YUCK!
FYI
IPAK 2019 Vaxxed/Unvaxxed Study just released.
” IPAK 2019 Vaxxed vs Unvaxxed Study”:https://informedchoicewa.org/education/its-here-the-vaxxed-vs-unvaxxed-study/
That so-called study is not credible, and it’s source is a well-known anti-vaccine organization. No further comment, per administrator request.
https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum
Hi everyone, as mentioned, I definitely don’t want to promote or defend either of the two sides on the vaccine argument, and I’m sure everyone already has their own opinion. But please avoid the subject on this forum.
It appears what that “IPAK 2019 Vaxxed vs Unvaxxed Study” actually discovered was that parents that skip vaccinations also skip doctors visits.
Ew! People !!!
This page was cited in the NPR article I linked above.
It explains the little dip and rise seen on the charts around Thanksgiving, which caused VP Pence to tell the CDC things were improving.
https://covidtracking.com/blog/daily-covid-19-data-is-about-to-get-weird [Written around Thanksgiving Day]
Further down on that long page, this:
So……we got that to look forward to……
And that’s what we call an airtight analysis…
FYI
Tested Positive?? Be Sure to Ask This Question!
Excerpt:
“The lockdowns are based on surging “cases” which are based on positive PCR test results.”
“When it comes to COVID, the presence of viral particles picked up by the PCR technique does not and has not been quantitatively linked to an active “symptomatic” infection. It simply cannot be so, because infection threshold as a result of viral load is different for each patient. It turns out, if you “cycle” over around 25 times, the false positivity of COVID infection starts getting very high.”
It’s really hilarious when people start telling a law school graduate what the law says and doesn’t say. Especially when the law is not applicable to the point being made, that universities have long tended to be bastions of free speech. No one claimed (the straw man argument) that colleges have a legal obligation to be that way. But they have almost always tended to be that way and have even trumpeted their free speech practices as an ideal; but when the things the students recently were saying didn’t fit the P.C. viewpoint, Johns Hopkins U. showed some hypocrisy.
On another note, today I read a good article in Imprimis by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya M.D., Prof. of Medicine at Stanford.
A Sensible and Compassionate Anti-COVID Strategy
An brief excerpt:
I should say something in conclusion about the idea of herd immunity, which some people mischaracterize as a strategy of letting people die. First, herd immunity is not a strategy—it is a biological fact that applies to most infectious diseases. Even when we come up with a vaccine, we will be relying on herd immunity as an end-point for this epidemic. The vaccine will help, but herd immunity is what will bring it to an end. And second, our strategy is not to let people die, but to protect the vulnerable. We know the people who are vulnerable, and we know the people who are not vulnerable. To continue to act as if we do not know these things makes no sense.
71k5:FYI
Tested Positive?? Be Sure to Ask This Question!
Excerpt:
“The lockdowns are based on surging “cases” which are based on positive PCR test results.”
“When it comes to COVID, the presence of viral particles picked up by the PCR technique does not and has not been quantitatively linked to an active “symptomatic” infection. It simply cannot be so, because infection threshold as a result of viral load is different for each patient. It turns out, if you “cycle” over around 25 times, the false positivity of COVID infection starts getting very high.”
That link was an interesting read. Glad you posted it.
MtnDon, hank, Northern Harrier. Forgive my ineptitude. I cannot figure out how to link a very interesting article. It is a Nov.30 article in Neuroscience News entitled How Covid-19 Reaches The Brain. I think you guys might enjoy.
David
Is there an article explaining how common sense reaches the brain? :laughing:
On another note, today I read a good article in Imprimis by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya M.D., Prof. of Medicine at Stanford.
A Sensible and Compassionate Anti-COVID Strategy
A good article, but I think thousands of hospital employees would disagree with this assertion from the author:
…The initial rationale for lockdowns was that slowing the spread of the disease would prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. It became clear before long that this was not a worry: in the U.S. and in most of the world, hospitals were never at risk of being overwhelmed…
Rexlion:On another note, today I read a good article in Imprimis by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya M.D., Prof. of Medicine at Stanford.
A Sensible and Compassionate Anti-COVID StrategyA good article, but I think thousands of hospital employees would disagree with this assertion from the author:
…The initial rationale for lockdowns was that slowing the spread of the disease would prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. It became clear before long that this was not a worry: in the U.S. and in most of the world, hospitals were never at risk of being overwhelmed…
Thousands more would also disagree with the article’s assertion that there is a group in the population that is not vulnerable to Covid-19. Even those who don’t die often have significant long-term health problems as a result of being infected with the virus. If you have other health conditions, that can be severely disabling.