Sunday, August 27, 2023
Biden’s probe censored Covid ‘smoking gun’
Mr Biden ordered the Intelligence Community in May 2021 to give him an assessment into how the pandemic began after revelations, first published by The Australian, that researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been hospitalised with Covid-like symptoms in November 2019 in the suspected first cluster of the pandemic.
When the report was published it concluded that most intelligence agencies assessed the virus, even if it had leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, was natural rather than manipulated in a laboratory
The Australian can reveal that this was not the assessments made by the four groups within the intelligence agencies that actually engaged in scientific analysis, who concurred that there was either a highly likely or reasonable chance the virus was genetically engineered.
At least 90 per cent of the work from one of those agencies — the Pentagon’s top intelligence group — was censored in the final report and Defence Department scientists were told to stop working with the FBI on their findings.
Scientists at the Defense Intelligence Agency’s National Centre for Medical Intelligence (DIA NCMI) had conducted rigorous research on the genomic sequence of the virus and firmly concluded that it was, most likely, a laboratory construct.
Well-placed sources familiar with the work that unfolded inside the intelligence agency and their interactions with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for the 90-day probe spoke to The Australian for this investigation.
Covid-19 origin ‘smoking gun’
Their internal research at the Pentagon-based agency led to a finding that was described internally as a “smoking gun.”
One of the scientists discovered that the size and location of a fragment of Covid-19 resembled the same fragment in Wuhan Institute of Virology research from more than a decade earlier, in 2008. It was the same technique that the WIV had used in grant applications to make chimeric viruses.
“This paper is the smoking gun of everything. When the team reviewed this data, they thought ‘This is created in the lab. It’s a reverse genetics construct,” a source said.
But their input into the 90-day origins probe was censored.
Sources close to the inquiry estimated that about 90 per cent of the DIA NCMI edits were deleted or censored or simply weren’t included.
“They said the information was too technical to include in the ODNI assessment,” a source familiar with the process told The Australian.
“When the scientists saw the final document, they wondered were did all their edits go?”
They had been working with the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction unit, until the co-operation between the two agencies was blocked, with a director at the Defense Intelligence Agency claiming the FBI was “off the reservation” on the topic of the origins of Covid-19.
The 90-day study also ignored coronavirus gain-of-function research underway in Wuhan and there was a lack of genomic data analysis.
The scientific team inside the DIA thought the 90-day report was scientifically inaccurate, according to sources familiar with the inquiry.
“There was a lot of erroneous information. There was no genomic analysis in the ODNI report, nothing about the rare codons or the poly basic cleavage site and the minimal cassette that is similar to prior work published by WIV scientists. This virus also had no apparent mutational signatures,” a source involved in the inquiry said.
********************************************************
US Congress to probe claims Covid report was censored by intelligence community
The US congress is set to probe revelations that officials at the highest levels of the intelligence community censored the input of scientists who concluded that Covid-19 was genetically engineered in a laboratory.
A homeland security committee senator has also called for the allegations to be “investigated immediately”.
The Australian and Sky News revealed on Friday that senior scientists working for the Defence Intelligence Organisation’s National Centre for Medical Intelligence – Robert Greg Cutlip, Jean-Paul Chretien and John Hardham – had 90 per cent of their input into a probe ordered by US President Joe Biden deleted.
They were stunned when the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s study into the origins of Covid-19 was released and downplayed the likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 was the result of laboratory research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
US officials have expressed serious concerns at censorship of the scientists, saying the matter raised questions over the accuracy of the 90-day probe handed down by Mr Biden in August 2021.
The congressional select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic will now evaluate the allegations, with a spokesperson saying there were concerns about the accuracy of the intelligence agency’s public assessments.
“The select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic takes the reported allegations seriously,” a spokesperson said. “We are explicitly tasked with investigating the origins of Covid-19 and the purported information raises questions concerning the accuracy of the ODNI report and its conclusions.”
Separately, US senator Roger Marshall, who sits on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and is leading the Covid origins investigations, said he was exploring his options about how to take censorship of the scientists further and that the cover-up “must be fully investigated immediately”.
“We never trusted the Chinese Communist Party to come clean about the origins of Covid-19, but a potential cover-up by our own government and Defence agencies tasked with securing our nation should concern every American and must be fully investigated immediately,” he told The Weekend Australian.
“The intelligence community’s official inconclusive position about the origins of Covid-19 has never accurately reflected the classified intelligence we reviewed. Now we are learning insider censorship of US expert scientists may have influenced the report.”
Quantitative biologist Justin Kinney, associate professor at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, said the revelations were “very important”.
“The ODNI appeared to have intentionally suppressed critical scientific information to mislead the public about the origins of Covid-19,” he said. “The house subcommittee on the pandemic should investigate.”
It comes after The Australian and Sky News revealed a draft document was shared with agencies in the intelligence community for input when Mr Biden ordered the probe in May 2021.
Sources familiar with the work inside the intelligence agency and the scientists’ interactions with the ODNI said 90 per cent of their input was censored or deleted.
“They said the information was too technical to include in the ODNI assessment,” one said.
“When the scientists saw the final document, they wondered where did all their edits go?”
**********************************************
Author of Congressional Vax Injury Compensation Bill Pens an Op-Ed
While the Biden administration recently announced another $1 billion for long Covid treatment research and up to $5 billion to develop more vaccines and therapies targeting Covid, a subject lurking just beneath the surface, individuals injured by the Covid vaccine for the most part go unacknowledged and even censored.
One advocate for the vaccine injured claims people have been suffering for too long without any government acknowledgement and it is time for action. “To live in a world where people harmed by a medication are treated with mercy instead of censorship, people must make their voices heard.” Action has been taken, including on the part of TrialSite, which covers the topic objectively as well as engages in partnership with organizations like React19, a Covid vaccine injury group, and offers vaccine injury support groups. Now, it looks as if the United States government is finally responding.
Bill to modernize vaccine compensation+
Democrat Representative Lloyd Doggett from Texas and Republican Congressman Lloyd Smucker of Pennsylvania introduced a bill, H.R.5142, which is designed to modernize the current COVID-19 vaccine compensation schemes. The bill would update and improve the nearly forty-year-old Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).
Doggett had been reluctant to criticize the Covid vaccine, but recently came out and said, “Vaccines save lives, but in the rarest of cases, usually caused by an error in administration rather than the vaccine itself, they involve injury. While strongly disagreeing with the dangerous misinformation spread by anti-vaxxers, I believe that those who suffer rare injuries associated with vaccines, including those to fight COVID-19, should receive prompt, reasonable compensation for medical bills and other losses. The existing program involves unreasonable delays and inadequate redress. Our bill would update the program and correct the unjust decision to have COVID-19 claims considered by a separate, and even more inadequate governmental program. By assuring a prompt and fair response to any related injury, we build confidence in vaccines and reduce hesitancy.”
Doggett op-ed
In an article in The Hill, Congressman Doggett wrote that Congress must act to modernize the approach to “rare vaccine injuries”. The politician points out the Covid vaccine was needed as a response to the pandemic and was successful. But, he adds, vaccine hesitancy was an issue which had to be dealt with. Doggett adds one way to assure people the vaccines are safe is to make sure there is trust in the vaccines and the government is to make sure there is a program to safely and fairly compensate people who have suffered a vaccine injury.
The Congressman points out because of the uniqueness of the situation with the Covid vaccine, compensation for Covid vaccine injury was considered under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). The CICP has been an “abject failure” in dealing with Covid vaccine injuries, and now, finally, politicians are aware of the situation. And, as Doggett points out, with all the claims made to the CICP, a pittance has been paid out by the agency scheme.
Doggett and Smucker’s bill is called The Vaccine Injury Compensation Modernization Act, which aims to update the CICP and provide “much needed” relief to people whose vaccine injury claims have been lingering. “Our legislation authorizes the resources and additional judges required to review claims expeditiously, as well as reforms to provide more reasonable time for filing a claim. It streamlines the addition of future vaccines to the program, a process now too frequently delayed by bureaucratic red tape.”
The payouts will also account for work loss compensation, medical costs and damages. The legislation would also raise the cap in line with inflation, indexing it moving forward.
Frankly why wouldn’t we compensate individuals that have legitimate, verified injuries associated with the vaccine? Again, the Biden administration continues to commit billions into new vaccine and medicinal development, yet no mention of vaccine injury compensation.
But some elected officials in Washington are starting to realize that a fair, reasonably expedited and funded compensation program makes sense.
*************************************************
Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************************
Friday, August 25, 2023
The Highly Mutated BA.2.86, the Detecting Lab and Immunity Questions
.
Yesterday, TrialSite reported that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) picked up on a new SARS-CoV-2 variant, one highly mutated, termed BA.2.86. In the United States, the mutated variant was sequenced in Michigan thanks to the ongoing surveillance occurring at the University of Michigan Clinical Microbiology Laboratory.
The University of Michigan Clinical Microbiology Laboratory in the report is termed the originating lab, while the submitting lab was the Lauring Lab, University of Michigan, Department of Microbiology and Immunology. This lab is led by Adam Lauring, M.D., Ph.D., a Professor of Internal Medicine, Infectious Disease and Microbiology & Immunology.
The Clinical Microbiology Lab is led by Michael Bachman, M.D., Ph.D., and Paul R. Lephart, Ph.D., D(ABMM), both Associate Directors of the prominent Midwestern lab—one staffed by 55 medical technologists and clinical laboratory scientists. The laboratories provide service 365 days a year to meet the medical needs of Michigan Medicine and the clients of the “M-Labs” program.
The Clinical Microbiology Laboratory has close ties with Adult and Pediatric Infectious Diseases, the Infection Control Program, the Department of Pharmacy, and the School of Public Health. Close collaboration is key among the various functional areas, thus providing the ongoing analysis of interactions between organisms and antimicrobial agents that allow for dynamic reporting to clinicians on the floors and foster productive research collaborations that directly result in improving the quality of care provided to patients.
The Clinical Microbiology Laboratories are accredited by the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and active in the CAP Laboratory Accreditation and Proficiency Testing programs
More on the variant
CBS News coverage of the latest variant discovered revealed some useful information. Kathleen Conley, a CDC spokesperson told the network news, “Today we are more prepared than ever to detect and respond to changes in the COVID-19 virus.” Conley empathized that “Scientists are working now to understand more about the newly identified lineage in these four cases and we will share more information as it becomes available.”
Alexander Tin covered the story for CBS News HealthWatch.
Is BA.2.86 a more threatening or dangerous variant of SARS-CoV-2? Will it lead to more severe COVID-19? While the World Health Organization went on the record that the variant includes dozens of genetic changes, for comparison it’s a similar situation in some ways to how Omicron emerged as a materially different stain than, say, delta.
But public health agencies and academic research centers need more data to determine the risk levels associated with BA.2.86. TrialSite reported that this newly detected strain has been detected in Israel and Denmark as well.
The concern, among other things, is that the mutations could aid the pathogen in its ability to evade immunity, both of the natural (previous infection) as well as vaccine-induced type. There is no real threat at this point given the pathogen has only been detected in a few places. Also, it may well be the case that the human body’s current immune responses help fight off the mutant. Or for that matter, the mutant may not be able to compete with existing highly infectious strains.
CBS News obtained a presentation from a Fred Hutch Cancer Center evolutionary biologist, Jesse Bloom, Ph.D., conveying what could be considered potentially disturbing information about the latest variant. “Deep mutational scanning indicates BA.2.86 variant will have equal or greater escape than XBB.1.5 from antibodies elicited by pre-omicron and first-generation Omicron variants.”
Some of the mutations exist in parts of the virus that could help it evade immunity provided by prior vaccination or infection.
But Bloom also suggested the collective immunity may well be ready to take on BA.2.86, “[T]here are also broader mechanisms of immunity elicited by vaccination and infection that provide some protection against severe disease even for very heavily mutated variants.”
What are the implications for the latest vaccine that will likely be approved by FDA, and recommended by CDC for the fall season?
A monovalent mRNA vaccine produced by both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna are under clinical study. TrialSite reported on a trial site looking to enroll adolescents in Cincinnati Ohio for the Moderna clinical trial.
The FDA recommended that the vaccine makers tailor this COVID-19 season’s vaccine to XBB.1.5, an Omicron variant. As TrialSite has reported recently, while this strain predominated circulating Omicron variants across America just a few months ago it is now at 10.3% or lower. TrialSite estimates that by October XBB.1.5 will be under 5% of all circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants, if not less.
What does this mean for COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness? And what about the emerging predominant variants? For example, EG.5 at over 17% of SARS-CoV-2 cases according to the CDC now is the pathogen to watch. The good news for vaccination and natural immunity supporters---EG.5 is an XBB descendent so perhaps the vaccine’s effectiveness will be better than expected. Or perhaps Moderna pointed out, according to CBS News, that its shot provides "a significant boost in neutralizing antibodies" for EG.5.
Yet according to the Fred Hutch evolutionary biologist Jesse Bloom, all bets are off if BA.2.86 is able to outcompete and overcome other fast-moving, mutating Omicron variants. That scenario could represent trouble for our collective immunity. BA.2.86 heavily mutated would be a “fairly poor match” for the current vaccines under clinical development which again target XBB.
A reminder tempering the concern. With each progressive mutation under the Omicron umbrella of variants, COVID-19 becomes ever milder all things considered. And there are treatments available. Yes, it still can turn severe and even deadly but the case fatality rate now ranks with influenza, if not even less dangerous for healthy people.
Even during the Delta variant surge TrialSite always reminded that 90-95% of the COVID-19 cases were mild to moderate, but that persons in high-risk categories (e.g., elderly, persons with comorbidities, immunocompromised) faced considerably higher threat. TrialSite emphasized with national and state public health agencies that face a U.S. population with a staggering reality—about 70% of the adult population is either overweight or obese as reported by Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. During the pandemic, there was little time to risk stratify, and obesity itself was/and is a risk factor. Meaning a good half, of the country’s adults likely fell in the higher risk category. This remains so, although the case fatality rate is under 1%. But generally, the Omicron variants are more infectious, meaning they spread faster, yet overall lead to milder outcomes.
********************************************
Murdoch Children’s Bombshell: Medicinal Value of COVID-19 Vaccines Now Questionable Among Healthy Children
According to researchers at Australia’s Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, COVID-19 vaccines have demonstrated efficacy against severe incidence of SARS-CoV-2 in children and adolescents, but their value proposition as a mass medical tool becomes questionable considering the unfolding dynamics of today: high pre-existing infection and low risk when infected.
Researchers led by John Hart from the academic medical center for young people Down Under acknowledge that most children now have been infected by SARS-CoV-2, meaning they have built up immunity, and the vaccine’s benefit in healthy children is minimal. They argue any energies and attention placed on COVID-19 vaccination campaigns should be used to advocate for vaccines known to offer higher medical value, such as the measles vaccine. The ramifications of this recent set of findings are substantial.
Published in the BMJ Pediatrics Open, the international review was led by medical researchers from the Australian medical institute. They explored the challenges and considerations of COVID-19 vaccination, especially in low-and middle-income countries with high levels of community transmission and infection-derived immunity.
The team’s review, led by Hart, a medical epidemiologist, suggests that any COVID-19 vaccination scheme moving forward, especially in low-and middle-income countries should be coupled with routine childhood vaccination program that the researchers acknowledge “have greater impact on illness and death, including for measles, pneumonia and diarrheal disease.”
Mild for most
The Australian team found that about two-thirds of all young people that had COVIS-19 and were hospitalized in the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic did not require medical intervention. Deaths, the investigators reported, “were extremely rare in children.”
Closing in on child herd immunity?
The researchers also point out that the vast majority of children have been infected with SARS-CoV-2. As immunity has increased over time, the disease continues to evolve. Prior research led by Murdoch Children’s found that croup, triggered by the novel coronavirus, declined in 2022 despite the rise of new variants.
Also, data from the Pediatric Active Enhanced Disease Surveillance (PAEDS) network in America found that rates of pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PIMS-TS), what was a major driver for childhood vaccination, were “Substantially lower during the Omicron COVID-19 variant period.” TrialSite reported on similar findings in the UK.
Net takeaway
While there are still cases where COVID-19 vaccination is recommended, the Australian researchers are clear—they value of these vaccines for children has markedly diminished. In fact, they use the COVID-19 vaccination push as a primary means of promoting more substantive medical vaccination, such as measles. Reading between the lines, and on the face of the piece, the investigators are more concerned about standard vaccination rates, especially in low-and moderate-income countries.
One takeaway called out by this independent media, children achieved herd immunity against SARS-CoV-2 by infection, not vaccination.
*************************************************
Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************************
Thursday, August 24, 2023
What You Need to Know About New ‘Eris’ COVID Variant
The new COVID-19 virus variant spreading now, “Eris,” is currently the predominant strain in the United States, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Although it’s increasingly reported worldwide, health experts say it poses a low risk to public health, as there is no evidence it causes different or more severe symptoms than previous omicron offspring.
The Essentials
A subvariant of the omicron lineage, Eris, otherwise known as EG.5, was detected as early as February 2023. As of Aug. 23, Eris has been detected in more than 50 countries and is responsible for an estimated 20.6 percent of all cases in the United States.
Meanwhile, FL.1.5.1 is now the second most prevalent strain, accounting for over 13 percent of cases.
On Aug. 9, the World Health Organization (WHO) designated Eris as a variant of interest (pdf), meaning it possesses genetic characteristics that could increase its transmissibility, virulence, and ability to evade vaccines.
The WHO had previously labeled Eris as a variant “under monitoring” after a surge in COVID-19 infections in early July.
The current variant of interest list also includes two other omicron cousins—XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.16.
If Eris is upgraded to a variant of concern, governments would need to increase preventative measures, such as mask mandates in hospitals, testing, or physical distancing.
There have already been growing concerns that Eris could trigger governments to revive some COVID-19 restrictions.
How Dangerous Is It Compared to Other Variants?
Eris is a descendent of omicron variant XBB.1.9.2.
Eris carries an additional amino acid mutation, known as F456L, in the spike protein. This mutation has been shown to escape immunity gained from previous variants and may help the new variant transmit quickly.
The CDC said there is no evidence Eris causes more severe disease than other omicron descendants, and it seems to cause similar symptoms.
Similar to those of earlier COVID-19 virus strains and that of the common cold, symptoms may include the following:
Fatigue.
Muscle pain.
Chest pain.
Headache.
Sore throat.
Runny nose.
Congestion.
Cough.
Fever and chills.
Nausea or vomiting.
Diarrhea.
Loss of taste or smell.
New Generation ‘Variant Under Monitoring’
Health authorities have also been tracking a highly mutated strain called BA.2.86, or “Pirola” by some, which has caught scientists by surprise after it was picked up by COVID-19 testing on three continents.
This variant has scientists on alert because its emergence is reminiscent of the early days of the omicron variant in late 2021 when researchers in southern Africa noticed a lineage that quickly spread globally.
“There’s a little bit of déjà vu all over again,” said Adam Lauring, a virologist and infectious-disease physician at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, whose lab identified one individual infected with BA.2.86, in an interview with Nature.
Health authorities first detected BA.2.86 in Denmark on July 24, and it has also been spotted in the UK, United States, and Israel.
None of the cases appears to be linked, including three infections in Denmark found in different parts of the country. This geographical distribution is another feature of BA.2.86 that is garnering scientists’ attention.
This suggests the variant may already be fairly widespread, Jesse Bloom, a viral evolutionary biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, told Nature. “It’s got to have been transmitting a fair amount.”
The UK Health Security Agency said a recent case was reported in a person with no recent travel history, “suggesting a degree of community transmission within the UK.”
However, experts do not expect BA.2.86 to have the same impact as omicron due to response practice with earlier COVID-19 waves and vaccine rollouts. “There’s good reason to think it won’t be like the omicron wave, but it’s early days,” Mr. Lauring said in the Nature interview.
Current Vaccines
Pfizer, Moderna, and Novavax have created new versions of their vaccines to target another omicron sublineage—XBB.1.5—similar to Eris, so health authorities hope the vaccines will work on new variants.
However, according to the WHO, the F456L mutation Eris carries has been shown to decrease the neutralization of most XBB.1.5 neutralizing antibodies.
Listed by the WHO as a “variant of concern,” XBB.1.5 previously dominated transmission in the United States for several months straight but was surpassed by XBB.1.16, or Arcturus, in July.
The new CDC director, Dr. Mandy Cohen, anticipates that these vaccines will be available at common locations such as pharmacies and anticipates an annual COVID-19 shot, integrating it into routine health practices.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/what-you-need-to-know-about-new-eris-covid-variant-5477514
***************************************************Another Covid Medication Gets authorization from FDA Despite a Phase 3 “Miss”
When the Covid pandemic started, there was a rush to find a vaccine to combat the disease. Initially, issues arose with the Johnson and Johnson shot and it was discontinued, but the Pfizer mRNA jab was approved. Both shots were authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under emergency use authorization (EUA) although the Johnson and Johnson’s (Janssen) authorization was later revoked. The mRNA jabs were later formally approved. But questions still arose over whether or not the Pfizer and later Moderna vaccines were fully vetted before EUA was granted. Now it appears history has repeated itself.
Known as vilobelimab, this experimental product now available on an emergency basis was developed via human-mouse chimeric IgG4 kappa antibody targeting human C5a in plasma.
Gohibic gets EUA
In April, the FDA granted emergency use authorization for the use of the Gohibic injection for the treatment of Covid-19 in hospitalized adults. The medication is to be used within 48 hours of a patient who’s been intubated or is on a heart-lung machine. The press release for the medication says, “There is limited information known about the safety or effectiveness of using GOHIBIC to treat people in the hospital with COVID-19.
Available results from clinical trials in adults indicate that treatment with GOHIBIC may decrease the risk of dying in hospitalized adults with COVID-19 when initiated within 48 hours of receiving IMV or ECMO. The safety and effectiveness of GOHIBIC have not been studied in children hospitalized with COVID-19.”
Authorized despite Phase 3 “miss”
According to the FDA, the Gohibic clinical trial showed that patients treated with the drug had a lower risk of death by day 28 and day 60 of treatment compared to placebo. However, there is a phase 3 clinical trial “twist”. In a randomized trial, Gohibic reduced the risk of death in the sickest patients by 27% compared with placebo during a 28-day period. In that trial, the drug missed “statistical significance” on the trial’s primary endpoint. But in another analysis and two other post hoc analyses the medication’s improvement was significant. The treatment targets inflammation that leads to progression of the Covid virus.
Drug maker talks to FDA
Despite the results of the trial, the maker of Gohibic, InflaRx, talked to the FDA and then applied for the EUA last September. InflaRx was founded in 2007 in Germany and has offices in Ann Arbor, Michigan. In a press release, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of InflaRx, Niels Riedemann said that Gohibic will bring hope to Covid patients who despite vaccines and other treatment options, are still developing viral sepsis and are progressing to critical status.
The company has a supply of Gohibic which is readily available, but Riedemann didn’t reveal the price of the medication. However, he did expect to charge a five-digit figure per patient for the drug. Once again, it appears Covid is a continual cash cow for Big Pharma CEOs.
****************************************************
The World’s Longest Natural Experiment on Vaccine Efficacy
Lack of controls in evaluating vaccine efficacy makes all inferences speculative
In early 2021, the COVID-19 vaccine campaign was launched, based on clinical findings of 95% efficacy in late 2020 (Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine).
But this efficacy relied on relative risk measures that are more appropriate for epidemiological population studies that measure exposure and response to risk factors without controlling for confounding factors that could produce the same results from other sources.
Confounding factors are controlled in a vaccine clinical trial through randomization of participants to the vaccine and placebo groups, thereby equally distributing all known and unknown confounding factors. Randomized controlled clinical trials require absolute measures of risk reduction to prove causation of vaccine efficacy, not relative risk reductions that only observe associations of effectiveness. (Relative risk reduction: Misinformative measure in clinical trials and COVID-19 vaccine efficacy).
The absolute risk reduction of the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials was approximately 1%, which rendered the vaccine clinically insignificant (Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials). Generally, a significant clinical effect reduces a risk by at least 50% or increases a risk by at least two-fold.
In what amounts to the world’s longest natural experiment, it took many months for a national public health official to declare to the public what the clinical trial results had already proven back in 2020 due to their low absolute risk reductions: that the COVID-19 vaccines would not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections (CDC Director Rochelle Walensky tells Wolf Blitzer that COVID Vaccines won't prevent transmission - YouTube 1:20).
And to suggest that the vaccines would at least keep you out of the hospital has never been clinically proven. Just because you are vaccinated and stay out of the hospital doesn't prove the vaccines had anything to do with it. It's just another one of those unproven associations.
By now the truth about the COVID-19 vaccine failure should be evident to anybody who cares to look and listen. However, are the lessons learned? Are we better equipped now to prevent more failed vaccine campaigns based on misleading statistics that benefit pharmaceutical profits? That last phrase provides a clue to the answer, and the world's longest natural experiment on vaccine efficacy is likely to continue on indefinitely.
https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/the-worlds-longest-natural-experiment-on-vaccine-efficacy-d9d9b7c3
*************************************************Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************************
Wednesday, August 23, 2023
Long COVID damage can linger for 2 years, leading to elevated risk of disability, hospitalization, and death, landmark new study finds
Long COVID—and the increased risk of death, disability, and hospitalization it brings—can persist for two years, according to a landmark study published Monday in Nature Medicine.
It’s the first study to look at a broad range of potential health effects stemming from the virus in the two years after infection. Most previous studies had only examined the initial year after infection, or a more narrow range of health effects in a period slightly longer than a year.
For those who contracted the virus in 2020 and were hospitalized with it, the risk of both death and hospitalization remained “significantly elevated” for two years, according to researchers with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Washington University.
Among those who contracted the virus the same year and weren’t hospitalized during their initial infection, the risk of death remained statistically significant for six months, researchers found. The risk of hospitalization remained elevated for about a year and a half.
“The findings highlight the substantial cumulative burden of health loss due to [long COVID] and call for attention to the care needs of people with long-term health effects" due to the virus, the study’s authors wrote.
A longer road for those who were hospitalized
Researchers examined the Department of Veterans Affairs medical records of nearly 140,000 individuals who survived COVID during 2020, as well as nearly 6 million who weren’t known to have contracted the virus that year. They followed them for two years to gauge their risk of death from all causes, as well as the incidence of 80 conditions known to be post-acute sequelae of COVID (PASC), frequently referred to as long COVID.
At the two-year mark, the risk of most of those health conditions—69%—was insignificant for those who hadn’t been hospitalized with the virus. But "substantial" risk remained "impacting several major organ systems." The chance of developing blood, lung, gastrointestinal, or musculoskeletal conditions remained elevated, in addition to fatigue and diabetes, suggesting a longer-lasting risk for these ailments, the authors stated.
In a Monday blog entry, Dr. Eric Topol, a professor of molecular medicine at Scripps Research and founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, wrote that the statistic was the "only reassuring finding for non-hospitalized people in the study."
For those who had been hospitalized with the virus, the risk of most of conditions—65%, affecting all organ systems examined, and including cardiovascular, blood, endocrine, gastrointestinal, kidney, mental health, musculoskeletal, and pulmonary issues—remained significant for the entire two years. The findings are a nod to the "the difficult and protracted road to recovery among those whose disease was sufficiently severe to necessitate hospitalization during the acute phase of infection," researchers wrote.
The study's findings "show that while risks of many (but not all) post-acute sequelae decline and become non-statistically significant over time, the decline is less pronounced among those who were hospitalized in the acute phase of infection," the authors wrote.
The good news for everyone: Researchers found no increased risk of cancer among those who had experienced COVID, hospitalized or not.
While significant, the study had its limitations, as the authors point out. All participants were veterans, and most were older males. Long COVID as a whole may look different—in both duration and symptoms—in a primarily female, or younger, population. As Topol pointed out, the study's prototypic participant, a 61-year-old male, is far different from a female in her thirties—the demographic for which long COVID is thought to be most prevalent.
Further, all participants were infected during the first year of COVID, before variants like Delta and Omicron evolved. While thought to be less common, long COVID from later strains may feature important differences.
What's more, those with a record of COVID infection were compared to those with no record of a COVID infection during the same year. But some of them may have had COVID without knowing, or telling their doctor, skewing rates of death, hospitalization, and disability in the COVID crowd for better or worse.
Long COVID's long-term impacts on the immune system
Another new study, published Aug. 18 in the journal Cell, details the long-term immune system changes that severe COVID can trigger. The findings help elucidate why some with long COVID have symptoms tied to prolonged inflammation, like lung and kidney damage and neurological changes—and may have implications for anyone who has experienced the virus, regardless of severity.
Researchers with Weill Cornell Medicine in New York City and other institutions examined data from the blood of tens of patients—those who had recovered from severe COVID, and those who had recovered from other types of critical illness. In particular, they were able to isolate and analyze a rare type of stem cells found in blood—CD34+ hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells—thanks to a new technique they developed that made bone marrow biopsy unnecessary.
Among their findings: Monocytes—a type of white blood cell produced every few days from stem cells—showed changes in epigenetic programming up to a year after severe COVID infection.
Epigenetic programming refers to the epigenome—comprised of factors like chemicals, stress, diet, drugs, and disease that modify DNA, telling it "what to do, where to do it, and when to do it,” according to the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Those changes, to what could be casually referred to as DNA's "packaging," can be passed down from cell to cell as they divide, and from generation to generation.
Researchers also found that stem cells of those who had experienced severe COVID were more likely to allow activation of inflammation-associated genes. Such cells were also more likely to create a type of blood cell that serves as a "first responder" to infection.
Stem cells "can pass their epigenetic ‘memories’ on to their progeny immune cells, changing those cells’ inflammatory programs," Dr. Steven Josefowicz, an associate professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine, told Fortune. "So, when they see another pathogen, they respond in a different way than they would if they came from ... cells that hadn’t seen inflammation to the same extent.”
Such changes to the immune system may persist longer than a year, Josefowicz said, adding that the study only lasted a year. And they may also occur—at least to some extent—in those who had more mild cases of COVID, though further study will be needed to tell.
Who's most at risk for long COVID?
Factors like age, gender, BMI, and pre-existing conditions may put individuals at higher risk for long COVID, according to a study published in March in the Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine.
The U.K.-based study found that certain groups of people are at a significantly higher risk of developing the post-viral condition, thought to affect millions around the world. They include:
Women
Over 40
People with obesity
Smokers
Those who were immunosuppressed before COVID
People who were hospitalized with COVID
People who had the following conditions before COVID:
anxiety or depression
diabetes
asthma or COPD
Researchers examined the results of 41 published studies, with a combined total of more than 860,000 patients. They found that the aforementioned conditions were strongly associated with a higher risk of long COVID symptoms persisting three or more months after infection.
The results bolster the case that female gender and older age serve as risk factors for developing long COVID. A potential common thread among several risk categories: pre-existing inflammation, which may extend the acute phase of COVID “even after recovery.” In the case of females, hormones might play a role in inflammatory status, while obesity shares a proinflammatory profile with long COVID, the authors write.
That’s not-so-great news for a giant swath of the population. There is good news, however: At least two doses of COVID vaccination seemed to lower the risk of developing long COVID, researchers found. Other studies have come to similar conclusions, they noted. They include a report from the U.K. Office of National Statistics, which found that those with two doses of COVID vaccine had a 42% lower risk of developing the potentially disabling condition.
What is long COVID?
With more than 200 symptoms identified—from lingering cough and fatigue to ear numbness and a sensation of “brain on fire”—long COVID is undoubtedly not one but multiple conditions, experts say.
True long COVID, some contend, is best defined as a chronic-fatigue-syndrome-like condition that develops after a COVID infection, similar to other post-viral syndromes that can occur after an infection with herpes, Lyme disease, and Ebola, among others.
Other post-COVID complications like organ damage should not be defined as long COVID and better fit into the larger umbrella category of PASC, some experts say. Also known as post-acute sequelae of COVID-19, the term is used to encompass a wide variety of COVID consequences, from chronic-fatigue-like symptoms and subsequent heart disease to lasting lung damage and odd new symptoms like urinary incontinence, itching, and skin lesions.
As of Jan. 16, 15% of U.S. adults reported having long COVID symptoms at some point in the pandemic, and 6% reported lingering symptoms, according to a Jan. 26 report by the Kaiser Family Foundation, citing data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The percent of Americans who’ve experienced COVID and still report long COVID symptoms dropped from 19% in June to 11% in January, according to the report.
https://fortune.com/well/2023/08/21/long-covid-last-2-years-death-disability-hospitalization/
*************************************************Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************************
Tuesday, August 22, 2023
Monday, August 21, 2023
Most Intensive Ivermectin Use Had 74 Percent Reduction in Excess Deaths
According to a new peer-reviewed ecological study, a natural experiment occurred when the government of Peru authorized ivermectin for use during the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in evidence of the drug’s effectiveness and ability to reduce excess deaths.
The paper’s results, published August 8 in Cureus, found a 74 percent reduction in excess deaths in 10 states with the most intensive ivermectin use over a 30-day period following peak deaths during the pandemic. When analyzing data across 25 states in Peru, researchers found these reductions in excess deaths correlated closely to ivermectin use during four months in 2020.
When ivermectin was available without restriction, there was a fourteenfold reduction in nationwide excess deaths. Once access to ivermectin was restricted by the government, a thirteenfold increase in excess deaths was observed in the two months following the limitation of its use. The findings align with summary data from the World Health Organization for the same time period in Peru.
Ivermectin is a widely-known and inexpensive treatment against parasitic diseases. Scientists believe the drug can also bind to the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, limiting its morbidity and infectivity.
Peru Promoted Then Restricted Access to Ivermectin
Before Peru implemented COVID-19 vaccine mandates, the country relied on mitigation strategies such as lockdowns and therapeutics to control the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19, as did many other nations.
The Peruvian Ministry of Health, on May 8, 2020, approved ivermectin widely for use prompting 25 states in Peru to implement inpatient and outpatient treatments with ivermectin to different extents and in different time frames. Additionally, through the Mega-Operación Tayta (MOT)—a national program led by the Ministry of Defense—Peru’s government began distributing ivermectin on a wide scale.
Through a partnership with 11 other government agencies, MOT aimed to reach every targeted region with rapid response teams to detect COVID-19 cases, administer ivermectin, and provide food to encourage people to isolate for 15 days. Shortly thereafter, MOT began distributing the therapeutic to everyone identified as high-risk, regardless of whether they tested positive or were symptomatic for COVID-19.
The government of Peru independently tracked daily COVID-19 deaths and all-cause deaths through numerous Peruvian national health databases, allowing researchers to calculate excess deaths. Additionally, they extensively tracked data for deaths and other public health parameters allowing analysis of the potential efficacy of interventions such as ivermectin during the pandemic.
When President Francisco Sagasti took office on Nov. 17, 2020, the government stopped distributing ivermectin and made it available only by prescription. This made the drug significantly more difficult for people to obtain and allowed researchers to see nationwide changes in daily excess all-cause deaths before and after restrictions went into place.
Impact of Ivermectin on Excess Deaths
Excess all-cause deaths were calculated from the total deaths recorded for January through February 2020. During this period, monthly all-cause deaths fluctuated with a mean value of 5.2 percent and a standard deviation of 3.8 percent. By May 2020, total deaths fluctuated by more than double the baseline value calculated in January through February.
An analysis of excess all-cause deaths was performed state-by-state for those aged 60 years and older to establish the date of peak excess deaths during the pandemic’s first wave. Decreases in excess deaths from the peak date of death to 30 and 45 days afterward were tracked. The 25 states were then grouped by the extent of ivermectin distribution: maximal distribution—occurring through operation MOT, medium, and minimal.
Results showed that the 10 MOT states had a sharp decrease in excess deaths after reaching peak values—with a 74 percent drop at 30 days and an 86 percent drop at 45 days after the date of peak deaths. For 14 states that locally administered ivermectin, excess deaths dropped by 53 percent at 30 days and 70 percent at 45 days.
In Lima, where ivermectin treatments were delayed until August—four months after its initial pandemic surge in April—excess deaths only dropped by 25 percent at 30 days and 25 percent at 45 days after peak deaths on May 30.
According to the study, mean reductions in excess deaths 30 days after peak deaths were 74 percent, 53 percent, and 25 percent, respectively, for the maximal, medium, and minimal states that distributed ivermectin. Forty-five days after peak deaths, mean reductions were 86 percent, 70 percent, and 25 percent.
The researchers noted that ivermectin distribution may have yielded such positive numbers due to the drug’s ability to both prevent and treat COVID-19 when distributed to an at-risk population on a greater scale.
Similar Results Observed in Uttar Pradesh, India
Researchers noted similar results with ivermectin distribution in Uttar Pradesh, India, where government teams moved across 97,941 villages as part of a COVID-19 management program to distribute home medication kits that contained ivermectin, doxycycline, zinc, vitamins C and D3, and acetaminophen tablets.
After the mass distribution of ivermectin, the seven-day moving average of COVID-19 deaths in Uttar Pradesh decreased by 97 percent. The cumulative total of COVID-19 deaths per million in population from July 7, 2021, through April 1, 2023, was 4.3 in Uttar Pradesh, compared with 70.4 in all of India and 1,596.3 in the United States, according to the study.
Although Peru had more comprehensive data, the Uttar Pradesh data suggests using ivermectin may prevent and potentially treat COVID-19.
“These encouraging results from IVM [ivermectin] treatments in Peru and similar positive indications from Uttar Pradesh, India, which have populations of 33 million and 229 million, respectively, offer promising models for further mass deployments of IVM, as needs may arise, for both the treatment and prevention of COVID-19,” researchers concluded.
The authors considered factors that could influence their findings, such as the effects of a social isolation mandate imposed in May 2020, the varying genetic makeup of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, differences in seropositivity rates, and population densities across the 25 states. Still, researchers stated the extent and reliability of data showed other factors did not significantly influence study outcomes.
**********************************************
Post-Vaccination Parsonage-Turner Syndrome: A Case Series
Cripes! I have something very like Parsonage-Turner Syndrome right at this moment: All sorts of painful symptoms in my right shoulder. And I have been Covid vaxxed. But the vax was years back and there is no associated muscle weakness so I suspect the resemblance is coincidental. I seem to be healing up anyway
Case reports on COVID-19 vaccination-related neurological events are appearing more frequently in the literature. TrialSite follows these case studies on adverse effects on the central and peripheral nervous system attributed to COVID-19 vaccines. The study summarized here describes six cases related to a rare neurological condition called “Parsonage-Turner syndrome (PTS)” that presented after COVID-19 vaccine shots.
Also called “brachial neuritis”, PTS is a neurological condition characterized by severe pain in the shoulder and upper arm followed by muscle weakness. It mainly affects motor nerves which are responsible for movement. These symptoms may last for months and are usually unilateral.
The condition is commonly seen in men as compared to women and although people of any age can develop the condition, the average age of onset is 41 years.
The study
The current case series published in Case Reports in Neurology in 2022 is entitled “Parsonage-Turner Syndrome Following COVID-19 Vaccination: Clinical and Electromyographic Findings in 6 Patients.”
Background
The reasons behind PTS are unclear, but reported causes include viral infections, surgery, vaccination, and trauma. One theory suggests that viral antigens in vaccines may trigger this syndrome. The condition is associated with various vaccines such as hepatitis B, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus vaccine, smallpox, and swine flu.
The authors of the case report mentioned that during the first six months of 2021, a rise in PTS diagnoses was observed. A possible reason could be COVID-19 vaccination, so they investigated it further. They suggested that a mechanism behind PTS may be an immunization-induced inflammatory reaction against brachial plexus nerve fibers. Although rare, other case studies investigating the relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and PTS have been reported.
Methodology
A retrospective analysis was performed with six patients who had acute onset of pain and weakness in their upper extremities post vaccination. These patients were referred for electrodiagnostic (EDX) investigation for their reported symptoms. EDX investigations include electromyography (EMG) and nerve conduction studies and aim to identify the cause of pain. It evaluates muscle and muscle nerve health.
Along with EDX evaluation, patients’ clinical symptoms, physical exams, MRI findings, COVID-19 vaccination history, and treatments were discussed. Other potential underlying reasons for PTS were excluded.
Findings
Four patients had received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine while two patients had received Moderna. Symptoms had arisen around 17 days after the injection in either the same arm with the injection site (five patients) or the other arm (one patient). Two patients had received the first dose and four had received the second dose before the symptom onset. EDX evaluation revealed abnormalities and further confirmed the diagnosis of PTS with localization of the disorder to the brachial plexus.
To treat the condition, patients received prednisone/prednisolone, gabapentin, and physical therapy. All of the patients showed improvement in their arm pain in follow-up evaluations. While three did not show improvement in weakness, the other three’s symptoms of muscle weakness improved.
https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/post-vaccination-parsonage-turner-syndrome-a-case-series-236a3340
*************************************************Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************************
Sunday, August 20, 2023
When corrupted science becomes a threat to population health
‘The medical-political complex tends towards suppression of science to aggrandise and enrich those in power. And, as the powerful become more successful, richer, and further intoxicated with power, the inconvenient truths of science are suppressed. When good science is suppressed, people die.’ BMJ executive editor Kamran Abbasi
Below is a section from the Australian Medical Professionals Society’s (AMPS) submission to the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts Communications Legislation Amendment (Combating Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023. The full submission can be viewed here. We encourage you to make a submission here by August 20.
AMPS believes granting ACMA, a government-appointed entity, the authority to label information contradicting official messaging as misinformation or disinformation establishes an alarming and precarious precedent. This becomes especially concerning considering the growing awareness of the effect of corporate conflicts of interest, leading to biased reporting within academia, biased media content, skewed therapeutic guidelines, and profit-driven public policies. History is replete with instances showcasing the consequences of authorities making decisions without being held accountable or having to be transparent about their actions. We must be cautious when policies, based on concealed health advice for instance, are determined by those in power without the requirement for empirical validation, effectively bestowing them the power to define what qualifies as true information.
The extensive sway exerted by pharmaceutical companies’ financial interests across medical academia and public policy presents a notable jeopardy to the credibility of healthcare and societal welfare. The involvement of pharmaceutical companies in financing research, regulation, education, and policy endeavours introduces an intrinsic susceptibility to bias, potentially undermining the impartiality of scientific investigation and policy development. This dynamic could result in an undue prioritisation of profit-centred incentives, overshadowing the imperative of prioritising patient well-being and the broader public health.
Professor Ioannidis describes what he calls a ‘misinformation mess’ where he claims much-published research is not reliable. Having to negotiate such a mess in deciding exactly what is misinformation offers no benefit to patients or decision-makers. It is a risk to public health.
The government must consider that many prominent journal editors have drawn attention to the pervasive influence of financial conflicts of interest on the reliability of research findings.
‘Financial conflicts can compromise the integrity of research,’ warns Dr. Fiona Godlee, editor-in-chief of The BMJ, stressing the potential bias that can result from industry funding.
Dr. Jerome Kassirer, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, notes in his book, How medicine’s complicity with big business can endanger your health, the ‘shocking extent of these financial enticements and explains how they encourage bias, promote dangerously misleading medical information, raise the cost of medical care, and breed distrust’, highlighting the distortion such conflicts can introduce into the scientific record.
Dr. Virginia Barbour, founding editor of PLOS Medicine, adds, disclosure alone is insufficient to address conflicts, emphasising the need for greater transparency and safeguards against undue influence.
Dr Maria Angell, long-time editor in chief of the NEJM resigned more than 20 years ago after 20 years as editor because of what she described as the rising influence of the Pharmaceutical industry. She said in her book, The truth about drug companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it, ‘Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, big pharma uses it wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US congress, the FDA, academic medical centres and the medical profession itself.’
These editorial voices collectively emphasise the imperative of robust disclosure mechanisms and stringent evaluation of financial conflicts to maintain the integrity and credibility of research in the face of commercial interests.
AMPS would argue that the demonisation of Ivermectin during the pandemic is a prime example of how financial conflicts of interests that claimed extensive evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of Ivermectin in the treatment and prevention of Covid resulted in harm.
Our submission to the TGA’s rescheduling of Ivermectin showed how statistically significant the evidence base is to support the clinical improvements in time to clinical recovery, time to viral clearance, and reduction in hospitalisation and death from this cheap, safe, fully approved, WHO essential medicine. This medication was banned by the TGA claiming safety and efficacy concerns when their own 2013 Australian Public Assessment Reports (AusPAR) demonstrated safety and instead recommended for example the use of provisionally approved very expensive Remdesivir. Remdesivir in the WHO Solidarity Trial reported in the NEJM was found to have ‘little or no effect on hospitalised patients with Covid, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation, and duration of hospital stay’. In fact, in 2020 the WHO recommended against the use of Remdesivir in Covid patients. A study in the Lancet from September 2021 found, ‘No clinical benefit was observed from the use of Remdesivir in patients who were admitted to hospital for Covid, were symptomatic for more than 7 days, and required oxygen support.’ The banning of Ivermectin in favour of antivirals such as Remdesivir appears to make little evidentiary or clinical sense.
Dr Mike Magee, former physician spokesman for Pfizer, published in 2019 his book Code Blue: Inside America’s Medical Industrial Complex. He powerfully describes the corruption of the US healthcare system.
‘Cosy relationships and generous gratuities have demonstrated a remarkable ability to corrupt even those we would instinctively put on the side of the angels, including members of the biomedical research community, deans of medical schools, directors of continuing medical education programs, officers at the NIH and FDA, and even seemingly altruistic patient advocacy organisations like the American Cancer Society.’
AMPS has also written quite extensively about our concerns regarding the conflict between the government safety and efficacy claims for the Covid vaccinations and the lack of comprehensive safety and efficacy data surrounding these novel immunisations. While the accelerated development and emergency approvals were perhaps motivated by the global health crisis, some experts caution that the available data are not yet as extensive as in standard vaccine development processes.
AMPS has written about our concerns with these vaccines especially for children. According to our Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) AusPAR long-term safety data remains a critical gap in our understanding, emphasising the importance of continued post-vaccination pharmacovigilance. Dr. Peter Doshi, an associate editor at The BMJ, underscores the need for transparent and thorough reporting of clinical trial results to ensure the public’s confidence in these vaccines.
Financial conflicts of interest can erode trust in medical research, undermine the credibility of academic institutions, restrict access to transparent data, and ultimately result in the promotion of treatments or policies that prioritise corporate gain over the impartial pursuit of knowledge and the advancement of public welfare. Stricter safeguards and transparency measures are essential to mitigate these dangers and ensure that medical academia and public policy remain steadfastly committed to unbiased and evidence-based decision-making when seeking to define what constitutes mis-or-disinformation.
We should heed Abbasi’s warning before science itself becomes a threat to overall population health, or maybe we are too late.
‘Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency — a time when it is even more important to safeguard science…’
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/08/when-science-becomes-a-threat-to-population-health
******************************************************For the COVID-19 Vaccine Injured: Time for Action
A recent letter to the editor of the Peninsula Daily News, a local press serving the Olympic Peninsula in Washington State shares some possible good news for persons struggling with injuries associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. Could real change be around the corner with the proposed bipartisan Vaccine Injury Compensation Act?
A local resident, Kathy Zelenka seeks to influence the area’s politicians to ensure they support the legislation. Why? Because “politicians need to hear that their constituents care.”
The Port Angeles, Washington State resident summarizes the challenge well: “To live in a world where people harmed by a medication are treated with mercy instead of censorship, people must make their voices heard.”
Reaching into the dark past of Germany during WW2, Zelenka cites a quote from Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran pastor, theologian and anti-Nazi dissident who is known to have said, “Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”
Ms. Zelenka educates her local politicians Derek Kilmer and Patty Murray on the new Office of Long COVID Research and Practice launched by the Biden administration and recently reported on by TrialSite. Importantly, she urges local residents to press the politicians to add vaccine injury studies to that new office, or conversely, set up an equivalent office.
She suggests the politicians read “Insult to the Injured: The Case for Modernizing Vaccine Injury Compensation” a recent piece published in Health Affairs co-authored by an advisor to vaccine makers and the director of Vaccine Injury Litigation at George Washington University Law School.
The opinion writer rightly points out that “we need each other.”
React19 is supporting this vaccine injury compensation reform. The largest COVID-19 vaccine injured group in the United States, if not the world, shared some thoughts on the proposed bipartisan legislation.
The organization, which collaborates with TrialSite, is identified as a science-based non-profit offering financial, physical and emotional support for those suffering from long-term COVID-19 vaccine adverse events globally.
Serving React19 as Legal Affairs Director, Christopher A. Dreisbach told TrialSite via email that “in an ideal world the COVID-19 vaccine-injured would be able to hold the pharmaceutical industry directly accountable through personal injury actions. Nonetheless, this bill represents the next best thing.”
As TrialSite has reported, the current COVID-19 vaccine injured population must navigate the completely broken Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). The proposed legislation among other things would move the COVID-19 vaccine injured to the at least somewhat functional Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
According to React19’s counsel:
“By transitioning the COVID-19 vaccines to the VICP, this bill represents the comprehensive reform the vaccine-injured desperately deserve. We commend Representative Doggett and Representative Smucker for their bipartisan effort - an unfortunately rare occurrence in today’s highly polarized political environment.”
React19 has a message for politicians that might try to water down, dilute the proposed legislation:
“Incremental CICP reforms, proposed by other lawmakers, will not make a meaningful difference to the COVID-19 vaccine-injured. That program is simply too broken to fix. This bill is a welcome departure from such a short-cited approach.”
Given that over 230 million people are now considered fully vaccinated, TrialSite estimates that anywhere from half-a-million to just over 2 million people are in dire need of care, suffering with life changing injuries caused by the COVID-19 vaccines.
Many of these people are barely getting by, and the medical establishment hasn’t embraced vaccine injures as key opinion leaders in the National Institutes of Health, Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have yet to step forward and open up the dialogue publicly.
It’s time they do so.
https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/for-the-covid-19-vaccine-injured-time-for-action-26b77ba5
*************************************************Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************************
Saturday, August 19, 2023
Another Sabbath thought
Did you know that, according to Genesis chapter 1 God did NOT create the heavens and the earth? What's that? You say. What the heck am I talking about
What I am talking about is what the original Hebrew Bible says, not what the King James version or some other translation says.
You see, the original Hebrew Bible is very exact when it refers to God. It uses a specific name for him: "Yahveh" (or Jehovah in English). I have a copy of the Hebrew Bible so does it anywhere in Genesis 1 mention the Tetragramaton (Divine name in Hebrew)?
It does not. The Tetragrammation is quite a short word, whereas Elohim is quite a long word. You can't miss the difference. What Genesis 1.1 to 1:3 says is that the Heavens and Earth were created by "Elohim", which in Hebrew means "gods", any gods. Could be pagan gods. Don't blame me. That's what it says.
So what is going on? Why is Genesis 1.1 to 1:3 so different from the rest of the Torah? It's because that passage is what scholars politely call an interpolation, in plain words a pious fraud. It was not there when the original Torah was written. It is a late addition, presumably put there by some priests.
The original creation story starts from Genesis 2:4. And guess who gets a mention there straight away? Yahveh. The divine name now appears.
So Genesis 1.1 to 1:3 is a document from somewhere much later than the rest of the Torah. It dates from a time when Israelite priests had ceased using the divine name out of a fear of taking it in vain. They used "Elohim" instead, as a respectful plural. It is quite a late document.
So Why? Why did the priests do that? It's propaganda. The Israelites have always had to exist among pagans and pagans all regard the Sun as a great god. So they dedicate the first day of the week to him. So it has always been a battle for Israelites to defend their unique god.
And one way they did that from early on was to defy custom and have their Holy day on the 7th day, not the 1st. But that needed defending to the Israelite public. They had to have a reason for celebrating the "wrong" day. So in desperation the priests invented a story about God resting on the 7th day of creation. Keeping Saturday holy was simply following God's example. Neat, eh?
I give a fuller account of the above matters here:
https://ntwords.blogspot.com/2017/03/#804425755551654534
**********************************************
Friday, August 18, 2023
Australian Scientists Find Disturbing Patterns: COVID-19 Vaccines Correspond with Excess Deaths
Recently, Andre Madry, Ph.D., a Sydney, Australia-based signal processing and data analysis scientist, investigated excess mortality in Australia, seeking to better understand when any obvious warning signs were in fact apparent. A physicist by training, Madry was in touch with TrialSite to disseminate his recent research findings uploaded to ResearchGate. The findings are highly disturbing and while they are yet to be published in a scientific journal nor peer-reviewed, the data need to be taken seriously. The head-in-the-sand approach to excess mortality taken by some public health agencies doesn’t help establish greater trust, which is likely at an all time low since the pandemic.
Also reviewing the recent paper uploaded to ResearchGate is an Australian journalist, Rebekah Barnett. She reports on what she describes as an “in-depth analysis of Queensland mortality data” finding the surge in deaths after the mass COVID-19 primary series rollout.
TrialSite reported on surges in COVID-19 mortality after the mass vaccination event which seemed to have contradicted expected outcomes.
By April of last year in “Heavily Vaxxed Australia: First 3.5 months of 2022 has Double the COVID-19 Deaths from 2020-2021 Combined,” TrialSite reported on the disturbing surge of COVID-19 deaths after the mass COVID-19 vaccination roll out Down Under.
This is a growing topic as reported in this media. Just in March of this year in “Australian Excess Deaths Surge While COVID-19 Deaths Down—Could there be a Link to COVID-19 Vaccination?”, TrialSite points to Australian Bureau of Statistics released “Provisional Mortality Statistics,” a report revieing provisional deaths data as part of an ongoing effort to measure changes in patterns of mortality. This latest period is for the entire year of 2022. The agency Down Under reports there were 190,394 deaths that occurred by December 31, 2022, representing 25,235 (15.3%) excess over a historical average.
Now, Madry applies his quantitative acumen to the problem of excess deaths in Australia. Although the paper is not scientifically peer-reviewed (meaning it should not be cited as evidence till its published and reviewed by a scientific body) his report for the Australian Medical Professionals Society (AMPS) needs to be taken seriously.
The Australian Scientist purchased custom data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) segmented and stratified by age and years. Emphasizing the elderly cohort (aged 60 and above) the pragmatic, real-world emphasizing scientists understood this cohort represented the highest risk for death Down Under.
The study’s output reveals a surge in all-cause mortality across all age cohorts, with the highest rates, perhaps not surprisingly, in the age 80 years and above group. The Australian journalist Rebekah Barnett points out that Madry analysis not only reveals “the elderly dying a year or two early after exposure to a nasty virus” but emphasizes actual declining life expectancy in real time starting around March 2021. What’s that date known for? Of course, the mass COVID-19 vaccination program rollout.
Drilling into the State of Queensland mortality data, the analysis probes mortality trends across three data sets including 1) No Covid, no vaccinations in 2020; 2) No Covid, almost full population vaccination coverage (2021) and 3) Covid and almost full population vaccination coverage (2022).
The expert data analyst and signal processing specialist finds a clear surge in all-cause mortality among the elderly (age 60 and up) temporally corresponding with the mass primarily mRNA COVID-19 vaccine program execution starting by March 2021.
As summarized by Ms. Barnett in her Substack Dystopian Down Under, another surge occurs in Queensland with the onset of the Omicron wave leading to COVID-19 deaths. Madry points to the confounding due to the concurrent saturation of primary series and booster mass vaccination effort.
But is there a temporal association of death and COVID-19 vaccine rollout?
Yes, there is, according to Madry. Down Under journalist Barnett calls the temporal link between COVID-19 vaccination and all-cause mortality “striking.”
Officially, the reporter reminds all that the Australian government agency charged with protecting the public against medicines and vaccines, the Therapeutic Goods Association (TGA) acknowledges formally only 14 deaths linked to the jabs. Yet the surge’s timing raises real alarm.
Madry shared with the journalist that a willingness of other research groups, such as The Actuaries Institute and their COVID Mortality Working Group to “swallow the TGA’s official figure whole without any further analysis” represents not only a major shortcoming but even a potential red flag for some kind of mass head in the sand moment.
No matter how one slices and dices the Australian data, deaths associated with COVID-19 after mass vaccination raise disturbing questions that TrialSite posed over a year ago. Now an Australian scientist reveals in graphic detail a surge in all-cause mortality right about the time that mass COVID-19 vaccination commenced. Yes, this data must be published and scrutinized in depth, but TrialSite also suggests, yes this is a problem that cannot be ignored.
****************************************************
The collateral damage of lockdowns on children is still emerging
There has been plenty of evidence published over the past three years of the severe effects on children’s education and wellbeing of closing schools during Covid lockdowns, but a new study by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) and University College London (UCL) has a slightly different emphasis – linking children’s social and emotional development with the employment situation of their parents.
Overall, it found that 47 per cent of parents reported that their children’s social and emotional skills had declined during the pandemic – with just a sixth of parents reporting that there had been an improvement. The effect was more severe along younger children – 52 per cent of children of 4-7 year olds reported a decline in social and emotional skills, compared with 42 per cent among 12-15 year olds.
Children were more likely to be affected if their parents’ employment situation changed
However, in contrast to other studies, this one did not find that children from disadvantaged backgrounds suffered more – in fact, the effect seemed to be least among children whose parents are in the lowest income quintile, and greatest among those in the 4thincome quintile. The survey relied on parents’ replies, however, rather than independent assessments, so there may be an element of different levels of expectation in children’s development.
What the study did find, on the other hand, was that children were more likely to be affected if their parents’ employment situation changed. This was particularly the case even if their parents had been furloughed, and so were being kept afloat financially. The difference was not all that great, however – social and emotional skills were reported to have fallen in 51 per cent of children whose parents had been furloughed, compared with 45 per cent of children whose parents had not been furloughed.
A lot of research and comment on children’s wellbeing during Covid has focused on the closure of schools. But as this study hints there is another side to the subject: what was happening in the home while children were confined there. It ought not to be a surprise if children fared worse in homes where parents were suffering a significant amount of stress for their employment and financial situation.
There are still ministers and advisers involved in the Covid response who think Covid lockdowns were a success – or who, like Matt Hancock, think we should have faster and more severe lockdowns in future. As the IFS/UCL study shows, the evidence on the collateral damage of lockdowns is still being produced.
**************************************************
Hybrid Immunity Surpasses Vaccination for COVID-19 Protection Against Omicron
Researchers from the Center for Infectious Disease Control, National institute for Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands led by Mirjam J. Knol, a senior Epidemiologist at the Dutch Center of Infectious Disease Control, investigated natural (pre-existing infection-based) immunity to SARS-Cov-2, the virus behind COVID-19.
The Dutch researchers report in the peer-reviewed Nature Communications an increasing proportion of the population became immune to COVID-19 via vaccination and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, i.e., hybrid immunity, possibly affecting the risk of new infection.
The goal of this investigation was to generate an estimation of the protective effect of previous infections and vaccinations on SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection. Tapping into data between January 10, 2022 and September 1, 2022 involving 43,257 adult participants in a prospective community-based cohort study in the Netherlands, the team’s output reveals that for participants with 2, 3 or 4 prior immunizing events (vaccination or previous infection), hybrid immunity is more protective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron than vaccine-induced immunity, up to at least 30 weeks after the last immunizing event.
The authors led by corresponding member Knol report variance in risk of infection are partly explained by differences in anti-Spike RBD (S) antibody concentration, which is associated with risk of infection in a dose-response manner.
Among participants with hybrid immunity, with one previous pre-Omicron infection, the authors fail to observe a relevant difference in risk of Omicron infection by sequence of vaccination(s) and infection. Furthermore, more immunizing events increase the protection against infection, however, there’s a limit: not above the level of the first weeks after the previous event.
Importantly, the authors note that based on mass vaccination concerns and so called “narrow immunity” or ‘original antigenic sin’ or immunological imprinting, the Dutch team reports, “We did not find evidence of a higher risk of Omicron infection in participants with hybrid immunity with a vaccination as first immunizing event compared to infection as first immunizing event.”
The authors wrap up that their “study shows that hybrid immunity confers better protection against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection than vaccine-induced immunity. This effect does not seem dependent on the sequence or number of immunizing events. It should be kept in mind that experiencing a SARS-CoV-2 infection carries significant risks, including severe COVID-19, post-covid syndrome and transmission to vulnerable people.”
*************************************************
Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************************
Thursday, August 17, 2023
Stuck in a (Covid) time warp: End of the pandemic? Or just Intermission?
Supposedly, the pandemic is over. The World Health Organisation (WHO) says it ended on 5 May. Yet the persecution of the unvaccinated continues.
Dazelle Peters, only 16 years old, has been denied a lung transplant. She suffers from an auto-immune condition and such people were excluded from the Covid vaccine trials so there is no data to support her immunisation. Indeed, at least two vaccine deaths in Australia occurred in healthy people with auto-immune conditions that were fatally exacerbated – Natalie Boyce who had antiphospholipid syndrome died after a Moderna vaccine and Roberto Garin who had cardiac sarcoidosis died after a Pfizer vaccine.
The hospital’s policy is not to perform transplants on unvaccinated people and Dazelle says she was told that if she didn’t get the jabs and caught the virus she would be a ‘major threat to everyone (in the hospital) who has done the right thing’.
Yet a report from the University of Freiburg by Reeg et al. shows ‘an impaired T cell response in solid organ transfers (SOT) following Sars-CoV-2 vaccination, with a potentially less robust development, compared to natural infection.’
Vicky Derderian, a slim 46-year-old mother of two, is trying to raise the money to get a heart transplant in India because she is being refused one in Australia. Vicky has been exempted by Australia’s Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation because she already has heart scarring from myocarditis but that’s not good enough for the Alfred Hospital in Melbourne which is denying her a transplant.
Never mind that a peer-reviewed Swiss study published on 20 July shows that 1-in-35 people who received the Moderna Covid booster had detectable heart injuries and women were almost five times as likely to be injured. The group tested was a healthy cohort with few preexisting heart problems and an average age of 37. How much worse would it be for Vicky?
Another study released this month by Marchand et al. showed that ‘Covid-19 vaccination may be associated with a small increase in cardiac-related mortality’. A study that came out in June from the prestigious US Cleveland Clinic shows that, ‘The risk of Covid-19 was lower in the “not up-to-date” group as compared to the “up-to-date” group.’ Put the two together and they show that a Covid jab makes you more likely to get Covid and more likely to die of heart trouble.
Unvaccinated people are encouraged to donate organs to others even though they are denied transplants. The wife of Garnet Harper, a 35-year-old Canadian man who died last month after he was denied a kidney transplant because he was unvaccinated was asked to donate his organs to a vaccinated person. She says the woman who made the request had no idea her husband was dying because he had been refused a transplant. Canadians opposed to persecuting the unvaccinated are calling on all Canadians to refuse to donate organs until the government ends its fatal discrimination.
But that’s not the end of the punishment in Australia. In South Australia, New South Wales and Queensland, healthcare workers are still not allowed to work unless they get vaccinated. (They are not the only ones.) In NSW, a case against vaccine mandates was lost in 2021, in Queensland, a case was heard in 2022 but no ruling has been delivered in more than 12 months. In South Australia, healthcare workers took their case to the employment tribunal in late June.
That was after the secretary of the federal Department of Health, Professor Brendan Murphy said in a parliamentary committee on 1 June, that in his view, as a clinician rather than as a public servant, Covid vaccine mandates were no longer justified.
But South Australia’s Chief Health Officer Nicola Spurrier – famous for claiming you could catch Covid from a football or a pizza box – is not for turning. Her indifference to evidence is breathtaking. The South Australian health department was forced to reveal in response to a freedom of information request from Liberal Senator Alex Antic that cardiac presentations in 18 to 44-year-old people in South Australia which remained steady at 1,100 per month from January 2018 to June 2021, drastically spiked from July 2021 to November 2021 when vaccines were rolled out to that age group, peaking at 2,172 presentations, with another spike in February when boosters were mandated. She doesn’t care. The laid-off workers, the heroes who faced Covid in 2020, are zero today.
Instead, the states that still ban unvaccinated staff are in a bidding war to attract vaccinated staff from interstate and abroad. They face dramatic shortfalls due to the thousands who have been laid off, while vaccinated workers and the general public have increased illnesses. In 2023, excess mortality is still running at 12 per cent above the baseline average.
Meanwhile, almost a thousand people have joined a class action suing the head of the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and Professor Murphy for negligence or misfeasance in approving the vaccines which resulted in personal injury or the death of a loved one. The case which is being funded through donations is still open to be joined and will be heard next year.
The TGA’s own database shows that there have been 996 deaths reported which it is suspected were caused by the vaccine and 139,052 reports of injury. That’s one-third of all deaths reported to the TGA since the vaccines were rolled out and three-quarters of all injuries.
Meanwhile, despite promising a royal commission into the pandemic before coming to office, Labor refused to support a motion in the Senate this week by Senator Ralph Babet of the United Australia Party, to get one underway. The Liberals helped Labor out by offering pairs so that the motion was narrowly defeated. The guilty protecting each other?
Why do state and federal governments refuse to acknowledge what even Bill Gates admitted in January, that Covid jabs are ‘not infection-blocking, they’re not broad, so when new variants come up you lose protection, and they have very short duration, particularly in the people who matter who are old people’. Is it because they have entered into a partnership with Moderna giving them a massive conflict of interest? Is it because the WHO is already predicting with its spooky clairvoyance that the next pandemic bonanza is on the way? Perhaps the pandemic isn’t over, perhaps this is just intermission.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/08/stuck-in-a-covid-time-warp
************************************Heart Scarring Observed in Children Months After COVID-19 Vaccination: Study
Some children who experienced heart inflammation after COVID-19 vaccination had scarring on their hearts months later, a new long-term study found.
Researchers followed a group of 40 patients aged 12 to 18 for up to one year after the children were diagnosed with myocarditis, or heart inflammation, following vaccination with one of the messenger RNA shots from Pfizer or Moderna. They performed a series of tests, including echocardiograms.
Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, or cardiac MRIs, was performed on 39 of the 40 patients. Abnormal results came in for 26 of those who were imaged, including 19 who had late gadolinium enhancement, or signs of scarring.
The patients with abnormal results returned for follow-up cardiac MRIs at least five months after the initial tests and 15, or 58 percent, had residual late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). The one patient without an initial scan also had mild late gadolinium enhancement when scanned during a follow-up visit.
“Persistence of LGE in a significant subset of patients with up to 1 year of follow-up was observed,” Dr. Yiu-fai Cheung, with Hong Kong Children’s Hospital, and the other researchers wrote.
They said that the implications of the persistence remain unclear, but that given it is an indicator of subclinical heart dysfunction and scarring, “there exists a potential long-term effect on exercise capacity and cardiac functional reserve during stress.”
The study was published by Circulation. Authors reported no funding or disclosures.
Dr. Peter McCullough, an American cardiologist and president of the McCullough Foundation, said that the new data is consistent with what cardiologists are seeing in clinical practice.
“Serious cases of COVID-19 vaccine induced myocarditis are not resolved by cardiac MRI at one year of followup in the majority of cases. At some point, we must assume that late gadolinium enhancement represents a scar or permanent damage,” Dr. McCullough, who was not involved in the research, told The Epoch Times via email.
“COVID-19 vaccines should be pulled from the market immediately until further notice. Large scale research programs should be commissioned immediately on subclinical and clinical COVID-19 vaccine induced myocarditis with initial aims at risk stratification and mitigation for cardiac arrest,” he added.
Dr. Anish Koka, another American cardiologist who was not involved in the study, said that the persistent LGE signifies a scar that replaced the initially inflamed heart muscle.
“The good news is that the amount of scar is small. The bad news is that there is scar,” Dr. Koka wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Dr. Koka said that the level of scarring indicates there would likely not be a long-term impact, but that even small levels of scarring could be a foundation for future arrhythmias, with exercise serving as a trigger.
“All these kids (even those without scar) would need exercise stress tests at 6 months to attempt to prognosticate this,” Dr. Koka said.
Pfizer and Moderna did not respond to requests for comment on the study on myocarditis, a known side effect of both of the companies’ COVID-19 vaccines.
Myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination was first detected in early 2021, and an increasing number of studies have undercut claims from officials in the United States that the heart inflammation is mild and resolves without treatment.
A study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), published in 2022, reported that among patients with follow-up cardiac MRIs, 54 percent had at least one abnormal finding, such as scarring.
The study relied on surveys from health care providers who examined the patients.
The providers later told the CDC that five to 13 months after the initial diagnosis, 14 percent of patients were still not cleared for all physical activity, and that multiple patients still had abnormal cardiac MRI findings. And in a separate set of surveys, many patients reported experiencing one or more symptoms beyond one year.
Also in 2022, Rhode Island doctors reported that eight of nine patients who were scanned a median of 94 days after initial diagnosis had persistent LGE, while U.S. researchers reported in 2023 that three of seven patients who were imaged a median of 107 days after diagnosis had persistent LGE.
Myocarditis can cause deaths, including sudden deaths, and deaths from myocarditis after vaccination have been confirmed in a number of countries, including South Korea, the United States, and Germany.
South Korean researchers reported in June that vaccine-induced myocarditis caused eight sudden deaths, all in people aged 45 or younger, and a new meta-analysis found COVID-19 vaccination was linked with an increased risk of cardiac-related death.
Vaccine-induced myocarditis primarily affects young people, particularly young males.
Some critics say that all people, or certain people, don’t need a vaccine, noting the risks as well as the high percentages of people who have been vaccinated, infected, or both.
The CDC still recommends people of all ages receive a COVID-19 vaccine, despite the risk of heart inflammation and other side effects and even as the effectiveness of the vaccines has become worse. In its most recent benefit-risk assessment, the CDC estimated that a million doses in children aged 12 to 17 would prevent up to 136 hospitalizations and one death. According to previous estimates from the CDC, a million second doses would lead to 48 cases of myocarditis in children aged 12 to 15 and 84 cases in children aged 16 or 17.
*************************************************
Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
