Jump to content

The Next Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19


Hedge

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Chris farley said:

all been about control/power and maintaining it.

 

It worked; they don't want to relinquish it.

 

 

 

 


Whether covid, online censorship, gatekeeping in media etc., it’s only ever been about aggregating power over us. 
 

Im entirely open to a rational conversation about more gun control.    However, these people are not rational and only want control.  Therefore, I don’t trust them .. at all .. when it comes to stripping away rights from Americans. 
 

Im sure they realize, but people like me will never forget how Dems have acted during covid.  It affects how I view everything now. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

you had it at Cali. The government of that state is ideologically moronic.  and wonder why they lead the nation in Net domestic migration, out of the state.

 

I know, I know. US NY'ers are like second or third on that list. if Cali keeps this up, we will never get top spot.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Timing is Everything…

Issues & Insights, by Thomas Buckley

 

When it comes to all things COVID, it seems as if the worm is turning.

 

The past few weeks have seen the release of a “gold standard” report essentially saying the mask mandates did nothing, a pair of government agencies now say the “lab leak” hypothesis is most likely the correct COVID origin story, the “Twitter Files” are forcing society to look at the reality of government-induced censorship, and the legacy media is actually starting to run stories that maybe – just maybe – the whole lockdown thing may have been a teensy bit misguided.

 

In other words, everything that got people banned from social media and polite society last year is no longer misdisconspirafomation but are reasonable arguments that should be discussed rationally.

 

And that is very good; at least it’s a start.

 

But the past three years have taught those paying attention to look beyond public pronouncements and to ask “why the change?” and “why now?”

 

Why the change is relatively simple and a bit heartening: lies cannot live forever, especially when those being lied to stop believing.  Homer Simpson made an excellent point when he said “It takes two to lie – one to lie and one to listen.” 

 

But the “why now?” is more complicated and, as everything else is today, politically motivated.

 

More at the link: https://issuesinsights.com/2023/04/04/timing-is-everything/

 

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

How many lives affected ?

 

 

 

Results Total 30,423 COVID-19 patients were analysed (86 refused the analysis of their data) including 30,202 with available treatment data, and 535 died (1.77%). All-cause mortality was very low among patients < 50 years (8/15,925 (0.05%)) and among outpatients treated with HCQ-AZ (21 deaths out of 21,135 (0.1%), never exceeding 0.2% regardless of epidemic period). HCQ-AZ treatment was associated with a significantly lower mortality rate than no HCQ-AZ after adjustment for sex, age, period and patient care setting (adjusted OR (aOR) 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55, 0.45-0.68). The effect was greater among outpatients (71% death protection rate) than among inpatients (45%). In a subset of 16,063 patients with available comorbidities and vaccinations status, obesity (2.01, 1.23-3.29), chronic respiratory disease (2.93, 1.29-6.64), and immunodeficiency (4.01, 1.69-9.50), on the one hand, and vaccination (0.29, 0.12-0.67) and HCQ-AZ treatment (0.47, 0.29-0.76), on the other hand, were independent factors associated with mortality. HCQ, alone or in any association, was associated with significant protection from death among outpatients (0.41, 0.21-0.79) and inpatients (0.59, 0.47-0.73).

 

Conclusions HCQ prescribed early or late protects in part from COVID-19-related death. During pandemic health crises, financial stakes are enormous. Authentication of the data by an independent external judicial officer should be required. Public sharing of anonymized databases, ensuring their verifiability, should be mandatory in this context to avoid fake publications.

  • Shocked 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JDHillFan said:

Did these pinheads consult redhawk on the origins? Of course not. They are too afraid he will destroy their narrative. 

 

Again, it was always a lab leak until proven otherwise.  And after over 3 years, it still hasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or humanized mice expressing human ACE2 receptors.

 

Cell culture? humanized mice?  

 

Our PPP follow the science(TM) morons couldn't tell you the first thing about either of those systems, let alone  coronavirus virology.

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

Or humanized mice expressing human ACE2 receptors.

 

Cell culture? humanized mice?  

 

Our PPP follow the science(TM) morons couldn't tell you the first thing about either of those systems, let alone  coronavirus virology.

 

 

 

Funny, you didn't want to highlight this Tweet from Andre.

 

 

 

If only King Trump didn't ignore his intelligence briefings.

 

Remember when you freaks DENIED reports that the US knew the virus was already spreading in November 2019?

 

This guy says it started earlier.

 

Idiots

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...