New study - the SARS-CoV-2 persists in the body for months

It's like playing Russian roulette taking vaccines with no long term study's for side effects. The Pharmaceutical Companies have a free pass too. If something shows up in the future, you can't even sue them. The government granted them immunity. How nice.

 

I prefer getting neither the vaccine or the virus but you do you.

 

Yeh, there are risks to everything. You can play roulettes with the vaccines or with Covid, you are just loading more chambers with Covid. I’m glad vaccines are here for people that want them. I stay healthy by getting a lot of exercise in my daily work. A lot of that work that keeps me healthy is risky behavior in that I have a decent chance of being injured at some point while engaging in those activities.

As long as the player decides how many chambers to load and puts the barrel to his temple and pulls the trigger by personal choice I have no problem. When any of those metrics are decided or coerced by others I get concerned.

Yep. Been that way since 1988. It would be “nice” in some ways to be protected from lawsuits by Uncle Sam. I have to buy umbrella policies to cover suits brought by people breaking trespassing law and being injured while on my property without permission and without my knowledge they are even on my property. All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others!

The truth of the matter is, in the long run you are better off to not depend on government for anything like legal protections vaccine makers enjoy. There is always a piper to pay and I’d just as soon not be beholden to your Uncle Sam.

 

Over 75% of Vermont COVID Deaths Are In The “Fully Vaccinated”

Really? It's why the Government is "giving" it away. If you had to buy it yourself there would be some legal expectations as to it doing what they say. Not so with something free, they offered but you don't have to take it and walk away.

 

No, even vaccines you pay for are protected from suits brought by the injured against the pharmaceutical company.

I hope you still have the right to walk away without losing your job or something. I’m opposed to all mandates and coercion.

You aren’t opposed to people who want a Covid vaccine getting one are you?

Your link supports my numerous posts here on PF urging people not to depend on vaccines to protect them. There are many other actions we can take that are as effective as vaccines at keeping us from being harmed by Covid. Your link shows if you want to stay out of the hospital or morgue you better do more than just get vaccinated.

 

Sure but such a small N =44 is subject to statistical bias.

 

Some of them or maybe one of them went up to 230 days. I didn't pay much attention to the study. Like I've been saying, I was, first, on vacation, then, super busy with 3 catch-up days, now on New Years break again, and not entirely in the mood for careful examination of all of this.

True. But the more one delays infection, the better the odds that the person will be able to take Paxlovid which I continue to believe, is a game changer.

 

If you don't do the vaccine how do you avoid the virus? The Omicron variant is the second most contagious virus known to humankind. Likely it will get even the vaccinated people but two basic vaccination doses plus one booster so far seems to be a strategy that confers some protection against a first infection with it.

The "you do you" jab is stupid. What exactly do you think I'm doing? I'm a doctor, fighting this off daily, in my hospital. I'm not in some cave, hiding from it.

 

Which vaccines and please show proof. Plus you have a choice whether to take the vaccine or not. They are mandating we get it.

I'm retired and thankful of that.

Nope, get 'em if you want 'em.

Study Confirms AT LEAST 400K People Have Died From The COVID “Vaccine” In The US
Over 75% of Vermont COVID Deaths Are In The “Fully Vaccinated”

Good Luck to all in the New Year.

 

You bet. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 set up the program where pharmaceutical companies can not be sued, but instead injured parties are compensated by the Federal Government, paid for in part by a $0.75 tax on each disease covered by a vaccine dose. So there is a $0.75 tax on the influenza vaccine but a $2.25 on say an MMR vaccine. So essentially those receiving the vaccine are directly or indirectly (through insurance premiums etc.) paying for potential damages. Neat, huh? Clever getting the injured parties to pay their own damages!

In 2018 a state challenge made it to the Supreme Court and the 1986 law was not only upheld but it was confirmed even design flaws in vaccines are covered by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

https://www.policymed.com/2011/03/s...cting-vaccine-makers-from-state-lawsuits.html

Here is a list of covered vaccines.

https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/covered-vaccines/index.html

You probably noticed Covid vaccines are not mentioned. This is because they were granted immunity from suit by the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). This program not only protects vaccines, but all Covid drugs, biologicals (monoclonal antibodies) and other treatments for Covid. When the pandemic is “over” I would expect Covid vaccines to make the list under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

They are trying to mandate by proxy and strong arm tactics through employment.

That helps.

We agree!

Well, no, the study doesn’t confirm anything. It doesn’t even establish correlation, let alone causation.

 

I was just asking myself "it's been awhile since the panic doc has made a panic thread..."

And low and behold!

 

Zantac comes to mind.

 

The OP was designed purely to trigger your unfulfilled wish to bury your head in the sand.

/sarcasm

 

Panic "NO!" I'd just like people to think things through. A long time ago I read in Russia if one in 10,000 AK-47's blew up and took the soldiers head off, that was acceptable. Do we want to be that Government?

 

Everyone should get the vaccine as it is like playing Russian roulette with your organs

 

Why WOULD they have a “long term effect”? If you take a Tylenol today are you expecting that your leg will fall off in ten years time?

 

Not necessarily. Although obesity hypertension disorder is an issue hypertension is also seen in many non obese patients

high sodium intake diets can also contribute to hypertension

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/346/bmj.f1326.full.pdf
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1051227608004391

 

Which stays within the body and is not broken down

 

Another first world problem. Trying to mitigate the effects of a decadent lifestyle with a drug that can kill you. Everyone is always looking for the pill or jab that can make it easier to live with consequences of poor lifestyle choices. Pop a pill to make you feel better that further destroys your body’s ability to function properly.

 

No, that would be canagliflozin, not acetaminophen.

 

We’ve observed very similar presence of virus in organs besides the respiratory tract (especially the brain) in autopsies of influenza infected decedents as far back as the 1970’s. And cognitive dysfunction is not uncommon in influenza either. While my intent is not to sugar-coat Covid—it’s a nasty bugger—I find it disturbing when it’s treated as some super virus capable of things no virus has ever done. That simply isn’t true.

 

There were untold numbers of people who contracted this virus and were asymptomatic. There were untold numbers of people who contracted this virus and felt crummy for a couple of days and that was it.

How do we know these cases will have the same data points as this study?

 

Asymptomatic does not necessarily mean no impact. Remember this is a disease of the lining of the small blood vessels and minor damage can occur say to the kidneys that may not show up on testing

https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003773
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects/index.html

 

Hey CenterField, I posted this in another thread, but maybe you don't visit it. I'd love to hear your take and why what you once considered good evidence is no longer

Here's the OP:

So I went to almighty google to look up Ivermectin because my uncle wants to give my grandmother this drug claiming it works prophylactically as well as in early infection.

He shared the IVMMETA site and so I thought I would do my own investigation.

Believe it or not this link is archived on the third page:

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...do-not-need-a-vaccine.582240/#post-1072284699

It happens to be yours. I've been lurking for a few weeks reading as much as I could on limited time, and I see you no longer share that opinion.

My question is what made you change your mind? At that time you presented those studies as valid, what changed in the study if anything? On the other hand, could it have been that you didn't review them thoroughly and missed something? In your quotes above you mention RCT studies showing no real benefit, but the link you also say Iver has good RCT quality studies confirming it's benefit?

Thanks for taking the time.

 

How about this study

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.21268276v1.full.pdf

So in summary from the abstract an increase in 18-40 year old males with vaccine, but increase in 40+ males from Virus.

Seems like a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.