-
-
For those who want to know more about ways (among many others) to identify fake news sources:
https://library.bridgew.edu/c.php?g=590539&p=4086409
About Trialsitenews.com:
https://healthfeedback.org/outlet/trialsite-news/
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/trialsite-news/
Telling lies is easy. Finding out the truth takes more time, effort, objectivity. That's not for everybody unfortunatelyComment
-
Originally posted by Patrick Gougeon View PostWhy don't you disprove the actual message instead of attacking the messenger? Your idea of "finding the truth" is to mindlessly post links to pharma-sponsored propaganda that call anything that goes against their profit-driven narrative as "fake news".Originally posted by Patrick Gougeon View Post
So let's do a deep dive into the actual article that you so pompously declare as "fake news"
They quote this study
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....11.22269045v1 that shows Omicorn to be much milder then Delta variant with zero cases of the Omicorn variant progressing to deadly ventilation.
"Zero cases with Omicron variant infection received mechanical ventilation, as compared to 11 cases with Delta variant infections throughout the period of follow-up (two-sided p<0.001). Median duration of hospital stay was 3.4 (2.8-4.1) days shorter for hospitalized cases with Omicron variant infections as compared to hospitalized patients with Delta variant infections, reflecting a 69.6% (64.0-74.5%) reduction in hospital length of stay.
Conclusions During a period with mixed Delta and Omicron variant circulation, SARS-CoV-2 infections with presumed Omicron variant infection were associated with substantially reduced risk of severe clinical endpoints and shorter durations of hospital stay."
Please Patrick show us where this is false!
"The share of unvaccinated people hospitalized for Omicron infection was a mere 24 percent—43 of 182 hospitalized patients—compared to 69 percent for Delta.
Put the other way around, the vaccinated have morphed into about three-quarters of hospital admissions for the now-dominant Omicron.
These figures belie the rock-solid mainstream narrative that hospitals are filled with the unvaccinated. Clearly, the “pandemic of the unvaccinated”—always open to question—is no more.
“This is a huge change,” said Juan Chamie, a covid data expert who verified my conclusion from the data. “It is clearly contradicting the ‘99-percent unvaccinated in hospital’ narrative.”
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Thursday, 10th February, 2022, 10:19 AM.Comment
-
Let's take this passage:Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post
"In Ontario, Canada, vaccine efficacy plummeted within two months of second doses, from 89 percent against Delta to 36 percent against Omicron. Two doses “provided no protection after ≥180 days,” that study of 16,000 Omicron cases found."
The study is at https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....30.21268565v2
Does your article talk about the needed third dose? Find does not find any "third" word in the article. Hmmm...
Lets read farther the cited study:
VE against symptomatic Omicron infection was only 36% (95%CI, 24-45%) 7-59 days after a second dose and provided no protection after ≥180 days, but increased to 61% (95%CI, 56-65%) ≥7 days after a third dose. VE against severe outcomes was very high following a third dose for both Delta and Omicron (99% [95%CI, 98-99%] and 95% [95%CI, 87-98%], respectively).
I agree with Patrick: "Telling lies is easy. Finding out the truth takes more time, effort, objectivity."Comment
-
Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View PostThe third dose of a vaccine with a horrific safety profile for what Egidjus? A virus with less virulence than the common cold as per the article? And you think it's honest that side effects and adverse reactions are ignored and that the efficacy of each dose diminishes to nothing in the space of a few months? Do you realize your innate immune system is weakened more and more with each dose? Why is the efficacy of third doses talked about in isolation without referring to its short-lived durability? Seriously, who is kidding who? One group has trillions(!) at stake (pharma) and the other group wants to practice medicine (Dr's) according to the Hippocratic oath.Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
I will always be on the side of the Dr's that have successfully treated hundreds of thousands of COVID+ high-risk patients. The ones that do that are the truth-tellers. Not your money-grubbing pharma salespeople and their corrupted politicians and health bureacrats
https://www.wsj.com/articles/end-cov...ta-11644419583
https://www.informedchoiceaustralia....vaccine-safety
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Thursday, 10th February, 2022, 05:44 PM.Comment
-
Sid, I trust you will then appreciate this speech from Bernie Sanders.Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02ex...withSethMeyers
Comment
-
Bernie Sanders lists the least of Big Pharma's crimes. He completely omits the 33 billion(!) profit that Pfizer alone earns annually with lethal jabs that have very short-lived efficacy. Of course, being part of that swamp that has corrupted all sides of the aisle with jab$$$$$ that might be too much to expect of him.Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View PostComment
-
-
Ivermectin in local/global paper the Toronto Star.
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2...-politics.html
Mexico went all in on ivermectin — a disproven COVID cure. Now there’s a fight over ‘false and misleading science’ and claims of ‘colonialist’ politics
It might hide under the payview/subscribe screen later.Comment
-
Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View PostQuite a statement!Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
https://c19ivermectin.com/
Do you think the author of this article, Phillip Cohen the sociologist who pontificates about the efficacy of Ivermectin has refuted this?
Compare this group of countries that adapted IVM in a big way according to https://ivmstatus.com compared to the US Canada Europe and Israel that did not. According to https://ivmstatus.com Mexico was not "all in" they had "mixed usage of this compound.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Friday, 11th February, 2022, 10:28 AM.Comment
-
According to the Eudravigilence data base https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-r...eudravigilance for the entire EEAOriginally posted by Neil Frarey View Post
They reported as Dec 31 2021- A total of 3.244.052 adverse events have been reported, of which 47,5% have been rated as severe
- A total number of 20.217 severe event reports resulted in death
According to https://vaccinetracker.ecdc.europa.e...tml#uptake-tab EEU and EEA 320,000,000 doses administered.
So approx probability of getting serious adverse reaction ~1,500,000/320,000,000= about .47%
Probability of death. = .0063%
This is just immediate reactions. Longitudinal data ie Cancer weakened Immune systems prion based diseases eventual death from myocarditis not known.
Probability of a healthy person under 70 succumbing to COVID-- .003%.
A severe adverse event can include serious paralysis, my0carditis, blood clots, serious neurological disorders. All life-altering conditions.
The Pharma sponsored press has tried to put out the preposterous idea that even though many of the deaths occur within 48 hours of the vax with healthy people that "correlation does not equal causation". or that somehow deaths can be fake reports ignoring the fact that over 86% of the reports are from health care professionals who legally have to report this.
These arguments have been put forward for the US VAERS , Eudravigilence, and UK yellow card vaccine adverse event reporting systems all in use for decades as effective early warning systems for drugs and vaccines. Here is a good letter that explains this sorry state of affairs.
https://margaretannaalice.substack.c...locaust-denierLast edited by Sid Belzberg; Friday, 11th February, 2022, 10:31 AM.Comment
-
Who are the "Pharma sponsored press" and how does Pharma sponsor them? I'm looking for lots of specifics (unless this is just more of your hyperbole).Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De QuinceyComment
-
OMG, Sid, you go on and on about corrupt politicians, and I agree with you. There is massive political corruption in the USA on both sides of the aisle!! We agree.Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post
But you have lumped Bernie in with the swamp? Are you kidding me?
Obviously, you don't know Bernie Sanders. Please educate yourself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYxZ...=BernieSanders
Comment
-
Bernie Sanders is the swamp.Comment
-
There is no politician that is not, anywhere.Comment
- If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
- Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir - General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
Tweet
Comment