Dr Dan Stock…well known spreader of COVID misinformation.
His statements are easy to debunk.
On another subject :
SOUTH AFRICA Issue dated 19/07/2021
Durban riots fuel great concern among miners violence that followed the arrest of former president Jacob Zuma has had serious repercussions for the country’s mining sector. The outbursts, located in the province of KwaZulu Natal, are hampering the activity of local mines, but also that of Durban and Richards Bay port terminals. :: more on article on their site::
Noted also; these riots have had a great effect on agriculture distribution centers from sea ports inland, and vice versa. It mentioned many of this years sugar cane, and grain fields were set ablaze also. Food distributions could be disrupted till Christmas.
**This type of unrest make the precious metal investment guys get warm and fuzzy inside. Add the unrest in Cuba, the earthquake in Haiti, right next door, and they spot their pants. It might be a good time to own a gold mine.
C.s.
There was nothing in Dr. Stocks presentation that disputes that. His presentation to the school board was to present information to dispel much of the misinformation being presented as established scientific fact. Scientists debate the validity of many things and weigh the facts as they emerge. Concerning ADE, it needs further investigation and time will tell which side is correct. Censorship is not the answer to resolving issues in a community or nation that faces problems needing resolution. It is being employed by media and official policy and deserves to be examined. The truth emerges even when being suppressed. He does dispute mandates for masking children in order to return to school. Dr. Stock also concludes it is unwise for this particular vaccine to be administered or mandated for children. Long term effects for new vaccines traditionally require 3 years or more of testing before being approved. His hypothesis is that Covid-19 is devolving to be less severe over time as it continues to mutate and will be handled in the immune system in a fashion similar to other corona viruses in the cold family that circulate year round. Most individuals have an immune system geared to taking care of “a cold” without being hospitalized.
From a Nov 19 2019 article:
Debunkers Debunked: Who Fact-Checks The Fact-Checkers?
Alex Berezow, PhD
One of the topics I touched on was the role that fact-checkers play in our online debates. Certainly, they can and do play a very constructive role. There are so many lies swirling around that professional fact-checking seems to be a necessary public good.
But, who fact-checks the fact-checkers? While that might seem like a silly question, the objectivity of fact-checking websites has already been called into doubt and for good reason. For example, an in-depth analysis by Matt Shapiro at the Paradox Project revealed that PolitiFact (the site that famously uses “pants on fire” as one of its ratings) is biased in its fact-checking.
The analysis makes several different arguments, but one of the more compelling ones is that the articles that debunk Republicans are longer than those that debunk Democrats. Why? Well, it comes down to a bit of chicanery:
"We’ve found that PolitiFact often rates statements that are largely true but come from a GOP sources [sic] as ‘mostly false’ by focusing on sentence alterations, simple mis-statements, fact-checking the wrong fact, and even taking a statement, rewording it, and fact-checking the re-worded statement instead of the original quoted statement.
“Doing this takes time and many, many words.”
Concerning the effectiveness on masks:
The CDC’s Mask Mandate Study: Debunked
Just look at the data from Jonas F. Ludvigsson that is emerging from Sweden in children 16 years old and under when preschools and schools were kept open and there were no face masks though social distancing was fostered. The result was zero (0) deaths from COVID-19 in 1.95 million Swedish children across the study period. The number of infections was exceedingly low, the number of hospitalizations was exceedingly low, and there were no deaths in children with COVID-19, all this despite not wearing masks due to no schoolwide mask mandate. Is this merely a perfunctory and legally prudent warning by the CDC that “your mileage may vary?” Or is it more like a hot mutual fund telling you that “past performance is no guarantee of future results.” What is the CDC really trying to say about face masks and why so much confusion?
We have reservations about the methodology employed and conclusions drawn in the CDC double mask study which we will address in a separate discussion but again their disclaimer as noted above: “The findings of these simulations should neither be generalized to the effectiveness …nor interpreted as being representative of the effectiveness of these masks when worn in real-world settings” seeds thoughts of doubt in relation to the value of this report. Why then, would the CDC even bother to publicize these findings? What is the public health impact? What is the benefit?
Moreover, the CDC even indicated in the double mask study that there are harms e.g. impediments to breathing, due to double masking. Indeed, the harms (e.g. reference 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) are very real when face masks are used yet are often dismissed and not even discussed by the media medical establishment or government bureaucrats.
The CDC’s Mask Mandate Study: Debunked
Study Cited By CDC To Justify New Mask Guidance Rejected By Peer Review, Based On Vaccine Not Used In US
7/28/2021
Hey Mike,
You ever think that people don’t trust the government and mainstream media because THEY have been responsible for spreading misinformation and lies time and time again?
You make it sound like it’s easy to discern fact from misinformation. What’s your barometer, anything the CDC or Fauci tells you is fact?
We have been lied to by our own government throughout history. JFK, WMD’s, 911 just to name a few.
What do you think about your tax dollars going to fund “gain of function” research in that Wuhan, China lab? Still believe the first official reports that it came from a bat? Hahaha
These are pretty eye opening. Must see in my opinion.
1 Like
It’s very easy. Look at the science; ignore the politics. Also watch for those with a political agenda that cherry pick data to deceive the uninformed.
Wear a mask. Get vaccinated. It is that simple.
2 Likes
MG,
You are entirely right that Covid-19 has been a truly devasting disease. Good science re-evaluates data constantly as new facts emerge. I see you are wise enough to rethink your earliest stance concerning vaccines Mike.
However, rigidity of thought does not denote intelligence. Science needs evaluation from all available sources as you recognized early on. Personal attacks do not serve to reveal the truth behind underlying facts that are constantly emerging. It is all too easy to use rigid ideology as a crutch in debunking the emergence of facts that oppose that ideology. Debunking based on political ideology has no place in science, yet it exists. I showed an early case of just factual reporting that was largely censored or debunked in the mass media. How did you see the case brought forward by Sweden?
[quote=“easymillion, post:137, topic:2625”]
Lockdowns made little difference in the number of people who die from coronavirus, a study has claimed. Researchers from the University of Toronto and the University of Texas found that whether a country was locked down or not w as “not associated” with the COVID-19 death
“Experts compared mortality rates and cases in 50 badly-hit countries up until May 1 and calculated that only 33 out of every million people had died from the virus… The study found that imposing lockdown measures succeeded in stopping hospitals from becoming overwhelmed, but it did not translate into a significant reduction in death rates.
“Government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns , and a high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality.”
THE EVENING STANDARD (UK)
Whatever differing studies, opinions, and statistics may conclude, the graph below shows the effect that Sweden’s no-lockdown policy has had on the actual number of Swedes who died of COVID-19.
Now approaching zero, the Swedish death rate due to COVID-19 is lower than that of Britain, Spain, and Belgium – all of which locked down.
The first graph (below) compares Sweden’s mortality rate for COVID-19 to the U.S. mortality rate for the common flu. In the group of all ages younger than 60, the Swedish mortality rate of COVID-19 was less than 1/3 rd of the American mortality rate for the common flu ! And, unlike the U.S. common flu mortality rate in the 60-79 age group, the vast majority of Sweden’s COVID-19 deaths occurred in those older than 80!
The second graph (below) compares the mortality rates of COVID-19 in Sweden with that of the U.S. as of July 2020. The graph shows that the U.S. COVID-19 mortality rate for those younger than 39 was 0.58% – more than 1,230 times greater than the 0.00047% mortality rate in Sweden. In the age groups of 40-59 and 59-69, the U.S. death rate from COVID-19 was respectively 215 times and 211 times greater than that of Sweden. These vast differences can only be explained by the open and free society resulting from Sweden’s no lockdown policy, and that if you are healthy and reasonably cautious your chances of dying from COVID-19 are far less than dying from the common flu.
These studies should not have been buried at the time, but they were largely debunked by reputedly reputable scientists. The scientists that did the original reporting were also reputable. Who are you going to believe these days unless you allow both sides to be heard before bureaucrats set public health policy?
This is one of the most alarming new studies that is showing harm to the infants in our global community. Fear is destroying our young and old alike (bolding mine):
Brown University researchers found that pandemic babies have 22% lower IQs
BY RALPH TURCHIANO ON AUGUST 13, 2021• ( 0 )
Read Time: 2 Minute, 17 Second
Since the first reports of novel coronavirus in the 2020, public health organizations have advocated preventative policies to limit virus, including stay-at-home orders that closed businesses, daycares, schools, playgrounds, and limited child learning and typical activities. Fear of infection and possible employment loss has placed stress on parents; while parents who could work from home faced challenges in both working and providing full-time attentive childcare. For pregnant individuals, fear of attending prenatal visits also increased maternal stress, anxiety, and depression. Not surprising, there has been concern over how these factors, as well as missed educational opportunities and reduced interaction, stimulation, and creative play with other children might impact child neurodevelopment. Leveraging a large on-going longitudinal study of child neurodevelopment, we examined general childhood cognitive scores in 2020 and 2021 vs. the preceding decade, 2011-2019. We find that children born during the pandemic have significantly reduced verbal, motor, and overall cognitive performance compared to children born pre-pandemic. Moreover, we find that males and children in lower socioeconomic families have been most affected. Results highlight that even in the absence of direct SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 illness, the environmental changes associated COVID-19 pandemic is significantly and negatively affecting infant and child development.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.Funding Statement
Funding for this study was provided by the National Institutes of Health (SCD). Neither funder played any role in the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of the data, or was involved in the drafting or approval of this manuscript.Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All data were acquired in accordance with ethical approval and oversight by the Rhode Island Hospital institutional review board, with informed consent obtained from all parents or legal guardians.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Link: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.10.21261846v1
Brown University researchers found that pandemic babies have 22% lower IQs – CLINICALNEWS.ORG
This is another related study that’s been out for quite a while now that I personally find alarming.
New Study Finds COVID Masks Harm Children’s Physical & Mental Health
Published on February 15, 2021
Written by Reagan Hall
A new study, involving over 25,000 school-aged children, shows that masks are harming schoolchildren physically, psychologically, and behaviorally, revealing 24 distinct health issues associated with wearing masks.
The health issues and impairments observed in this study were found to affect 68% of masked children who are forced to wear a face covering for an average of 4.5 hours per day. The study also includes 17,854 health complaints submitted by parents.
Some of the health issues found in the study include: increased headaches (53%), difficulty concentrating (50%), drowsiness or fatigue (37%), malaise (42%), and nearly a third of children experience more sleep issues than they had previously and a quarter of children developed new fears.
Though these results are concerning, the study also found that 29.7% of children experienced shortness of breath, 26.4% experienced dizziness, and hundreds of the participants experiencing accelerated respiration, tightness in chest, weakness, and short-term impairment of consciousness.
The study authors noted the lack of unbiased research on this topic:
“There are no manufacturer-independent studies on the use of masks for children and adolescents that are certified as medical products for occupational safety in professional applications. In addition, due to the unknown materials used, there are no findings on the potential protective effects or side effects of the often home-made ‘everyday masks’ worn by the majority of children. In view of the ongoing measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic, and in particular the varying obligations for children and adolescents to wear masks in school over a longer period of time, there is an urgent need for research.”
New Study Finds COVID Masks Harm Children’s Physical & Mental Health | Principia Scientific Intl.
And another terribly long, very well researched paper with many footnoted links
the general mass media is failing to recognize. Wake up people, post what you are really seeing and not just what Washington bureaucrats want you to hear!
Masking Children: Tragic, Unscientific, and Damaging
Masking Children: Tragic, Unscientific, and Damaging – …
Summary : Children do not readily acquire SARS-CoV-2 (very low risk), spread it to other children or teachers, or endanger parents or others at home. This is the settled science. In the rare cases where a child contracts Covid virus it is very unusual for the child to get severely ill or die. Masking can do positive harm to children – as it can to some adults. But the cost benefit analysis is entirely different for adults and children – particularly younger children. Whatever arguments there may be for consenting adults – children should not be required to wear masks to prevent the spread of Covid-19. Of course, zero risk is not attainable – with or without masks, vaccines, therapeutics, distancing or anything else medicine may develop or government agencies may impose.
How did this blue surgical mask and white cloth mask come to dominate our daily lives? Well, indeed, the surgical masks and white cloth (often homemade) masks have become the most contentious and quarrelsome symbol and reminder of our battle with SARS-CoV-2 and the disease it causes, Covid-19. The mask has become so politicized that it prevents rational consideration of the evidence (even across political lines) and drives levels of acrimony, invidious actions, disdain, and villainy among wearers to each other who feel threatened by the individual who will not or cannot wear a mask.
(Masking Children: Tragic, Unscientific, and Damaging Paul-E-AlexanderPaul E. Alexander – March 10, 2021 - Search)
1 Like
Paul E. Alexander…former Trump official…he is all about “herd immunity”
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000176-6c7e-d0c3-ab77-7dff0c950001
Smarter messaging is needed. Children need to be taught math, science and literature as they interact with peers and adults. Social skills are developed and learned through interaction. Obviously the educational message being taught in schools is being dictated in a less than desirable way. Cost benefit analysis based on scientific evidence instead of political influence and power would benefit all concerned.
Later today, COVID will officially become the deadliest disease in American History. The final death toll from COVID will likely exceed 1 million in the U.S. before(if?) it burns out.
670,000 white flags are currently displayed on the National Mall. There should not be any illusion by anyone that this Covid19 is anything but a very deadly virus. The policies that force individuals by mandates to be fired are counter productive to policies that have been shown to effectively counter the virus and have the population return to a more normalized life. Half our population knows this to be true even though much of the information is being censored on the social networks and selectively shown on the mainstream news outlets.
A friend of mine just got back from a trip to Scandinavia, and wrote a letter to the editor published in the Sept 14th edition of the Tampa Bay Times.
Can we do this?
Denmark: Virus no longer a “critical threat” | Sept. 12
While we continue to restrict the ability of our businesses to ensure safe environments, argue over vaccine hesitancy, masks and mandates, with COVID still ravaging around us, Denmark on Friday lifted all remaining COVID restrictions. We just returned from three wonderful weeks in Denmark and Sweden. We found ourselves living a “normal” life, essentially COVID free. With infection rates currently 17 times lower per capita than the U.S., according to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. There just isn’t much spread. It’s truly liberating.
How did the Danes do this? No doubt it is complicated, yet three facts stand out.
First, they mandated masks and achieved very high compliance. Mask restrictions were lifted some time ago when rate decreases justified doing so.
Second, they were among the first to require a Coronavirus pass. The Coronapas app or equivalent data (our CDC cards worked easily) was required for entry into all indoor public and private venues. All that was needed was proof of full vaccination, a negative test or recovery from an infection within six months. Everyone could participate freely and safely.
Third, they did not hesitate to get the vaccines. They have achieved almost an 80% full vaccination rate that is still rising.
We can keep fighting over and blocking public health measures that are proven to work, or we can continue to live a confined, divisive existence haunted by COVID. Ironically, we are restricting our liberties more by refusing to accept the simple, temporary inconveniences and sacrifices required.
So, after complimenting him I wrote back:
Something additional to think about in the article I present below. This is science, not conjecture. The Danes did consider a negative test or recovery from an infection within six months to receive a valid corona pass . Our State Governors and Federal Government need to consider it also to decrease the strong political divisions that are increasing instead of diminishing. Blind compliance and virtue signaling should not be necessary to keep a job. Firing Healthcare workers or Federal employees is an unwanted self-defeating outcome of mandates that don’t consider relevant facts. It smacks of authoritarianism not based on sound science and unnecessarily creates more harm than good. Here is just one article (there are others) that those with a thinking brain should at least consider in the discourse and conversation. There is something said for brevity, so this is only an excerpt, so please follow up on the main link. Some of the other links will point to some of the popular mass social media information/misconception that pass for official positions of settled science. Science should always balance both sides of the equation and there is always more to be considered. Which medical approach is used should be specific to each community and between an individual and their physician.
83% of blood donors have COVID-19 antibodies, study finds
by Erica Carbajal
Friday, September 3rd, 2021
About 83 percent of blood donors had infection-induced or vaccine-induced COVID-19 antibodies by May 2021, according to research published Sept. 2 in JAMA Network.
The study involved more than 1.4 million blood donation specimens from all 50 states, representing a catchment of 74 percent of the U.S. population.
Antibodies induced from a COVID-19 infection rose from about 3.5 percent of donors in July 2020 to 20.2 percent in May 2021. The combined infection and vaccine-induced seroprevalence estimate by May 2021 was 83.3 percent, findings showed.
Researchers observed differences in the source of antibodies among racial groups. Infection-induced antibodies were consistently highest among Hispanic and Black donors, the findings said.
“However, by May 2021, non-Hispanic Asian and White persons had significantly higher combined seroprevalence estimates, likely because non-Hispanic Asian and White persons received vaccinations at a greater rate than Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black persons,” researchers said.
The study will continue through at least December, with results to be shared on the CDC’s website.
This is the response I got back:
One of the things that we are not focusing enough on is that, as (EZ) points out,the Danes, and indeed the EU, gave individuals choices when it came to the Corona passes. There were three choices, vaccination, proof of a negative test, and proof of recovery within six months. None of those are 100% fail safe but the chances of transmission in indoor settings was essentially nil, provided everyone met one of those conditions
We should not keep stating it as binary choice. One can still maintain a reasonable level of moral autonomy (liberty) if one of these three choices is present. And everyone can participate safely which promotes even more liberty. True Libertarians want to maximize liberty. They understand that we must accept certain (minimum) guidelines and laws in order to achieve greater liberty. Self-defeating libertarians bank everything on individual liberty while not providing for the adjudication of conflicts when my liberty deprives you of yours. They are unable or unwilling to behave in responsible ways that respect the liberties of their fellow citizens. This ultimately forces the promulgation of rules and mandates they don’t want, thus self-defeating.
Getting back to Covid restrictions: A pass that provides choice and safe indoor environments that reduce transmission so all can participate should be acceptable to everyone, including true Libertarians.
There is no doubt the virus is already circulating in the population, mostly appearing without severe consequences. Natural immunity and vaccines do offer exceptionally good protection from severe illness and death.Unvaccinated adults should consider the risks of taking the vaccine vs successfully surviving a severe covid infection. Science has already shown that with only about 400 deaths during the last 18 months in those under 17 this group does not warrant mandated vaccines. Of 1.4 million healthy adults in the military there have only been 46 deaths from covid-19, Additionally, of 2500 Navy Seals there has not been a single known death from Covid. There is not a need to vaccinate those who have already shown immunity from having recovered from the disease, yet hundreds in the military will be forced to end their service because they choose not to take an unnecessary medicine that offers little or no benefit. The same situation exists for many fighter pilots. Many question why this is being done. The same is true in the healthcare field with nurses and physicians alike who stand to lose their jobs and practice. There is already a shortage of these healthcare workers without adding to the problem. Politically motivated bureaucratic coercion is counterproductive. Family owned restaurants and other small business are being closed and going bankrupt. The 2 million individuals crossing over our open Southern border and being delivered to destinations of their choosing are adding to our nation’s health care burden, and diminish the learning in community schools who must cover the costs. The list goes on of these negative effects of these mostly one-size-fits-all mandates.
I just got a notice that a webinar for Blackrock Silver starting in a few minutes (https://6ix.com/event/the-silver-queens-maiden/?utm_bmcr_source=client_email&utm_source=client_email) in case anyone is interested, so I’ll stop here. There’s much more that can be discussed productively, so stay engaged. Trust everyone is taking the appropriate precautions to keep themselves, their loved ones, family and friends safe and obtaining the appropriate medical care in consultation with primary care physicians and specialists.
1 Like
It’s time to question if mandates are the scientifically proven preferred method to achieve public safety from covid-19. Maybe the question really is “Does the math add up?” It appears the equation to the bureaucratically run administration looks some like “2 + 2 = who cares?, so we’ll just do it anyway and see what happens.”
Well, there are so many parts to the equation that it would take a 6th degree polynomial to solve it. The science says masking kids creates greater harm than good. When it comes to those under 17 the science says this age group is the least affected for severe outcomes … vaccines are not needed or warranted without underlying medical conditions. Likewise, healthy adults under the age of fifty, absent comorbidities, are unlikely to need hospitalization if treated with available therapeutics and have a fractional morbidity rate 0.02%. A large percentage of those most vulnerable over the age of 65 have already received immunity by vaccination. There is a large percent of adults that have survived a covid-19 infection and have much greater long-lasting immunity than that offered by the current vaccines.
Vaccine mandates for those that have worked through the past 18 months and gained immunity by surviving a covid-19 infection should be exempted. Threatening loss of job, dishonorable discharge, loss of pension and benefits. and ruined reputations is greatly harmful to the health of the country. Many of the skilled and unskilled labor force are affected without considering individual medical contraindications. This is beyond authoritarianism and smacks of a mindless bureaucratic administration that has failed to weigh the outcomes and consider all the scientific facts. Remaining unvaccinated does impose costs, but the overall costs of imposing mandates is much greater and creates greater harm than benefit.
1 Like
I’m pretty sure I can’t afford any reduction in grey matter!
1 Like
From Easymillions post:: A large percentage of those most vulnerable over the age of 65 have already received immunity by vaccination. There is a large percent of adults that have survived a covid-19 infection and have much greater long-lasting immunity than that offered by the current vaccines.:::
Maybe the Talking Heads should start being honest and put both “these” numbers together, [vaccinated + survived a covid-19 infection] = honest numbers of how far we have come to herd immunity.
** No fight- no blame - just be honest. C.s.
3 Likes
Thanks Elrac - of note is the fact that they examined neither the baseline grey matter nor the current grey matter of VACCINATED patients. A comparison between the vaccinated and unvaccinated would be very informative. Unfortunately, we’re not even getting autopsies of deceased Covid patients (vaccinated and unvaccinated) - and one has to wonder why our government seems to have absolutely zero intellectual curiosity. Too many questions that have gone unanswered cause vaccine hesitancy, and you cannot blame people.
1 Like
I with throw out a new fact that has come out recently.
If you are unvaccinated and you catch COVID; you have a staggering 18% chance of long term organ damage.
Think about that for bit.
M.G. Any % numbers on peoples long term organ damage that get COVID
after getting vaccinated? ** No fight- no blame - just want honesty - when they come out with something like that.
Don’t have it although it is certainly quite a bit lower since reported Long COVID percentages for breakthrough cases of vaccinated people is a lot lower.
1 Like
This is very significant development. Note however that is an antiviral and taken no later than day 5 of symptoms. If likely would have little effect for patients that have COVID longer as the virus is more or less gone by then but the damage already inflected which it doesn’t address. The other problem with this is that the Delta wave will have come and gone before this drug is available. However, it could be very helpful for future waves/variants.
Merck pill seen as 'huge advance,' raises hope of preventing COVID-19 deaths | Reuters?
I’ve seen recent news about one of these Big Pharmas developing a protease inhibitor - the article above does not mention those specific words, but if what they are developing is a protease inhibitor, it’s not going to engender one iota of confidence in the government or Big Pharma, as Ivermectin is a protease inhibitor which has already had documented SUCCESS in various countries. In one province in India (>225 Million population) the incidence of Covid has been reduced to about 200 cases - which is attributed to Ivermectin. Now Big Pharma wants us to pay them for basically the same thing? I really want to trust my government, but … Good Heavens!
1 Like