381–390 of 417 posts
The title is a little misleading; they're not currently offering a second booster. They're presumably still doing primary vaccination, and the language implies they may offer a booster later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As the variant distibution changed, nearly all benefits of vaccines disappeared. These facts are slowly trickling into the larger public knowledge, but it's been well understood within the medical research community for a while now.
I asked my mother why she got vaccinated and boosted, despite knowing that the vaccines were for a legacy variant from like 2 years ago. "I wanted to travel and go on my trip". SMH. They forced our parents to get these legacy vaccines for a variant that hasn't been seen in a year, and held Juicy cruises over their heads. Next, there will be a vaccine requirement to play Bingo!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Danish health authorities still recommend everyone to get vaccinated against COVID, including healthy people under 50. Everyone should get two jabs, everyone over 18 should get a third "booster" shot. The vaccine talked about in the OP are the fourth vaccine jab, i.e. second booster shot, which is only offered to above-50 and people with certain heath issues. That is not true. You just made that up didn’t you? What i…
> That is not true. You just made that up didn’t you? > What is compelling you to spread misinformation? My source is https://www.sst.dk/da/corona/Vaccination point 10
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There actually really isn't any difference between the two groups. They differ only in how they articulate the same bad logic. Vaccines became broadly available in relatively wealthy countries in 2021 wherein the only reasonable position would have been that vaccination of all groups would decrease net mortality even among those unlikely to die and reduce damage to people's bodies that we were already seeing even wit…
The risk with trusting the people with "niche knowledge" is that they are susceptible to corruption. Now, given the choice between a corrupt capitalist expert and a doubtful idiot, I'd choose the latter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One gets myocarditus from covid and even mild cases in healthy young people commonly show damage from covid which isn't true of vaccination. Furthermore its reasonable to suppose that decreasing chance of infection decreases chance of spread which effects your 60 year old with hypertension which probably exists in most exists in most people's peer,friend, or family group and would really rather not die.
Fair enough, but you are comparing a sure event (if you decide to get the vaccine) and a contingent one (getting covid). It's impossible to declare any of both as a clear winner. Furthermore the risk difference is negligible when compared to daily activities (like driving or making the dinner). One of the problems here, and the source of a lot of trouble it's that sending nuanced messages it's very hard and goverment…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is nothing to interpret. Very simply - more people have died since the shots than before. No need for goofy phd words like “robust inferences” Much more than 70% of the at risk population were injected, they are the ones that are dying. That shots were sold as stopping the virus entirely, “If you get this shot you won’t get the virus” let alone die from it! So why have there been more deaths since the shots tha…
Currently Russia and Iran are leading the excess death charts, neither of which use mRNA vaccines. Birth rate trends in Israel, German and Russia are the same as in prior years https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/DEU/germany/birth-rate https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ISR/israel/birth-rate https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/RUS/russia/birth-rate
https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/new-data-from-germany-birt...
The effect we are talking about is something that necessarily only shows up within the past year, 9 months after young people started getting the shots.
A line chart going back 70 years is not useful here.
If you look at the data, linked above, where it is possible to see the effect I’m referring to, it is not something to blithely dismiss with a chart where it isn’t even possible for the effect to be visible.
Birth rates may be down over the long term, but year to year they are fairly stable, we are seeing moves to the downside hugely outside the range of normal year to year variability. And we are seeing it in a wide range of different populations with the commonality that we are seeing this hugely statistically significant effect occur in all these various populations like clockwork nine months after the young people in those populations started getting the shots.
>This is a continuation of my post from yesterday about a massive 13% decline in births in Germany. Such a decline is a nine-sigma event, meaning that it is so unlikely to occur by chance, that it would naturally happen as rarely as an asteroid striking the Earth
…
When expressed in “sigmas”, units of standard deviation, the 23.24% drop in the birth rate in Taiwan is a 26-sigma event!
This is can be described as “unimaginable” in terms of the likelihood of happening due to random chance
https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/depopulation-of-taiwan
https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/taiwan-birth-rate-cratered...
https://igorchudov.substack.com/?sort=search&search=Taiwan
Regarding “excess deaths,” I maybe should’ve mentioned I was referring to what has come to be called “non-COVID excess deaths.” The excess deaths are found in statistics of “all cause mortality.”
Is data for non-COVID excess deaths available for Russia and Iran?
It sounds like Danes over 50 can get a free vaccine, and those under are prohibited from getting one. Why can't we have a middle ground where young people can get a vaccine if they really want to (and e.g. pay for it themselves)? This mirrors the common thread in Covid policy where everything is either forbidden or compulsory.
> It sounds like Danes over 50 can get a free vaccine, and those under are prohibited from getting one. Why can't we have a middle ground where young people can get a vaccine if they really want to (and e.g. pay for it themselves)? This mirrors the common thread in Covid policy where everything is either forbidden or compulsory. Yeah. It's insane if they prohibit under-50s from getting the vaccine. There are more rea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There could still be vaccines that have the potential to be much more effective, like this one that's soon to enter Phase 1 human trial: https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/sars-coronavirus-variant-... I think it'll be interesting to follow further vaccine development in that sense. Also, I don't know why you say researchers no longer believes that vaccines missed the mark. Yes they didn't prevent reinfection of futur…
What has been generally disproved is the concept of herd immunity. Initially this was what scientists and researchers had hoped would occur with vaccinations, and sadly for multiple reasons this did not happen. Vaccines does significant help in reducing the severity when a person get sick, which reduces the work load on the health care system and allowing the personal to focus their time and skill on people in worse…
Those were the deadliest strains as well.
What happened is that COVID started mutating much faster than expected in ways that it can avoid the immune system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is nothing to interpret. Very simply - more people have died since the shots than before. No need for goofy phd words like “robust inferences” Much more than 70% of the at risk population were injected, they are the ones that are dying. That shots were sold as stopping the virus entirely, “If you get this shot you won’t get the virus” let alone die from it! So why have there been more deaths since the shots tha…
I look forward to hearing your Nobel prize for Medicine speech in a number of years so.
The number of people who have died from the virus after shots were introduced, that were supposed to stop people from contracting the virus, let alone dying from it, is bigger than the smaller number of people who died from the virus before the shots were introduced.
Do you find this an important data point? Do you think it is enough to win the prize? Do you want to co-author with me? Where should we publish?