Vaccine influences our Lyme disease - More countries suspend AstraZeneca vaccinations

skinny_joe said...
Case counts are being driven by people who have not been vaccinated. Essentially everyone under 50.

Here in BC the 20-39 year olds are ignoring the rules and we are seeing spikes in that age group

Until the tests are fixed its all suspect and the reason so many people smell a rat.

My sister and her husband who both were working from home were sick and both tested negative, twice. 3 Months later they test positive for the antibodies. Utterly useless tests.

Maybe use reasonable PCR multiples so that they reflect actual illness, not just the fraction of a hint of a millionth of a DNA strand that's possibly an indicator that someone near you saw someone with COVID.

Or maybe make a test that actually works.

And until cause of deaths are accurately reported its nothing but a power grab by power mad politicians. There is no science behind any of it.

I pray the the younger generations see what we've done to them and they take harsh revenge because their cowardly elders deserve no quarter.

Girlie said...
Here in BC the 20-39 year olds are ignoring the rules and we are seeing spikes in that age group

I have to say I find the rules in BC can be very very very confusing, and they always seem to require months worth of clarifications.

This article exposes the problems BC has with its rules:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-quarantine-rules-confusion-1.5912544

I’m sure others have said their experience ...

My choice to get vaccinated was
... the insane, prolific death in NYC a year ago including heart-breaking stories from many who lost someone... plus
... ...the prospect of long-haul-covid like in otherwise ‘healthy’ people in their 30’s and 40’s.


Reaction:
I had almost no reaction to dose 1 of the Pfizer vaccine. (A little bit of a sore arm for a few days.)

Still waiting on dose 2.

ChristianWithLyme said...

Was it from the virus or the response to the virus though?

Also, if Covid was here in fall 2019 as it seems quite apparent now (in my area local indications and higher ups in the world saying very possible), it's almost like the response to the virus did the most harm. We were living normally in fall 2019 with people traveling everywhere, no masks, no social distancing, and as far as I can remember, no reports of abnormal death rates.

It gives reason to pause.

The response to the virus does not put people on ventilators. They may commit suicide avoid procedures but it does not fill a wing with people on ventilators. The virus was here and spreading when hospitals were filling up. No one was masking up or social distancing or whatever crap. That was not in the fall of 2019.

Waiting for Antichrist post again.

Post Edited (skinny_joe) : 3/31/2021 8:22:38 PM (GMT-6)

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/sports/20210227/i-rather-miss-olympics-take-vaccine-blake

https://twitter.com/yohanblake/status/1365810749310971907?ref_src=twsrc%5etfw

Fact Check Fraud about India Banning Pfizer Vaccine and fundings

India has learned their lesson from Bill Gates wish years ago funded the HPV vaccine Guardasil trials on the country wish injured and killed children.

Warning: You will find a lots of manipulated media telling that Bill Gates was never involved in this trials. I will ask you only to check this example of a Fact Check site, wish denies that no injuries or deaths were caused by the HPV vaccine, mentioning poisoning from insecticide. They mentions several deaths not related to the vaccine, but omit two suspected girls deaths, that died possibly from pyrexia, or high fever, and a second from a suspected cerebral hemorrhage, after the vaccine. They also purposely omit that the researchers investigating the deaths, failed to conduct postmortem examinations.

They also smartly claim that "An anti-vaccination blog tied Bill Gates to the deaths of several girls who were part of an HPV vaccination roll out in India", but after telling this, they remain silent about Bill Gates connection or ties to it, they only tell it was the anti-vaccination blog that made the connection. Why? Because Bill Gates was indeed involved, he funded the trials. But they purposely omit it.

Now, the shocking part of this Fact Check site and many others, wish make a living in "raiding" all the sites that publish anything negative about the Pfizer and any other vaccines is, who is in fact funding this FactCheck sites?

Lets check the Factcheck site, it that was published in 2016, but before reading the article, please go to the bottom of the page and see who funds the Fact Check site.

Here:
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/dec/20/blog-posting/anti-vaccination-blog-revives-debunked-hpv-story/

Where is the truth about what really happened in the trials? And who really funded them? This was published in the science magazine and written by an Indian authorized article contributor for science magazine, Pallava Bagla

Check here:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/09/indian-parliament-comes-down-hard-cervical-cancer-trial


Now what happened recently in India? They learned from the past from vaccine pharma related to Bill Gates. They banned or didn't authorize the use of the pfizer vaccine in the country. Banned or refuse to permit it is the same thing. Now what does the msn (microsoft) fact check site says about this recent ban of pfizer vaccine in India?

Check it here, press the blue button "continue reading". You will find that the msn fact check site is published in partnership with NewsGuard, wish also reported the same fact check on their own Newsweek site.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/fact-check-did-india-ban-the-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine/ar-bb1dnwnm

The Newsweek fact checker site, saying the same false claim here:
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-india-ban-pfizer-covid-vaccine-biontech-coronavirus-1570158

Now in this site, wish is debunks both fact check sites above, you can see how the msn and newsweek fact check sites are indeed false by saying its false that India banned, because India did banned or didn't authorize the pfizer vaccine in the country, wish is the same as banning.

https://laptrinhx.com/newsweek-fact-check-claims-india-vaccine-ban-mostly-false-while-admitting-de-facto-ban-458357917/

Wait. If you read well on the laptrinhx.com site wish debunks both msn and Newsweek fact check sites, in the end of the article, they say this:

"But it gets worse. Bill Gates owns stock in Pfizer Inc. and his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has donated significant sums of money to help Pfizer’s development of vaccines. Interesting to note therefore that a message which originally appeared at the bottom of the Newsweek ‘fact check’ article has now disappeared The message read; “Microsoft and partners may be compensated if you purchase something through recommended links in this article.” It is not known why that message has now vanished. This is yet another example of how ‘fact checks’ are often completely devoid of facts and are merely a way of legacy media institutions and giant corporations shutting down narratives they don’t like."

Are they right in saying that the site did had the info "Microsoft and partners may be compensated if you purchase something through recommended links in this article"? This info was removed. But was it there in the first place? How can we be sure? We can, just go the the cached site wish contained all the original information plus the reference tp microsoft and partners, here:

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:y9o1iyloekoj:https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/fact-check-did-india-ban-the-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine/ar-bb1dnwnm+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=pt&client=firefox-b-d

This is how the media is being controlled today.

isitlyme said...
Did you even read the whole article from CDC??

I did- it's not very long. The math is perfect. The methods are not new, in fact they are standard.

Remember when you posted this:

" in 16 march, one week ago more or less, a new study was published wish showed that the Astrazeneca vaccine is useless against the south African variant."

They used the same methods.

You shouldn't dismiss a study because you dislike the result, and it must be said, it's a very strange result to dislike.

isitlyme said...
I disliked all of them on a negative sense, because they all demonstrate the inefficacy of the vaccine, regardless of the method or i liked them all, if you will, for the same reason . So the problem here is not liking or disliking, that is irrelevant, because no matter if i like or dislike, they all show the same thing, the vaccine inefficacy...

Ok I didn't realize you actually thought the Pfizer trial (and others) showed an inefficacy of the vaccine. It seemed like before you were saying the results were invalid and therefore inconsequential. But if the results are valid and show inefficacy, then how do you explain 94.6% of infections coming from placebo group?

The placebo group exists only as a control to compare against the vaccine group. The comparison helps to eliminate factors that would otherwise contaminate the results. Most importantly, it is the only way to account for the amount of exposure to the virus (which the method you have invented does not account for).

The 94.6% is an estimate of efficacy with a 95% confidence interval of 89.6% - 97.6%. This means, since the trial is ongoing, that with more time in the trial the efficacy rate is 95% certain to stay somewhere in the range of the confidence interval. As time goes on, confidence increases (estimate of efficacy becomes even more accurate).

Edit: I believe as time goes on the 95% confidence level is typically kept the same and the interval (range) shrinks.. but the data can also be presented with a higher confidence level instead (99%).

Post Edited (potsnpans) : 4/2/2021 12:19:57 PM (GMT-6)

Government numbers will never be trustworthy and no one will ever know the true numbers for infections or deaths. Between the CYA Coumo kind of stuff in NY, power hungry politicians seeking more power everywhere, and the inflating of the PCR tests worldwide, we'll never know exactly how deadly it is. Add in few trillion in government spending incentives the numbers are doubly suspect.

If you just discount the likely 50% of false PCR positives the death rates percentage/verses infection would probably double or triple actually making it a really deadly disease if you're high risk. So don't give the cretons in government any ideas or the only places worth in living will be Texas and Florida.

Pebble: check out skinny_joe's reply on page 9 regarding 'all cause deaths'. It should alleviate your concerns.

potsnpans said...
This perfectly illustrates how your method fails to determine efficacy of vaccine. It says the placebo worked (and that it happened to be extremely effective). The reason why your method fails is that you are allowing rate of exposure to be a factor in your calculations (it's the dominant factor). The standard method eliminates rate of exposure.

Rates of exposure? Where did you get that from, potsnpans? Where did you learn that eliminating rates of exposure is the standard method? We might aswell get only 10 infected, only 2 in vaccine and 8 in placebo, and remove all the thousands and then call it 95% efficacy. Is this your standard method? All participants were exposed to the same conditions, but they only took the few infected from placebo, ignored all the rest from placebo healthy ones, but didn't do the same to the vaccinated. They counted with 161 healthy on the vaccinated and inserted them in the infected group to equally compare it with the 161 infected in the placebo. Just do the maths, think a little bit on you own .

Now your assumption is, that placebo must never be equal to the drug group, if it is, than the method fails, if its not, then the method works, we must favor the drug. Seriously? According to your view, we only need the placebo if the numbers are worst for it, favoring the drug group. If the numbers are almost equal in between groups, then they should be narrowed to the group who were affected by the disease. If the others thousands were not, shame on them, they should never joined the trial. Ridiculous.Welcome to the real world pots, placebo is the key to understand drug efficacy and we cannot throw all the participants out and only include the ones that favor one side.

By, "My method", do you mean i invented the numbers that are on the trial? This is a joke even more greater than the trial itself.

Post Edited (isitlyme) : 4/2/2021 3:18:49 PM (GMT-6)

potsnpans said...
You're method includes all healthy participants in both groups and treats them as if they all had enough exposure to get sick (plus any other factors needed).

How do you know they didn't? If exposure is a determinant factor, then the participants should be narrowed according to exposure conditions right? Was that done?

Post Edited (isitlyme) : 4/2/2021 3:34:29 PM (GMT-6)