Jump to content

Coronavirus Mega-Thread.


numnuts

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Anti Facts Sir said:

Out of likes, but spot on.

 

1) wear masks, socially distance and isolate to save the NHS, stop the spread and protect others so life can return to normal sooner.

 

2) be forced into lockdowns to save the NHS, stop the spread and protect others so life can return to normal sooner.

 

3) get vaccinated to stop the spread, protect others and go on holiday. Vaccines are the passport to freedom.

 

4) get double vaccinated.....

 

5) oh none of this shit worked, so we're back to a combination of 1, 2, 3 and 4 plus some extra goodies.

 

Happy Christmas.

 

OK, so it's a rinse and repeat operation. But, do you think there is a viable solution to stop this? Can we stop it by meticulously posting all the news we can dig up here, a forum in the virtual world? Or are there people here with truly good and working ideas to stop it?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

 

It helps that 90% of the people they are inflicting this on are as thick as pig shit.

It's easy to blame others. I was told when I was a boy, that if you point the finger at others, the other 4 pointing back at yourself. At the moment it seems that the 90% are not listening to what you have to say, but listening to the tyrants. I wonder how we can change that?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

so, lets see, in this conference

 

more lockdowns

 

the dirty anti vaxxers are causing the burden, we with great regret may have to make it mandatory

 

passports, look to be a better system for managing this crisis

 

more vigilant enforcement of masks and social distancing

 

we are deeply worried about children; they must all, consider vaccination

 

Marburg may get a a cameo reference

 

I wonder how much will be foundered

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, epsom said:

 

DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH/ VALIDITY OF THIS......

 

 

246640671_4760682810622473_1940903383896660675_n.png.dd1b113d992ee5bef145c1ea3a85166f.png

See hereunder a part of that bulletin of the EU.  The 5 therapies are mentioned in it. Non of them Ivermectin.

 

"Les cinq produits se trouvent à un stade avancé de développement et ont de grandes chances de figurer parmi les trois nouveaux traitements contre la COVID-19 qui seront autorisés d'ici octobre 2021 — l'objectif fixé dans le cadre de la stratégie — pour autant que les données finales démontrent leur innocuité, leur qualité et leur efficacité. Il s'agit des produits suivants:

une nouvelle indication relative à la COVID-19 pour des médicaments existants:

  • l'immunosuppresseur baricitinib (un médicament qui réduit l'activité du système immunitaire) d'Eli Lilly: une demande d'extension de l'autorisation de mise sur le marché pour inclure l'indication relative à la COVID-19 est en cours d'examen;

des anticorps monoclonaux nouvellement mis au point faisant l'objet d'une évaluation en continu — un outil réglementaire permettant d'accélérer l'évaluation d'un médicament prometteur en cas d'urgence de santé publique:

  • la combinaison de bamlanivimab et d'etesevimab d'Eli Lilly: évaluation en continu;
  • la combinaison de casirivimab et d'imdevimab de Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et F. Hoffman-La Roche, Ltd: évaluation en continu;
  • le regdanvimab de Celltrion: évaluation en continu;
  • le sotrovimab de GlaxoSmithKline et Vir Biotechnology, Inc.: évaluation en continu."

You can use google to translate.

 

The rest of the story, about Ivermectin, is fake as hell. It is not re-approved and the Pasteur Institute tested it only on hamsters, with not too good results at all. HOWEVER, that being said, there are 63 real time meta analysis of the use of Ivermectin as a prophylaxis or early treatment, which you can find here: https://ivmmeta.com/

 

You can check the data there yourself and make up your own mind.

 

Personally, I'm already using Ivermectin since about 6 months. Encountered several Covid patients in that period and did NOT got infected. This is of course no guarantee for the future, but so far, so good.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/covid-cases-uk-100000-daily-sajid-javid-press-conference-1260081?ITO=newsnow

 

“We’ve got the jabs, we just need the arms to put them in.” (the first 2 didn't work, so you need a third)

 

Mr Javid said the new variant of Delta, AY.4.2 was “spreading” although it was not known whether it would become the dominant variant.

Edited by campanar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This study is being "promoted" as being proof that Ivermectin is not working. The devil, as always, is in the details. The study was using patients that were already positive for Covid and hospitalized. It is well known, that the effectiveness of IVM as treatment for Covid is much lower than as prophylaxis. The earlier posted meta analysis show that as a prophylaxis IVM has an effectiveness of 85-86%. This is only 10% less than that of the vaccines. But, the risks with IVM are negligible, while the VAERS database in the US shows over 6,000 deaths already from the vaccines. Not even mentioning the over 700K severe side effects reported in the same VAERS database.

 

In other words: how to manipulate science to make it look the way you want it.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00239-X/fulltext

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ween Dwijler said:

This study is being "promoted" as being proof that Ivermectin is not working. The devil, as always, is in the details. The study was using patients that were already positive for Covid and hospitalized. It is well known, that the effectiveness of IVM as treatment for Covid is much lower than as prophylaxis. The earlier posted meta analysis show that as a prophylaxis IVM has an effectiveness of 85-86%. This is only 10% less than that of the vaccines. But, the risks with IVM are negligible, while the VAERS database in the US shows over 6,000 deaths already from the vaccines. Not even mentioning the over 700K severe side effects reported in the same VAERS database.

 

In other words: how to manipulate science to make it look the way you want it.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00239-X/fulltext

I can't see any effectiveness of this 'vaccine' since there are more dead bodies than same time last year and over 82% adults are poisoned. What math did they used to count this effectiveness? 

Edited by Human10
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Human10 said:

I can't see any effectiveness of this 'vaccine' since there are more dead bodies than same time last year and over 82% adults are poisoned. What math did they used to count this effectiveness? 

its not affective and javid is now promoting merks and pfizers anti virals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...