The COVID-19 Thread

[The_Mask]

As I am the one starting this thread I, respectfully, ask that we try to keep the discussion as scientific as possible. But feel free to get dirty if the situation demands it.

In any case... I bumped into *this*, today:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epd ... 13294?s=09

(my take: SARS‐CoV‐2 spike mRNA vaccine sequences circulate in blood up to 28 days after COVID‐19 vaccination)

[Watser]

Fake and gay.

[Dead]

One of the more memorable moments of the Covid debacle was Ron Unz pushing the vax after writing a whole series on the origins of the hysteria.

[fork]

It' getting better and better.

[The_Mask]

[The_Mask]

Past SARS-CoV-2 infection protection against re-infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis - The Lancet

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanc ... 5/fulltext

(I'm sorry to straight-up dump a whole research document here, but if you're seriously interested in your own health and COVID-19, you'll read this)

Please note the funding of this research project, and its findings, as well.

[aeternalis]

Past SARS-CoV-2 infection protection against re-infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis - The Lancet

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanc ... 5/fulltext

(I'm sorry to straight-up dump a whole research document here, but if you're seriously interested in your own health and COVID-19, you'll read this)

Please note the funding of this research project, and its findings, as well.

Thanks Mask. This analysis almost appears to not matter now, because of the frequent new Omicron "subvariant" strains, but in fact would seem to demonstrate to me that the general trend of "natural infection-conferred protection >= vaccine (or boosterino) protection" is going to continuously hold, provided one's immune system is healthy enough to cope with that initial infection.

I'm personally quite worried about the future here, because many people I know and care about were vaxxed with the initial series.

[The_Mask]

Thanks Mask.

No problem.

[The_Mask]

European Periodic Safety Update Report Confirms Vaccine Damage Shown in Pfizer’s Limited 90-Day Post Marketing Document

https://dailyclout.io/european-periodic ... -document/

Now with extremely large numbers, we have to ask why working-age women are being attacked across the Western world.


In a very large data set from the European Union covering the first 6 months of the rollout of the Pfizer vaccine in European countries, serious adverse events and deaths with a preponderance of effects on working-age women were confirmed, similar to that already reported in the Pfizer documents by the Daily Clout/WarRoom volunteers.

Reported initially by investigative journalist Sonia Elijah on her substack after a FOIA enabled the first-ever safety report from the European Union (PSUR#1) to be released.

This 286-page document describes the initial 6 months of data across European countries. The contents are disturbing and some of the findings are even more stunning, given that we have spent the last year decoding the 90-day follow-up by Pfizer in their Post Marketing Experience document 5.3.6, and have developed a thick skin.

I would encourage everyone to read Sonia Elijah’s substack posting, as she goes into great detail about the reason for the document and the framework of what it is supposed to cover. However, I will concentrate on the findings that most strike me while reading through the contents.



The PSUR is a much larger review of data reported in Europe during the first six months of the rollout of Comirnaty, the commercially approved version of BNT162b2, which is not available in the USA. Not only does it cover many countries, but only studies the safety signals in patients receiving the Pfizer vaccine, and does not include a similar number who received either Moderna or AstraZeneca products.

Consistently, throughout the WarRoom/DailyClout Pfizer document investigations, when writing our system micro-reports, we have found adverse events in women to outnumber men by a factor of around three to one.

But this NEW report reveals even more disturbing patterns of findings that will take us right back to the original documents to see if the same things were present in the initial Pfizer document.

Who reports adverse events anyway?
As with any of these reports, we have to take into account issues of under-reporting of adverse events. When I had a severe adverse event within 24 hours of receiving a booster ‘clot shot’ which did not resolve for upwards of 3 weeks, I had never heard of VAERS (vaccine adverse events reporting system) and would not know how to use it anyway. Also, male chauvinism, wanting to appear strong (to myself) I was stoic in keeping myself to myself.

The VAERS system was supposed to make reporting adverse events easy, and with the addition of v-safe (a very superficial ‘pain or redness of the injection site’ questionnaire), incomplete data was obviously going to be collected.

As a product of The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Lazarus report (2010) stated that “Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)”



Other models conservatively estimate a 25% under-reporting rate. In Europe and Australasia, they have different reporting systems, some are purely reliant on primary health care doctors submitting a ‘yellow card’, or similar report. Either way, these events are always underestimated.

The PSUR#1 report contains some eye-watering statistics, particularly due to the large population that was vaccinated in the EU during the first 6 months of the rollout.

There were:

• 1.17 million adverse events with 5,115 deaths
  ⅓ of all Adverse Events (AEs) were serious
  The commonest age range for these was for working-age adults (31-50 years)
  Nearly half of all deaths plus 86% of AEs were amongst healthy people, in other words, those with NO CO-MORDBIDITIES
  Nearly half of the outcomes remained ‘unresolved’
  23% did not recover
  Women suffered AEs at a rate of 3:1 over men

What evidence is there that these adverse events and deaths affect working age groups?
Figure 3 Page 37



The RED bands represent patients who had co-morbidities (like heart disease or diabetes) and the GREEN bands represent healthy populations. You would always expect people with underlying conditions to succumb to illness easier than healthy folk, but here the light band is way higher than the dark band in the 31-50 year group.

People WITHOUT co-morbidities show up in a large proportion of the EU data
Figure 8 Page 45



In this large group of previously healthy people, in the cases reported, they comprised

46% of deaths, (2331:2758)

Not recovered or resolved in 79%, (60618:16270)

Recovered but with sequelae (that means that there was a residual abnormality/symptom or sign) in 73%, (2366:912)

92% of the unknown outcomes (64485:5783)

Why is there a preponderance of effects on women?
Figure 9 Page 42



It does not seem to matter whether you have co-morbidities, especially if you were healthy BEFORE the shots as if you are a woman you have a marked increased risk of suffering a long-term outcome, by this data.

Who leads the World tables in medication errors?
Table 13 Page 67



Who would have thought it? The leading nation of the FREE WORLD with the most expensive healthcare is the good ol’ US of A.

Here are some of the types of errors, some of which were deemed fatal, that are described on page 68.







All of these errors should not take place in a controlled environment like a clinic administering vaccines. Good Distribution Practice is also mandatory in the European Union and Pfizer tried to circumvent the laws when they drew up contracts with the EU (see my report on Daily Clout)

CONCLUSIONS
In a very large data set from the European Union covering the first 6 months of the rollout of the Pfizer vaccine in European countries, serious adverse events and deaths with a preponderance of effects on working-age women were confirmed, similar to that already reported in the Pfizer documents by the Daily Clout/WarRoom volunteers

[aeternalis]

we have found adverse events in women to outnumber men by a factor of around three to one.

It does not seem to matter whether you have co-morbidities, especially if you were healthy BEFORE the shots as if you are a woman you have a marked increased risk of suffering a long-term outcome, by this data.

Absolutely unconscionable. A high crime against humanity.

[Tweed]

Covid raped my sinuses and it's still raping them. My nose has been fucked since early December of last year.

[Dead]

Allegedly many Iranian officials died from covid in 2020. If this were assumed true, something dangerous but not virulent has been conflated with the repurposed flu, causing widespread panic through terror-inducing imagery without the statistics to justify the panic. I know people who lost their sense of taste or smell for over a year. It appears there is some sort of fuckery related to whatever this set of symptoms is, and the primary function of political commentators who encourage the attitude of asserting there is absolutely nothing noteworthy about these symptoms seems to be to create easily discreditable positions to be used against diverse groups of people who support medical freedom and/or suspect conspiracies involving the medical industry.

[MadPreacher]

Natural immunity, or postinfection immunity, provided 76 percent protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations while Omicron was the dominant virus strain in the country, the researchers found. A primary series of the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine, in people without a prior infection, provided just 39 percent protection.

Natural immunity also lasted longer at higher levels than both primary series of vaccination and vaccination with a messenger RNA booster on top of a primary series, according to the study. During Omicron predominance, natural immunity against hospitalization was 74 percent 150 or more days after infection. A primary series without prior infection remained just 39 percent protective beyond 149 days, while three doses started at 81 percent protection but waned to just 31 percent after 150 or more days following the third dose.

Link

Something that we already know is finally being admitted by the Centers of Disgusting Criminals.

[The_Mask]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-orig ... k-807b7b0a

(This is the first time a mainstream left-leaning publication is admitting the "Wuhan lab leak theory" is the most likely theory for the past 2 years of this shit-show)

Lab Leak Most Likely Origin of Covid-19 Pandemic, Energy Department Now Says
U.S. agency’s revised assessment is based on new intelligence

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Energy Department has concluded that the Covid pandemic most likely arose from a laboratory leak, according to a classified intelligence report recently provided to the White House and key members of Congress.

The shift by the Energy Department, which previously was undecided on how the virus emerged, is noted in an update to a 2021 document by Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines’s office.

The new report highlights how different parts of the intelligence community have arrived at disparate judgments about the pandemic’s origin. The Energy Department now joins the Federal Bureau of Investigation in saying the virus likely spread via a mishap at a Chinese laboratory. Four other agencies, along with a national intelligence panel, still judge that it was likely the result of a natural transmission, and two are undecided.

The Energy Department’s conclusion is the result of new intelligence and is significant because the agency has considerable scientific expertise and oversees a network of U.S. national laboratories, some of which conduct advanced biological research.

The Energy Department made its judgment with “low confidence,” according to people who have read the classified report.

The FBI previously came to the conclusion that the pandemic was likely the result of a lab leak in 2021 with “moderate confidence” and still holds to this view.


A nurse cared for a patient at a California intensive-care unit in May 2020 as Covid-19 continued to spread across the U.S.
PHOTO: ALLISON ZAUCHA FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

The FBI employs a cadre of microbiologists, immunologists and other scientists and is supported by the National Bioforensic Analysis Center, which was established at Fort Detrick, Md., in 2004 to analyze anthrax and other possible biological threats.

U.S. officials declined to give details on the fresh intelligence and analysis that led the Energy Department to change its position. They added that while the Energy Department and the FBI each say an unintended lab leak is most likely, they arrived at those conclusions for different reasons.

The updated document underscores how intelligence officials are still putting together the pieces on how Covid-19 emerged. More than one million Americans have died in the pandemic that began more than three years ago.


A campus of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, in 2020.
PHOTO: HECTOR RETAMAL/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

The National Intelligence Council, which conducts long-term strategic analysis, and four agencies, which officials declined to identify, still assess with “low confidence” that the virus came about through natural transmission from an infected animal, according to the updated report.

The Central Intelligence Agency and another agency that officials wouldn’t name remain undecided between the lab-leak and natural-transmission theories, the people who have read the classified report said.

Despite the agencies’ differing analyses, the update reaffirmed an existing consensus between them that Covid-19 wasn’t the result of a Chinese biological-weapons program, the people who have read the classified report said.

A senior U.S. intelligence official confirmed that the intelligence community had conducted the update, whose existence hasn’t previously been reported. This official added that it was done in light of new intelligence, further study of academic literature and consultation with experts outside government.

The update, which is less than five pages, wasn’t requested by Congress. But lawmakers, particularly House and Senate Republicans, are pursuing their own investigations into the origins of the pandemic and are pressing the Biden administration and the intelligence community for more information.


The updated report was completed by Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines’s office earlier this year.
PHOTO: JOSE LUIS MAGANA/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Officials didn’t say if an unclassified version of the update would be issued.

U.S. national-security adviser Jake Sullivan declined to confirm or deny the Journal’s reporting in an appearance Sunday on CNN. He said President Biden had repeatedly directed every part of the intelligence community to invest in trying to discern as much as possible about the origins of the pandemic.

“President Biden specifically requested that the national labs, which are part of the Energy Department, be brought into this assessment because he wants to put every tool at use to be able to figure out what happened here,” Mr. Sullivan said.

There are a “variety of views in the intelligence community,” Mr. Sullivan added. “A number of them have said they just don’t have enough information.”

Asked about the Energy Department’s assessment, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R., Alaska) said Sunday on NBC that Congress needed to hold extensive hearings concerning the origins of the pandemic, adding that China has sought to intimidate other countries from questioning whether the virus emerged naturally. “This is a country that has no problem coming out and lying to the world,” he said.

The Covid-19 virus first circulated in Wuhan, China, no later than November 2019, according to the U.S. 2021 intelligence report. The pandemic’s origin has been the subject of vigorous debate among academics, intelligence experts and lawmakers.

The emergence of the pandemic heightened tensions between the U.S. and China, which U.S. officials alleged was withholding information about the outbreak. It also led to a spirited and at times partisan debate in the U.S. about its origin. At first, the dominant view was that the virus likely arose naturally when the virus leapt from an animal to a human, as had happened in the past. But as time elapsed and no animal host was found, there has been greater focus on coronavirus research in Wuhan and the potential for an accidental laboratory leak.

David Relman, a Stanford University microbiologist who has argued for a dispassionate investigation into the pandemic’s beginnings, welcomed word of the updated findings.

“Kudos to those who are willing to set aside their preconceptions and objectively re-examine what we know and don’t know about Covid origins,” said Dr. Relman, who has served on several federal scientific-advisory boards. “My plea is that we not accept an incomplete answer or give up because of political expediency.”

An Energy Department spokesman declined to discuss details of its assessment but wrote in a statement that the agency “continues to support the thorough, careful, and objective work of our intelligence professionals in investigating the origins of COVID-19, as the President directed.”

The FBI declined to comment.

China, which has placed limits on investigations by the World Health Organization, has disputed that the virus could have leaked from one of its labs and has suggested it emerged outside China.

The Chinese government didn’t respond to requests for comment about whether there has been any change in its views on the origins of Covid-19.

Some scientists argue that the virus probably emerged naturally and leapt from an animal to a human, the same pathway for outbreaks of previously unknown pathogens.

Intelligence analysts who have supported that view give weight to “the precedent of past novel infectious disease outbreaks having zoonotic origins,” the flourishing trade in a diverse set of animals that are susceptible to such infections, and their conclusion that Chinese officials didn’t have foreknowledge of the virus, the 2021 report said.

Yet no confirmed animal source for Covid-19 has been identified. The lack of an animal source, and the fact that Wuhan is the center of China’s extensive coronavirus research, has led some scientists and U.S. officials to argue that a lab leak is the best explanation for the pandemic’s beginning.

U.S. State Department cables written in 2018 and internal Chinese documents show that there were persistent concerns about China’s biosafety procedures, which have been cited by proponents of the lab-leak hypothesis.

Wuhan is home to an array of laboratories, many of which were built or expanded as a result of China’s traumatic experience with the initial severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, epidemic beginning in 2002. They include campuses of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Wuhan Institute of Biological Products, which produces vaccines.


The Energy Department revised its assessment of the origins of Covid-19, according to an updated U.S. intelligence report.
PHOTO: ERIC LEE FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

An outbreak at a seafood market in Wuhan had initially been thought to be the source of the virus, but some scientists and Chinese public-health officials now see it as an example of community spread rather than the place where the first human infection occurred, the 2021 intelligence community report said.

In May 2021, President Biden told the intelligence community to step up its efforts to investigate the origins of Covid-19 and directed that the review draw on work by the U.S.’s national laboratories and other agencies. Congress, he said, would be kept informed of that effort.

The October 2021 report said that there was a consensus that Covid-19 wasn’t the result of a Chinese biological-weapons program. But it didn’t settle the debate over whether it resulted from a lab leak or came from an animal, saying that more information was needed from the Chinese authorities.

The U.S. intelligence community is made up of 18 agencies, including offices at the Energy, State and Treasury departments. Eight of them participated in the Covid-origins review, along with the National Intelligence Council.

Before that report, the Energy Department’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory prepared a study in May 2020 concluding that a lab-leak hypothesis was plausible and deserved further investigation.

The debate over whether Covid-19 might have escaped from a laboratory has been fueled by U.S. intelligence that three researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care.

A House Intelligence Committee report concluded last year that this disclosure didn’t strengthen either the lab-leak or the natural-origin theory as the researchers might have become sick with a seasonal flu. But some former U.S. officials say the sick researchers were involved in coronavirus research.

Lawmakers have sought to find out more about why the FBI assesses a lab leak was likely. In an Aug. 1 letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Sen. Roger Marshall, a Kansas Republican, requested that the FBI share the records of its investigation and asked if the bureau had briefed Mr. Biden on its findings.

In a Nov. 18 letter, FBI Assistant Director Jill Tyson said the agency couldn’t share those details because of Justice Department policy on preserving “the integrity of ongoing investigations.” She referred the senator to Ms. Haines’s office for information on what briefings were arranged for the president.

Write to Michael R. Gordon at [email protected] and Warren P. Strobel at [email protected]

Corrections & Amplifications
Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan represents Alaska. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said he represented Alabama. (Corrected on Feb. 26)

Appeared in the February 27, 2023, print edition as 'DOE Says Lab Leak Is Likely Origin of Covid-19'.

[aeternalis]

Covid raped my sinuses and it's still raping them. My nose has been fucked since early December of last year.

Same here, actually, and around the same time, but I have a history of sinus issues, so :shrug: I'll just keep on keeping on. Sucks, dude.

[Tweed]

Covid raped my sinuses and it's still raping them. My nose has been fucked since early December of last year.

Same here, actually, and around the same time, but I have a history of sinus issues, so :shrug: I'll just keep on keeping on. Sucks, dude.

So do I. My sinuses are usually messed up and I get about 7-8 infections a year I need to see a doctor for, but COVID just completely wrecked them, for good.

[rusty_shackleford]

coof

[Atlantico]

Two years ago it was basically a capital offense to claim covid was leaked from a Chinese lab. Now it's mainstream opinion.

Note that the "consensus" is that the virus is totally natural and not at all a result of any biotech fiddling.

Not that it is any more true, since covid does not and has never existed.

[Ranselknulf]

coof 

[The_Mask]

[The_Mask]

[The_Mask]

https://news.mit.edu/2023/peter-baddoo- ... -dies-0315

Peter Baddoo, Department of Mathematics instructor, dies at 29
Baddoo was a respected and admired scholar, teacher, mentor, and colleague.
MIT Human Resources
Publication Date:March 15, 2023



Caption:In addition to his work as instructor, scholar, and advisor, Peter Baddoo brought the Department of Mathematics community together by organizing social events for postdocs and instructors.
Credits:Photo: Shoott
Peter Baddoo, an instructor in the Department of Mathematics, passed away suddenly on Feb. 15 while playing basketball on campus.

Baddoo joined the MIT Department of Mathematics in January 2021. Prior to this, he was an EPSRC Doctoral Prize Fellow at Imperial College London. He studied mathematics as an undergraduate at the University of Oxford and received his PhD from Cambridge University.

An accomplished applied mathematician, Baddoo had broad research interests and activities spanning complex function theory, fluid dynamics, and machine learning and data-driven methods. His book, “Analytic Solutions for Flows Through Cascades” (Springer, 2020) received praise for its “exceptionally clear presentation with beautiful figures.”

“Peter was an outstanding, self-propelling researcher, a master of complex function theory with a burgeoning interest in machine learning, and had several collaborations within the U.S. and farther afield. He had an exceptionally promising future in academia. He was a deeply respected and valued member of my research group and the broader applied math community. He will be sorely missed,” says Professor John Bush, his faculty mentor.

In addition to his research, Baddoo was an exemplary teacher who gave generously of his time in assisting colleagues, graduate students, and undergraduates.

“Peter was an excellent lecturer — clear, composed, thoughtful, and kind. He was extremely popular among his students,” says Michel Goemans, the RSA Professor of Mathematics and Department of Mathematics head. One of Baddoo’s students in class 18.04 (Complex Variables with Applications) says that “I took Peter's class, and I walked out of that class actually liking math. I was assured that I want to study more of math and pursue a minor.”

Aside from his work as a scholar and teacher, Baddoo brought the department together by organizing social events for postdocs and instructors; for these and other efforts he received a Math Community Service Award. His interests extended well beyond mathematics and included music and sports such as basketball and lacrosse — which he played at Oxford and Cambridge universities, and as a member of the Senior England Men’s training squad. He was also a devoted and active member of Park Street Church.

In his honor, the Department of Mathematics will be endowing a Peter Baddoo Prize to recognize outstanding contributions to community-building within the department.

Peter Baddoo is survived by his parents, Jim and Nancy; his sisters, Kate and Harriet; and his fiancée, Yuna Kim.

[Ranselknulf]

Do the vaxxed go to heaven?

[The_Mask]

This one is way too filled with pictures, and I am at work, so I feel this is a bit too much work, but just in case anyone reads this make sure you do realize: this is an opinion piece. This is NOT proven science. Please, as you read, make your own mind and decisions on the article you're about to read.

https://dailyclout.io/edward-dowd-prese ... americans/

[Klerik]

[Thor Kaufman]

Russell Brand is a controlled op luciferian.

And all this pharmakeia garbage is not just unnecessary but harmful as well.

[Atlantico]

Russell Brand is a controlled op luciferian.

Are you controlled opposition?

[Klerik]

If you're willing to die for the cause it doesn't matter.

[Thor Kaufman]

Russell Brand is a controlled op luciferian.

Are you controlled opposition?

wat

[rusty_shackleford]

Fauci flat out lies to people to try to guilt them into getting vaccined(first ~10 seconds)

"you could pass it on to them ... you're protecting your family by getting vaccinated"

What a sick individual.

There is no evidence the vaccine prevents transmission. This is something even the mainstream admits now.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... s-not-low/
The most amusing part of this article:

I am a science journalist and I have followed COVID news closely to protect my family. Based on extensive reading of trusted sources, I judged the risk of COVID transmission from a vaccinated person to be “very limited,” or “rare.” I allowed my son to be around my vaccinated, unmasked friends indoors.

What data did she use to determine this? There was no data to draw a conclusion from.