The Reality of Living in Australia and Covid

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Meanwhile Graig Kelly is all in a bother since the FB outage - read more here (un-paywalled)



https://www.theshovel.com.au/2021/10...Tg6O0oFLsPkgfo

You forgot to mention it is satire, for those who are ironically challenged.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by GILow

You forgot to mention it is satire, for those who are ironically challenged.

I'm not sure it is knowing Graig K.

[Thumbs Up]

If you don't want to watch this, don't (I'm not going to engage about it). This is actually our foremost expert on Covid19 (published the most papers on the subject and actually treats his patients with great success) and he has a lot to say. Needless to say, the media won't cover it. Fact check this all you want. Some of you can see what is happening (he mentions Australia). These vaccines are dangerous and are not working against delta. Early home treatment works. Over 1000 supportive studies to support his treatment protocol. Most of our deaths are from inadequate treatment. Most of our doctors have refused to treat covid.

Peter McCullough speaks at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons on October 2, 2021.

Dr. Peter McCullough 'Therapeutic Nihilism And Untested Novel Therapies' :
https://rumble.com/vnc5yk-dr.-peter-...pies-aaps.html

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Meanwhile Graig Kelly is all in a bother since the FB outage - read more here (un-paywalled)

https://www.theshovel.com.au/2021/10...Tg6O0oFLsPkgfo

Sums up him really really well.

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I'm not sure it is knowing Graig K.

Craig K is my local member and I bloody well know it isn't, mabee ostensibly, but oh no.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

Only one of your links discusses 12-15 year olds...

...The WHO currently states that although over 12 year olds at high risk should be vaccinated against COVID-19, “More evidence is needed on the use of the different COVID-19 vaccines in children to be able to make general recommendations on vaccinating children against COVID-19.”
https://www.who.int/emergencies/dise...accines/advice

SWL

Thanks for your informed rebuttal analysis.
I’m not qualified to argue any position, but only point out that the Finnish decision, regarding youth vaccination, is not currently universally endorsed.

‘My links’ were actually from the [25] Canadian Paediatric Society position statement [‘clinical guidance’], which I forgot to link.
My apologies.
“Clinical guidance for youth with myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination”
➥ https://cps.ca/documents/position/cl...d-pericarditis

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Thanks for your informed rebuttal analysis.

I’m not qualified to argue any position, but only point out that the Finnish decision, regarding youth vaccination, is not currently universally endorsed.

‘My links’ were actually from the [25] Canadian Paediatric Society position statement [‘clinical guidance’], which I forgot to link.
My apologies…

This is a classic example where there is debate amongst medical experts regarding the best course of action.

By the way, Moderna was not given emergency approval in Canada for 12+ year olds until late August, so there is even less data since release compared to Pfizer, the other mRNA vaccine. Emergency approval was given on the basis of a trial vaccinating merely 2500 youth. In the youth trial there was no improvement in hospitalisations or deaths for those treated compared to the placebo group.
Moderna’s press release states: “Additional adverse reactions, some of which may be serious, may become apparent with more widespread use of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine.”
https://investors.modernatx.com/news...vid-19-vaccine

Experts in Denmark, Norway and Finland are not unique with their concerns, despite experts in Canada disagreeing.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (UK's vaccine advisory body) has “refused to give the green light to vaccinate healthy children aged 12-15 years against COVID-19 on health grounds alone.”
The reason given was children are at such a low risk from the virus that vaccination would offer only a marginal benefit:
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58438669

The decision to over-rule the The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation was made by the UK's four chief medical officers (one for each country) , but only one dose of mRNA vaccines is being given.

Similarly, in Hong Kong in September “a panel of health experts advising the Hong Kong government has recommended children aged 12-17 should get only one dose of BioNTech's (22UAy.DE) COVID-19 vaccine after reports of heart inflammation as a side effect.”https://www.reuters.com/business/hea...rs-2021-09-16/

I haven’t searched every country, the above are just a few examples.

Where there is such uncertainty regarding the risk benefit of a medical procedure, particularly for a very new treatment, caution is advisable. With Australia having lagged behind with COVID-19 vaccination rates compared to other OECD countries this year, we have the luxury of hindsight viewing what is occurring elsewhere. We do not seem to be taking advantage of this on a number of fronts.

SWL

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

If you don't want to watch this, don't (I'm not going to engage about it). This is actually our foremost expert on Covid19 (published the most papers on the subject and actually treats his patients with great success) and he has a lot to say. Needless to say, the media won't cover it. Fact check this all you want. Some of you can see what is happening (he mentions Australia). These vaccines are dangerous and are not working against delta. Early home treatment works. Over 1000 supportive studies to support his treatment protocol. Most of our deaths are from inadequate treatment. Most of our doctors have refused to treat covid.

Peter McCullough speaks at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons on October 2, 2021.

He has been fact checked and found wanting

“Vaccines are a safer alternative for acquiring immunity compared to natural infection and COVID-19 survivors benefit from getting vaccinated, contrary to claims by Peter McCullough”

But the point is the public evaluated the risk and decided , after all it was all voluntary

[HankOnthewater]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

If you don't want to watch this, don't (I'm not going to engage about it). This is actually our foremost expert on Covid19 (published the most papers on the subject and actually treats his patients with great success) and he has a lot to say. Needless to say, the media won't cover it. Fact check this all you want. Some of you can see what is happening (he mentions Australia). These vaccines are dangerous and are not working against delta. Early home treatment works. Over 1000 supportive studies to support his treatment protocol. Most of our deaths are from inadequate treatment. Most of our doctors have refused to treat covid.

Peter McCullough speaks at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons on October 2, 2021.

Although I am not a doctor, I disagree with many points this doctor is claiming.
Funny that, there is Australian article that put this doctor (and I assume it is the same doctor), with rather bad company.
https://theconversation.com/how-snak...ad-name-165574

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

SWL, I'm a busy man - I don't have time to read all the links I post - I leave that work to others.

Just back in from toiling in the fields - here is some 6 week old info for you
https://www.theage.com.au/world/midd...26-p58m4x.html
Risk of heart inflammation is between 1 and 5 per 100,000 amongst those that have been vaxxed
Risk of heart inflammation is 11 per 100,000 amongst those who catch the virus.

I'll take the vax thanks.

Risk amongst our youth of getting a fried brain or toasted liver due to the use of drugs, either legal or illegal, over the next 40 years is considerably greater than either of those figures.

Ping, you are providing links to articles/documents you have not read? That is an appalling admission.

The whole purpose of providing a link is to back up your statements, not to bamboozle people with irrelevant links, as if your opinion is more than just an unsupported personal point of view.

The figures you provide from the Age article above do not break up the cases of myocarditis by age and sex. Another irrelevant link when discussing the risk versus benefit of COVID-19 vaccination for the young.

The risk of severe COVID-19 disease skyrockets with age and with certain risk factors. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that there are dramatic benefits vaccinating this group. The known short term risks of TTS with DNA vaccines and cardiac issues with mRNA vaccines is negligible for this group when compared to benefit.

The latest data seems to indicate the risk benefit ratio reverses for the very young. In addition is almost double for 12-15 year old males compared to 16-17 year olds.

SWL

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

Ping, you are providing links to articles/documents you have not read? That is an appalling admission.
I read them but possibly did not inwardly digest them - my bad . I do not have the luxury of spending my days sitting on my yacht - I have work to do

The whole purpose of providing a link is to back up your statements, not to bamboozle people with irrelevant links, as if your opinion is more than just an unsupported personal point of view.

The figures you provide from the Age article above do not break up the cases of myocarditis by age and sex. Another irrelevant link when discussing the risk versus benefit of COVID-19 vaccination for the young.

The risk of severe COVID-19 disease skyrockets with age and with certain risk factors. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind
Ah so it is all in your mind OK thats good that there are dramatic benefits vaccinating this group. The known short term risks of TTS with DNA vaccines and cardiac issues with mRNA vaccines is negligible for this group when compared to benefit.

The latest data seems to indicate the risk benefit ratio reverses for the very young. In addition is almost double for 12-15 year old males compared to 16-17 year olds.

SWL

I'm just back in from the North 40 but something I heard on the radio earlier suggested the split between agin/for/don't know re vax for the young was 1/3rd for each in Vic. And you are aware of course that it is not compulsory - they have the right to kill their grandparents.

And inner city Melbourne is -it seems - going the full 'Byron Bay'.
https://www.theage.com.au/national/v...05-p58xbx.html
Yep, read that one

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy .......

.In the youth trial there was no improvement in hospitalisations or deaths for those treated compared to the placebo group.
Moderna’s press release states:"[B

Additional adverse reactions, some of which may be serious, may become apparent with more widespread use of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine.[/B]"
https://investors.modernatx.com/news...vid-19-vaccine

.....

The document you reference states
"In the study, no cases of COVID-19 were observed in participants who had received two doses of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine using the primary definition."
And the word placebo is not in the text.

Why is it useful to bold and italicize the boiler plate note that applies to all drugs. Does it make it more specific to this drug or just lets the reader know you think it is so relevant:
"Additional adverse reactions, some of which may be serious, may become apparent with more widespread use of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine"

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by Paul L

The document you reference states
"In the study, no cases of COVID-19 were observed in participants who had received two doses of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine using the primary definition."
And the word placebo is not in the text.

Why is it useful to bold and italicize the boiler plate note that applies to all drugs. Does it make it more specific to this drug or just lets the reader know you think it is so relevant:
"Additional adverse reactions, some of which may be serious, may become apparent with more widespread use of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine"

Paul, if there were 3732 participants in the Moderna trial and only 2500 of them received the vaccine, the rest of them are called the placebo group.

I did not say vaccination made no effect on case numbers. It just made no difference to hospitalisations or deaths in the trial. This is an important differentiation. All reports I have read indicate there have been less cases of children hospitalised from COVID-19 than from the usual respiratory illnesses that occur yearly. Unlike some adults, particularly the elderly, children are not at high risk from this illness.

The trial was short and numbers were very small so yes, the note Moderna made about possibly serious adverse reactions occurring with more widespread use is very relevant.

SWL

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

Paul, if there were 3732 participants in the Moderna trial and only 2500 of them received the vaccine, the rest of them are called the placebo group.

I did not say vaccination made no effect on case numbers. It just made no difference to hospitalisations or deaths in the trial. This is an important differentiation. All reports I have read indicate there have been less cases of children hospitalised from COVID-19 than from the usual respiratory illnesses that occur yearly. Unlike some adults, particularly the elderly, children are not at high risk from this illness.

The trial was short and numbers were very small so yes, the note Moderna made about possibly serious adverse reactions occurring with more widespread use is very relevant.

SWL

Yes, you just neglected to mention there were no hospitalizations or deaths. Pretty misleading even if you can technically say what you said was correct.

A warning that says in the future we may find problems wirpth a drug maybe be very relevant to you. It isn't to me.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by HankOnthewater

Although I am not a doctor, I disagree with many points this doctor is claiming.
Funny that, there is Australian article that put this doctor (and I assume it is the same doctor), with rather bad company.
https://theconversation.com/how-snak...ad-name-165574

I'm beginning to wonder whether anyone on this thread is a fair dinkum 'strayan.
Not a word thus far about Goanna Oil
Goanna Oil - The Full Quid
And its still out there!!!
I bet it works better than horse dewormer on Covid

https://www.pharmacyonline.com.au/go...liniment-150ml

Seems Rawleighs are still out there but last time I had one of their salesmen at the front door would have been 40 plus years ago
https://www.truelocal.com.au/busines...ghs/ulverstone
They could probably sell you a live Goanna