Skip to main content

Coronamonomania Lives Forever, Part 70

By December 16, 2021Commentary

Our gutless and shameless DOH had an event today designed to coerce people into vaccinating children and numerous health care providers participated in this in violation of their ethical and professional responsibilities.  We should be very, very honest about this.  The data relied upon to approve vaccinating children was completely inadequate.  Now the FDA has even taken to circumventing its own advisory committee in regard to child vaccinations.  These were grossly underpowered trials to show either effectiveness or safety.  The risk to children from CV-19 is so small as to essentially be non-existent.  So there is a strong moral obligation to demonstrate absolute effectiveness and safety before even thinking about vaccinating children.  But instead, really solely to protect adults and at the behest of the criminal teachers’ unions, which routinely engage in child abuse that goes unchallenged by one party because it is a subsidiary of those same teachers’ unions, we are continuing the campaign to ruin the lives of a generation of children, first by terrorizing them, then depriving them of an education and a social life, and now inflicting a medical product on them without adequate testing.  Shame, shame, shame and you all who did this should burn in hell.

And don’t take my word on it, as the FDA succumbed to political pressure from the White House (really, again, from the teachers’ unions) to rush the children vaccine approval through, two senior vaccine officials quit.  Here is one co-authoring an editorial on the sloppy and dangerous work being done by FDA.  (WP Editorial)

Here is more detail on the work done on supposed deaths in children due to CV-19.  It is literally disgraceful to attribute these deaths to CV-19.  Read those descriptions in detail.  So when you hear about deaths in children, it is almost never CV-19.  Copy this list and show it to your schools and politicians and supposed public health experts and ask them to insist that for that particular state these details be disclosed as well.  Please note that the database used does not include all states, if it did we would likely see similar results for even more of the deaths supposedly occurring in children.  It is simply outrageous to mislead the public in this way.  (RG List)

CV-19 enters through the upper respiratory tract so having a strong line of defense in that part of the body might help limit infection and disease.  This study suggests that mRNA vaccines prompt a very limited response in this area, except that in people with prior infection, the response is very strong.  And prior to vaccination, the previously infected group obviously had much higher levels of immune response than did those without infection, who basically had no response.  (Medrxiv Paper)

The vaccine effectiveness research never ends.  This study looked more at effectiveness against variants.  In general effectiveness in regard to infection was similar across variants, just slightly lower in Delta.  That effectiveness lessened over time, particularly in the elderly.  Effectiveness against hospitalization stayed higher, again slightly lower against Delta and again less effective in the elderly.  (BMJ Study)

No real change from the latest UK vaccine surveillance report, other than perhaps a suggestion that boosters may be limiting infections among the elderly age groups.  Just going to point out that 98% plus of the UK population have CV-19 antibodies, about 23% from infection and the rest from vaccination (with some overlap likely).   So almost all cases and transmission in the UK is among the vaxed.  Nonetheless, there is good protection against serious disease.  (UK Report)

Having a breakthrough infection dramatically improves your adaptive immune response, including to Delta and other variants.  Such an infection strengthens and broadens the response over that found solely from vaccination. (JAMA Article)

This paper analyzed the trajectory of immune responses following infection and found low variability in antibody response but more likelihood to lessen over time, and greater variability in T cell response, which seemed to compensate for weaker antibody responses.  Most individuals had a response of some durability and T cells played a prominent role.  (Medrxiv Paper)

This study purports to be a meta-analysis of high quality studies on children’s role in transmission.  I am always dubious about these meta-analyses, because of the difficulty of melding studies with different statistical and methodological approaches.  The authors find that children have a slightly lower likelihood of being infected in a household and that they are at less risk of transmission in school than at home.  And yet we still are closing schools routinely.  (Medrxiv Paper)

 

 

 

Join the discussion 8 Comments

  • Abhijit Bakshi says:

    If you are interested, my weekly charts from the UKHSA are up here: https://noline.substack.com/p/uksha-week-50.

    For graph nerds (and let’s face it this is a pandemic of graph nerds) there may be something interesting to see.

  • Corey says:

    I actually find it refreshing that the FDA is dropping all pretenses of being an objective regulator. They haven’t been objective for years, so why even pretend any more? Their leadership is bought and paid for by Big Pharma. If you want an inside look at the corruption within the pharmaceutical industry, just watch “Dopesick” on Hulu. It is based on the true story of Purdue Pharma and their quest to push OxiContin as a “non-addictive” opioid painkiller. Great show starring Michael Keaton and some other big names that is very enlightening. The FDA was a central player in the opioid crisis in America.

  • J. Thomas says:

    Parents are 100% responsible for the fate of their children, not politicians or the pharmaceuticals industry. There was once a time when these were reasonably trusted resources for information in the area of healthcare that you could investigate before deciding what to do to your child. But, like a fart in a hurricane .. it’s GONE !!

    These are mostly the same people who freak-out about having a glass of wine during their pregnancy … then jab the same child with an experimental serum with ZERO risk from this virus. We have become a nation of physically and mentally weak people, ripe for exploitation. This is just another glaring example.

    Courageous parents should organize ‘corona’ parties to help get all of the children exposed to and recovered from this virus. This would be the best thing for them, and our country, in the long run.

  • Kevin Roche says:

    I don’t think intentionally exposing anyone to a pathogen is a good idea

  • Kevin Roche says:

    the FDA has actually generally been a pretty good regulator and they routinely denied approvals or stopped the development of drugs. The FDA doesn’t enforce abuse of approved drugs, that falls to DEA and to the states, so the FDA has a very limited role. If an opioid is appropriate for some uses, what are they supposed to do, completely deny approval because it might be abused?

  • J. Thomas says:

    Always good stuff at Brownstone.

    https://brownstone.org/articles/why-have-they-done-this-to-the-children/

    The sooner children’s immune systems are exposed to none life-threatening viruses the better. This entire ‘hide the children’ approach is foolish and will cost them in the long run.

  • Rob says:

    I’m in agreement with you about meta-analysis. I think it’s good that they are being done and should be done, but the promotion of them as some sort of gold standard pinnacle of analysis sounds completely far fetched to me. So much important data gets whitewashed by aggregation that it can’t be a pinnacle of data analytics.

  • Corey says:

    The FDA has a major problem with the revolving door of leaders that go on to major roles within the very industry it regulates. Watch the show and read the details. In this particular case, the FDA approved a label claiming the drug was non-addictive with scant evidence at all:

    https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/commentary/opioids-accountability-fda-janet-woodcock-20210914.html

    “Yet it turns out the FDA never had reliable scientific evidence supporting the claim of safety and efficacy of opioids for chronic pain, according to an analysis in the New England Journal of Medicine. To test a drug that physicians would soon be prescribing to patients for months, if not years — and at far higher doses than were used in that brief clinical trial — Purdue Pharma had conducted only one adequate and well-controlled clinical trial of two weeks’ duration, according to FDA documents.”

    “One person who appears consistently throughout this regulatory fiasco is Janet Woodcock, the FDA’s current acting commissioner. Woodcock was head of the FDA division that approved the initial OxyContin application in 1994 and held the position during a period in which the FDA approved a steady stream of other extended-release opioids. Woodcock has never given a persuasive accounting of how FDA policy took such as disastrous turn, nor explained the conflict of interest of key FDA officials directly involved in the approving new opioids.”

    “While the application was flimsy, the FDA approval was rife with conflicts. According to a 2006 Justice Department memo, investigators obtained evidence that primary FDA medical review officer, Curtis Wright, invited Purdue officials to assist in drafting the FDA response in a hotel room, away from FDA headquarters.”

Leave a comment