicize it in a hurry. In “normal times” peer review can take from a few weeks to months. Often the reviewers do so in their spare time as volunteers.

Conversely, peer reviewed does not imply correctness in a paper. It's a "inspected by #7" sticker. It does meet the standards of science.

Remember this: Peer-reviewed NASA “EM drive” report
https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/pt.5.8198/full/

Actual testing results:
https://www.grenzwissenschaft-aktue...e-engine-does-not-develop-any-thrust20210321/

 

Conversely, peer reviewed does not imply correctness in a paper. It's a "inspected by #7" sticker. It does meet the standards of science.

Remember this: Peer-reviewed NASA “EM drive” report
https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/pt.5.8198/full/

Actual testing results:
https://www.grenzwissenschaft-aktue...e-engine-does-not-develop-any-thrust20210321/

rub it in ...

 

Conversely, peer reviewed does not imply correctness in a paper. It's a "inspected by #7" sticker. It does meet the standards of science.

Remember this: Peer-reviewed NASA “EM drive” report
https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/pt.5.8198/full/

Actual testing results:
https://www.grenzwissenschaft-aktue...e-engine-does-not-develop-any-thrust20210321/

Not relevant to my message.

 

Not relevant to my message.

OK, what was your message?

 

Go back and read it. It is very simple. Don't make it more than it is.

 

Go back and read it. It is very simple. Don't make it more than it is.

If I read you right I'm on your side about this. Scientific papers, peer-reviewed or not, one side or the other, is not proof of actual fact.

 

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that I was being grumpy when replying. I think we agree about papers reviewed or not. There are a lot errors being published in all fields. Realizing that was kind of a shock, like learning that drug studies may tell you one things but another study might show different results. They didn't teach that in when I studied statistics.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm

The understanding and epidemiology of COVID-19 has shifted substantially over time with the emergence and circulation of new SARS-CoV-2 variants, introduction of vaccines, and changing immunity as a result. Similar to the early period of this study, two previous U.S. studies found more protection from vaccination than from previous infection during periods before Delta predominance (3,7). As was observed in the present study after July, recent international studies have also demonstrated increased protection in persons with previous infection, with or without vaccination, relative to vaccination alone†††, §§§ (4). This might be due to differential stimulation of the immune response by either exposure type.¶¶¶ Whereas French and Israeli population-based studies noted waning protection from previous infection, this was not apparent in the results from this or other large U.K. and U.S. studies**** (4,8). Further studies are needed to establish duration of protection from previous infection by variant type, severity, and symptomatology, including for the Omicron variant.

 

so after all the mandates and push to indiscriminately vaccinate everyone, CDC's own data supports what pro-choice groups were telling all along - that natural immunity being major defense factor against Covid and vaccinating those that already have antibodies actually increases risks. just wow...

 

https://bangordailynews.com/2022/01...stling-as-americans-learn-to-live-with-covid/

Data from businesses and social media and interviews across the nation show a population accommodating COVID-19. Several factors have caused people to rethink: Omicron spreads so readily that catching it can seem all but inevitable for everyone but hermits. Inoculations and previous infections lower risk of severe disease. And it has been a very long two years of putting off get-togethers and trips.

 

so after all the mandates and push to indiscriminately vaccinate everyone, CDC's own data supports what pro-choice groups were telling all along - that natural immunity being major defense factor against Covid and vaccinating those that already have antibodies actually increases risks. just wow...

I've always believed that natural immunity (tested) should be a substitute for vaccination in any mandated program. That said, I'm also dubious about claims of excess risk from vaccination as most of the claims have been either BS or bad math.

 

actually i am not surprised, truth tends to come out eventually.

I've always believed that natural immunity (tested) should be a substitute for vaccination in any mandated program.

and i am of opinion that the substitute is the vaccine. natural immunity is the biggest and best thing keeping our specie alive and it was at work for millions of years. it did not save everyone but it is why any of us are alive today. ignoring it is a grave miscalculation. vaccine is something very very recent and a lot of learning is involved. using design rather than evolution produces results faster so both benefits and mistakes are encountered at higher rate. we may have learned a lot, specially in recent years but - nature still has leg up as it tried things over many generations.

sadly the pandemic situation became highly politicized and resulting info war polarized society. on one side of the deep divide are those pushing for aggressive agenda without looking critically at all the data, considering alternatives or voices of caution. just get those torches and pitchforks already, round up any nonbelievers and jab them using any means necessary... or "mercifully" tattoo their foreheads, lock them up and throw away the key. approach they consider progressive and scientific is more of a medieval witch hunt.

want to do some good in the world? ask for sincerity, correct and validated data. ask for accountability. don't oppose those that ask questions, challenge those that claim to have answers but cannot back them up.