Coronamonomania Lives Forever, Part 189

Other countries are also grappling with the excess death problem, trying to understand how many their are and from what causes other than CV-19.  Here is a story from England with accompanying commentary by the Center for Evidence-Based Medicine people.  The latest data from England finds an over 27% increase in deaths attributed to alcohol in 2020 and 2021.  These were caused by heavier and more frequent drinking resulting in essentially overdoses.  As the authors note, these are likely just the tip of the iceberg for deaths in coming years, as most alcohol-related disease takes years to create a fatality, such as cirrohsis of the liver.  And as the authors also state, these are lockdown deaths.  I firmly believe that any excess deaths beyond those directly caused by CV-19 will all be related to the attempts to suppress the epidemic–overdoses and missed care.  (DS Post)

And here is the annual update on heart disease related statistics from the American Heart Association.  You will note that in 2020, before vaccines were used, there was a substantial rise in heart deaths.  Also a lockdown effect.  People were stressed, got fatter and exercised less and missed needed care due to the terror campaign.  And, voila, more deaths,which we will be experiencing for years.  (AHA Report)

And this study from England finds a substantial uptick in eating disorders and self-harming episodes among teen-agers, particularly females, during the epidemic.  (SSRN Study)

And yet more evidence that will still not sink through the thick skulls of the vax safety nuts.  Another huge study finds no signficant safety signals, i.e., ones affecting lots of people, in the 65 and over age group.  The study uses the large claims databases contracted with the FDA to provide close to real-time safety monitoring.  Sixteen potentially serious adverse events were assessed.  Six showed some potential signal in unadjusted initial analyses.  Upon further examination, there was only an ambiguous signal in regard to pulmonary embolism and a small increase in risk of Bell’s palsy.  Note too that prior CV-19 infection was identified as one of the confounding factors creating the initial signal.  Every, single study using these large databases shows none of the nonsense perpetrated by vax safety sensationalists.  (Medrxiv Paper)

And I have yet more bad news for the VSNs, here is a very large study from Israel in people over 60 finding no safety signals other than a potentially weak one in regard to pericarditis–nothing, nil, nada, zilch.  But don’t worry, the VSNs still have their anecdotes, beliefs and lies.  (SSRN Paper)

Boosters are pretty much worthless, I think that is incontrovertible.  Most people have multiple immune-response-provoking events, and further ones aren’t going to make a bit of difference.  This study compared getting the newer “bivalent” booster versus the original booster.  The bivalent one is supposedly more effective against Omicron.  The followup period is absurdly short given what we know about how quickly the vax lose effectiveness.  Even with that, effectiveness was a mere 60% against severe disease leading to hospitalization or death.  And it appears to me that the authors were using a comparison of a longer follow-up with the original booster versus a shorter one for the bivalent booster, which would make effectiveness look higher.  Talk to your doctor, but my advice is to avoid further boosting.  It isn’t worth it.  (NEJM Study)

There is every reason why the body’s response to an actual CV-19 infection is going to be better than one created by limited sequence vaccines.  This study examined the response in the lungs, which is critical, prompted by vax alone or vax and infection.  The vax and infection combination was vastly superior, with a strong T cell and antibody reaction, whereas vax only prompted solely an antibody response.  For reasons that elude me, the authors chose not to study infected only as a group, but I suspect the response in that subgroup is at least as good as in the hybrid immunity group.  (Medrxiv Study)

The study finds that antibody tests alone likely understate the prevalence of CV-19 infection in children.  Unlike adults, children have primarily a T cell response to infection, and a limited antibody one, so they won’t show up on an antibody test even if infected.  (SSRN Study)