Talk about cherry picked data...
If my data are cherry picked, then where are all the data showing that vaccines don't work?Most people who claim that COVID-19 is "just a flu" do not understand the disease even remotely and have made no effort to study the underlying pathophysiology. Hyperinflammatory COVID-19 that puts people in the ICU is basically sepsis. It has been shown that sepsis can be treated with antioxidants, like intravenous Vitamin C (see the MATH+ protocol for COVID-19, as well as papers regarding the repurposed drugs - fluvoxamine, budesonide, famotidine, and so on - and their antioxidant activity).
The MATH+ protocol is written by a scan organization, provides no data to support their recommendations, and is headed by individuals with vested interests in the fake treatments they recommend. Looking at the treatments they and you are suggesting:Vitamin C:
There are no controlled trials that have definitively demonstrated a clinical benefit for vitamin C in critically ill patients with COVID-19, and the available observational data are inconclusive.
Fluvoxamine:
No evidence. Biggest ongoing trial to date (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04668950) has just reported "No treatment effect" on early results.
Famotidine:
Quote from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33982938/
We found no evidence of a reduced risk of COVID-19 outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients who used famotidine compared with those who did not or compared with PPI or hydroxychloroquine users.
Budesonide does have some evidence, but it is inferior to IV dexamethasone which we have been using for all our inpatients for months.
The links in your original letter consider these drugs in the context of rodent peptic ulcers, among other things. Hardly applicable to humans with COVID.
COVID-19 patients have blood that is chemically incapable of transporting oxygen due to a buildup of hypochlorous acid that is stripping iron out of their heme and competing for O2 binding sites. What this means is that they will suffer from "silent" hypoxia, where they appear to be breathing just fine, but are suddenly turning blue in the face as their red blood cells chemically refuse to carry O2.
This has been directly observed in COVID-19 patients.
Pumping O2 into the lungs does not make RBCs chemically incapable of carrying O2 somehow magically capable of carrying it. All it does is produce more ROS injury.
There's some truth in this, but not to degree you state. If there was enough hypochlorous acid to destroy hemoglobin to such a degree, why do we not see a severe hyperchloremic acidosis? Why do we not see buffer systems being completely overwhelmed? Why do we not see profound anemia due to hemoglobin destruction? Why does intubation and proning make the SpO2 go from 70% to 95%? Why does it make the PaO2 go from 60 mm Hg to 120 mm Hg?This has been directly observed in COVID-19 patients.
Pumping O2 into the lungs does not make RBCs chemically incapable of carrying O2 somehow magically capable of carrying it. All it does is produce more ROS injury.
Trying to claim that intubation and ventilation is actively killing people is just plain incorrect.
The majority of clinical trials of antivirals (any antivirals, not just Ivermectin) enroll people who have no virus left in their bodies.
OK, so show me the randomized control trials which show ivermectin is an effective prophylactic. There is currently no evidence for this either:Quote from: https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n949
Owing to very low certainty of evidence, the effect of ivermectin, compared with standard care, in reducing the risk of suspected, probable, or laboratory confirmed infection remains very uncertain; the certainty of evidence was rated down because of serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision.
I'm happy consider any treatment provided there is some evidence it works. You have failed to provide that evidence.
Many of the concerns raised about the vaccine have been corroborated (in far greater detail) by Stephanie Seneff:
https://dpbh.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/dpbhnvgov/content/Boards/BOH/Meetings/2021/SENEFF~1.PDF
An article written by a computer scientist and a practitioner of "energy medicine", published in a fake journal which is not listed in PubMed, has no publisher, has literally zero impact factor, which is ran by a young Earth creationist and a lawyer who sues vaccine companies on behalf of "victims". And even then, they still state "there are no studies demonstrating definitively that this is happening". https://dpbh.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/dpbhnvgov/content/Boards/BOH/Meetings/2021/SENEFF~1.PDF
Come on. You seem smart enough to realize just how disingenuous and dishonest something like this is.
And the rest of your links go the same way as this one, and the same way as your original letter - off the deep end of conspiracy theories with absolutely no supporting evidence or facts.
My data given in the other thread shows the vaccine info about effectiveness was exaggerated and I do not know the final effectiveness but the the data I gave was based on Jan 1 2021 to April 30 based on the cdc
they claimed 10,000 breakthroughs in 100,000,00 fully vaccinated people durig the time period Jan 1 2021 to April 30
I completely explained how that is a mis use of statistical data and the proper way to show breakthrough cases Would be to follow those same 100 million vaxxed people from April 30 to Aug 30 2021
not from Jan 1 to April 2021
The reason is the 100 mill were about 1 million on Jan 1 sp you are using a false cout since the 100 million were not fully vaccinated on Jan 1 but on April 30.
Like it of not the numbers now seem to show lots of breakthrough cases not 10k out of 100m
So while I do not say spartcus is right or wrong I do say the cdc lied and mis used number when giving the Jan 1 to Apr 30 report.
and recently the 15 infectious disease experts voted 15 to 0 to not give booster shots to those under 65 with no health issues yet were over ruled. Both suggest something is up.
my links to follow