Youtube comments of TheFlat EarthTruth (@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth).
-
99
-
45
-
29
-
23
-
22
-
21
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
11
-
Hi Dani, hope that you are well. Yes, many do assume that a previous infection translates into a high level of immune response but this is not always so. Research shows that around one third of previously infected people may not generate any natural immunity at all (Predictors of Nonseroconversion after SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Liu et al, Emerging Infectious Diseases Journal, Sept 2021). It is also widely assumed that a previous infection will give higher levels of immunity than vaccination but recent real-world studies are showing that Vaccination against Covid-19 provides stronger protection than immunity from a previous infection with the virus. A large scale study in the US looked at more than 7,000 people hospitalized with Covid and found that those who were unvaccinated but had a previous case of the illness were five times more likely to have a confirmed case of Covid than people who were fully vaccinated and had not had Covid before. (Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19 with Infection-Induced or mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Immunity — Nine States, January–September 2021), Bozio et al, Nov 2021. So in summary, large numbers of unvaccinated people who have previously had Covid-19 do not develop natural immunity, vaccine immunity may give greater protection of reinfection and immunity response from previous infection plus vaccination may give better immunity than vaccination alone. Take care & stay safe.
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Hi Finlay, hope that you are well. You asked "explain the fast falling dust at feet, tyres of lunar rover,". The dust clearly falls faster than it would on Earth as there is no air resistance to slow its descent. This situation has been well analysed and the conclusion is that its behaviour is exactly consistent with a low gravity, no air-resistance environment. As evidenced in various video sources the dust quickly falls back to the ground showing no sign of floating or being slowed down in a horizontal direction by air-resistance. On earth, dust tends to billow and form clouds due to the effect of our atmosphere. The trajectory of the dust is also characteristic of the lack of air-resistance. A perfect example of this is the "Rooster Tail" dust trails kicked up by Apollo 16's John Young during his "Grand Prix" in April 1972. This very situation has been analysed, studied and the published results are easily obtained online. "Ballistic motion of dust in the Lunar Roving Vehicle dust trails", Hsu, Hsiang-Wen, Horányi, Mihály, (University of Colorado), American Journal of Physics, Volume 80, Issue 5, pp. 452-456 (2012). They conclude that the lack of particles’ deceleration along the x-axis of their coordinate system, could only be the case if Apollo 16’s rover footage was filmed in a vacuum and in an environment where the acceleration due to gravity was 1.6 m/s2. . Enjoy reading, take care.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@realsciencerhythm "I'm afraid without a valid link it's just words". Strange that you did not hold yourself to the same standards in your original post. However......(1) COVID19 coagulopathy in Caucasian patients, Fogarty et al, British Journal of Haematology, April 2020. (2) Thrombosis and COVID-19 pneumonia, Price et al, European Respiratory Journal, April 2020. (3) Thromboembolism risk of COVID-19 is high and associated with a higher risk of mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Malas et al, The Lancer, Nov 2020. (4) Covid-19 and thrombosis: what do we know about the risks and treatment?
, Wise, British Journal of Medicine, May 2020. These are just a sample of the well over 1000 studies, research reports and papers that I am aware of which demonstrate clearly that the link between Covid-19 infection and blood clots was well established well before vaccines were available. Take care & stay safe.
4
-
@realsciencerhythm Hi again KT, thank you for your reply. I believe in an evidence based approach to medicine. The overwhelming body of evidence shows that the link between blood clots and Covid-19 infection was well established long before any vaccinations took place or any vaccines were available. I am also aware of research that shows that there is a very small risk of rare blood clots associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine in particular. The research that I have read indicates that this risk is of the order of between 1 in 50,000 and 1 in 100,000 vaccinations. This is much lower than the risk of blood clots associated with various brands of contraceptive pill on the market for example. Again, the overwhelming body of evidence shows that the benefits of being vaccinated far outweighs any risk and that the risk of serious blood clots is far greater as a result of Covid-19 infection. To understand and evaluate the risks you could read the following opinion piece from The British Medical Journal. "Putting risks into context: covid-19 vaccines and blood clots", Alexandra Freeman, Executive Director, Winton Centre for Risk & Evidence, Communication, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Cambridge, May 2021. Take care & stay safe.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@marianogilglz9049 Hi again Mariano, thank you for your reply. I have watched that video and nowhere did I find any suggestion that she has any qualifications or experience in virology or epidemiology so my original point stands. Dr Laurie is an expert in obstetrics and gynaecology, not viruses. Also it is very important to note that her study that she mentions (actually a meta study) was not peer reviewed nor was it published in any reliable journal. Is it not also true that there are major issues with some of the reports that she cites in her meta study? For example the paper Elgazzar A, Eltaweel A, Youssef SA, et al. Efficacy and safety of ivermectin for treatment and prophylaxis of covid-19 pandemic. Res Square. 2020, was actually withdrawn in July 2021 due to issues of fabrication of data, plagiarism and also, bizarrely, it turned out that it contained data from patients who had died before the trial had actually started! Several other papers that she cites in the meta study also have been found to have major errors and flaws. In short, Laurie's meta study has been shown to be based on flawed and possibly fabricated research and is not considered reliable in any way. Take care and stay safe.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Alex-hr2df Thank you for your reply. I asked for evidence, unfortunately all that you have been able to do is make further unevidenced claims. These claims are the usual jaded offerings that have been debunked many, many times before.
(1) "Shadows in images proving spot lights"...If there were multiple light sources as you claim then every single object would produce multiple shadows. However we do not observe this in any of the thousands of Apollo photographs.
(2) “No crater of thrusters”. The Descent Stage rocket engine produced a thrust of just 3000lb on landing and this engine was cut some 2m above the surface. No “crater” could possible be expected in these conditions.
(3) “No dust on the the (sic) pads”. Incorrect, dust is observed on the landing pads in some of the missions ( AS16-107-17442). That said, what exactly does basic Physics tell us should happen to dust disturbed and given momentum in a vacuum?
(4) “Camera lens crosshairs hidden behind objects”. The crosshairs aren’t behind objects, they’re washed out, as occurs often for any thin object photographed against an overexposed bright background, especially after repeated analogue duplications of a photo. The apparently covered crosshairs are often visible in the original pictures.
(5) “Illuminated dark side of the astronaut”. (Please identify this photograph). Does the lunar surface reflect light, yes or no?
(6) “Ridiculous fuel capacity compared to distance”. Strange that none of the many thousands of highly qualified scientists and engineers involved in the Apollo Program and the many who have studied it over the decades see any difficulty here. Please provide your detailed calculations on this issue to include all your research, assumptions, published work etc.
One has a choice, blindly regurgitate the usual conspiracy nonsense claims without providing any evidence to back them up or actually go and study some basic science. Take care.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Analysis by physicists of various pieces of Apollo footage has concluded that it was filmed in an environment with no atmospheric resistance and within a gravity field where g = 1.6 m/s2. A perfect example of this is the "Rooster Tail" dust trails kicked up by Apollo 16's John Young during his "Grand Prix" in April 1972. This very situation has been analysed, studied and the published results are easily obtained online. "Ballistic motion of dust in the Lunar Roving Vehicle dust trails", Hsu, Hsiang-Wen, Horányi, Mihály, (University of Colorado), American Journal of Physics, Volume 80, Issue 5, pp. 452-456 (2012). They conclude that the lack of particles’ deceleration along the x-axis of their coordinate system, could only be the case if Apollo 16’s rover footage was filmed in a vacuum and in an environment where the acceleration due to gravity was 1.6m/s2. Take care.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Hi HP, hope that you are well. You asked "If we did land a man on the moon then why did we stop sending more?" Well after Apollo 11, NASA did......6 more times, 5 of these missions landing on the lunar surface. By 1972 after the Apollo 17 mission all the aims of the decade long Apollo Program had been realised and In the 1970,s and 80's NASA invested their resources in projects such as the Voyager probes and the space shuttle. After the huge cost of the Apollo missions the NASA budget was drastically reduced. The Apollo program cost the equivalent of $170 in todays money and NASA's portion of the federal budget, which was 4% in 1965, declined to about 1% for most of the last 50 years and was less than 0.5% in 2020. Technology had moved on, the Saturn V rocket was no longer being built and there was little political will to redo everything again from scratch. Politics also played a role as each successive president seemed to have a different space agenda. Nixon for example was not over concerned with lunar missions as they were more associated with Kennedy. Finally, in the last few years, all the political, economic and scientific conditions seemed to have to all fallen into place for a return. It has always been on NASA's agenda to return to the moon and it seems that this is finally happening with the Artemis Program. Take care.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@mrvivek815 Thank you for your reply. Not even slightly. It is not simply a matter of "deciding" to go or not to go. A large number of conditions and variables had to perfectly align for this to be possible. The Apollo Program, landing men on the Moon and successfully returning them to Earth has few, if any, equals in terms of human exploration. The sheer level of manpower, resources and finance needed for this endeavour as well as political will and imperative mark this out as a unique event without comparison. The Apollo Program required over 400,000 people in the US to be involved. These included some of the top engineers, chemists, Physicists and other subject experts that were available. In addition there was the involvement of some 50,000 individuals oversees in such tasks as the various tracking stations of the MSFN (Manned Space Flight Network) right across the Globe. The MSFN used a network of giant satellite dishes and radio antenna such as Goldstone (70m), Parkes, Australia (64m), Honeysuckle Creek, Australia (24m) and Madrid, Spain (34m). The Saturn V Rocket was manufactured by multinational companies such as Boeing, Douglas and North American Aviation. The Landing Module by Grumman and computers by IBM. Dozens of other firms were involved. NASA budget was 4.41% of the Federal Budget in 1966 compared to 0.48% in 2020. The Apollo Program lasted over a decade and built upon the work done in the Mercury and Gemini Programs. During the Apollo era NASA had basically just one aim, to fulfil Kennedys promise of "landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth". The geo-political situation of the 1960's and the Cold War also gave huge impetus to the project. Although all 6 Moon Landings occurred in the presidency of Richard Nixon they were very much in the public mind associated with JFK. Nixon was not particularly keen in continuing the Apollo Missions. By 1972 the Apollo Program had fulfilled all of its objectives and more. The space exploration agenda moved on to satellites, Skylab, Voyager Probes and the Space Shuttle. Thankfully after over five decades the scientific, financial and political conditions have aligned once again and the Atriums Program looks set to return humans to the Moon. Take care.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@cocos8903 Covid-19 is a disease so to attach the phrase "being isolated" to it is meaningless. Covid-19 is caused by the SARS-Cov-2 virus which has been isolated, sequenced and imaged literally thousands of times. Whoever has told you otherwise has misinformed you. The SARS-Cov-2 virus was isolated and identified as far back as Jan 2020 and its entire genetic makeup (genome) was widely published online within days (one example published in the Lancet, Vol 395, Feb 2020). Other examples are "Virus Isolation from the First Patient with SARS-CoV-2 in Korea", Park et al, Journal of Korean Medical Science, Feb 2020 and "SARS-CoV-2 isolation from the first reported patients in Brazil", Danielle Bastos Araujo, March 2020. The same has occurred for the many hundreds of variants that have been identified as well. Take care, stay safe, speak truth, learn some basic science. PS: Public Health England (please at least get their name correct) never "admitted" any such thing, please look ate the FOI request Aug 2020).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@aikidoisthebombyeah You have lost your bet. "Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference (Full Mission)" on YT channel "lunarmodule5". Timestamps: 23:31, 25:20, 40:00, 47:54, 49:06, 52:43, 56:43, 1:02:25, 1:03:52, 1:08:50, 1:10:27. In future if you are going to make a comment on a video, actually go and watch that video first and not just the tightly edited short clips that your reality denier guru has allowed you to watch. Take care.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Divine Truth1 You seem to have been misinformed!. The SARS-Cov-2 virus was isolated and identified as far back as Jan 2020 and its entire genetic makeup (genome) was widely published online within days (one example published in the Lancet, Vol 395, Feb 2020). Other examples are "Virus Isolation from the First Patient with SARS-CoV-2 in Korea", Park et al, Journal of Korean Medical Science, Feb 2020 and "SARS-CoV-2 isolation from the first reported patients in Brazil", Danielle Bastos Araujo, March 2020. The same has occurred for the many hundreds of variants that have been identified as well. Take care, stay safe, speak truth, do research.
2
-
Divine Truth1 Again, I do not want to appear rude, but you are specialising in non-factual comments. There is a very tiny risk of a rare blood clot with the British AstraZeneca vaccine but this must be balanced with the knowledge that the risk of some blood clots resulting from Covid-19 infection are many times higher can be up to 100 times greater than normal background risk. (Cerebral venous thrombosisand portal vein thrombosis: a retrospective cohort study of 537,913COVID-19 cases, Maxime Taquet, Masud Husain, John R Geddes, Sierra Luciano, Paul J Harrison, NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre, 2021). Take care, report facts, be nice.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@andylaauk Hi andy again. With a break through virus it is not surprising that a certain number of fully vaccinated people will get seriously ill, hospitalised and die. However the rates of serious illness, hospitalisation and deaths in the unvaccinated cohort in every country that I have researched is far out of proportion to their size in the community and their risk factor for serious illness and death is unfortunately many times greater than for the vaccinated population. There are many. many reports and research papers from many different countries that show this, here are just a sample. (1) "Unvaccinated face 11 times risk of death from delta variant, CDC data show", Author: Owen Dyer, Published in British Medical Journal, 16 Sept 2021. (2) Public Health England recently published document "Covid-19 Surveillance Report Week 36 ", What is really interesting in that in Table 5(b) is the comparison between unvaccinated and vaccinated cohorts for Covid-19 death rates per 100,000 of population. This shows that unvaccinated people in all age groups are far more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated. 18-29 = 4 times, 30-39 = 6.5 times, 40-49 = 6.3 times, 50-59 = 9.1 times, 60-69 = 6.7 times, 70-79 = 5.4 times & >80 = 3.2 times. (3) The ONS report, "Deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 2 January and 2 July 2021", 13 Sept 2021, which states "Of the 51,281 deaths from Covid-19 in England between 2 January and 2 July 2021, 50,641 were of people who were not fully vaccinated. It is sad to see so many needless deaths of so many unvaccinated people.". Have a read of these and let me know what you think. Take care.
2
-
@lynnB3159 Hi Lynn, I hope that you are well. You mentioned that in your opinion the vaccine "does not work and ruins your bodies immune system". I have not seen any evidence or research that suggests either of these opinions to be true. If you can provide or reference any I would be delighted to discuss it with you. I have encountered a large body of research that shows that vaccines are highly effective in reducing serious illness and deaths from Covid-19. For example: (1) "Unvaccinated face 11 times risk of death from delta variant, CDC data show", Author: Owen Dyer, Published in British Medical Journal, 16 Sept 2021. (2) Public Health England recently published document "Covid-19 Surveillance Report Week 36 ", What is really interesting in that in Table 5(b) is the comparison between unvaccinated and vaccinated cohorts for Covid-19 death rates per 100,000 of population. This shows that unvaccinated people in all age groups are far more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated. 18-29 = 4 times, 30-39 = 6.5 times, 40-49 = 6.3 times, 50-59 = 9.1 times, 60-69 = 6.7 times, 70-79 = 5.4 times & >80 = 3.2 times. (3) The ONS report, "Deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 2 January and 2 July 2021", 13 Sept 2021, which states "Of the 51,281 deaths from Covid-19 in England between 2 January and 2 July 2021, 50,641 were of people who were not fully vaccinated. It is sad to see so many needless deaths of so many unvaccinated people.". Have a read of these and let me know what you think. Take care.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@marianogilglz9049 H again Mariano, thank you for your reply. Why are you going off on a tangent about "big pharma"? Why not stick to the points at hand? (1) Is it not true that Dr Laurie is an expert in obstetrics and gynaecology, not viruses. and she does not has any qualifications or experience in virology or epidemiology (nor in fairness does she claim to in the video) so my original point still stands. (2) Is it not a fact that one of the papers that Laurie relies in in her meta study the paper by Elgazzar A, Eltaweel A, Youssef SA, et al. Efficacy and safety of ivermectin for treatment and prophylaxis of covid-19 pandemic. Res Square. 2020, was actually withdrawn last July by the journal that published it due to issues of fabrication of data, plagiarism and also, bizarrely, it turned out that it contained data from patients who had died before the trial had actually started! (3) Is it not also true that several other papers that she cites in the meta study also have been found to have major errors and flaws including the same patient data being used multiple times for supposedly different people. Evidence that selection of patients for test groups was not random. Numbers unlikely to occur naturally/ Percentages calculated incorrectly ? (4) Isn't it also true that the largest and highest quality ivermectin study published so far is the Together trial at the McMaster University in Canada, which found no benefit whatsoever for the drug when it comes to the treatment of Covid-19? Take care & stay safe.
2
-
@marianogilglz9049 Hi again Mariano "you obviously are somebody paid to do so". It is regrettable that you can not have a civil discussion without resorting to fantasy. You also seem to wish wish to constantly change the topic of our discussion by introducing new material and new names. You have done this before. This discussion is not about you and me, it is about the facts. This discussion is about Therese Laurie, Ivermectin, and your assertion that she is "an expert in coducting (sic) ..drug evaluations" (1) I claim that this is incorrect as she is in fact qualified in obstetrics and gynaecology and does not have qualifications in epidemiology or virology or related fields. (2) I also state clearly that there are major issues with some of the reports that she cites in her meta study? For example the paper Elgazzar A, Eltaweel A, Youssef SA, et al. Efficacy and safety of ivermectin for treatment and prophylaxis of covid-19 pandemic. Res Square. 2020, was actually withdrawn in July 2021 due to issues of fabrication of data, plagiarism and also, bizarrely, it turned out that it contained data from patients who had died before the trial had actually started! (3) Several other papers that she cites in the meta study also have been found to have major errors and flaws. In short, Laurie's meta study has been shown to be based on flawed and possibly fabricated research and is not considered reliable in any way. You have not been able to counter my above three points in any way. When you agree that the above 3 points are factual then I am more then happy to discuss further issues. Take care.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Bendy-oceans-lol Hi again Shane, thank you for your reply. "Practical demonstration is what science is". While practical demonstrations are quite illustrative and informative, one can not reduce science to this alone. That said, every practical demonstration and investigation that has ever been done on the topic such as pendulum motion, Coriolis Effect, Eotvos Effect , the weight of objects decreasing as the latitude increases, apparent star rotation about N and S poles, and many more, all show that we live on a rotating planet. In short every observation and investigation that has been done shows that the Earth is rotating, no investigation has ever show otherwise. Take care & stay safe.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cocos8903 Hi again CoCo S. "60,000 medical scientists ....on the Great Barrington declaration" Again, and with the greatest of respect, you really need to do some research on this. The GBD was unverified online petition which numbered among its early signatories Dr. Michael Mouse, Dr. Adolf Hitler and at least a dozen Dr. Harold Shipmans. As the names added became more and more ludicrous the list of signatures was hidden from the public. While there was a small number of real scientists and medical professionals involved the vast majority of names were either false, homeopaths, faith healers or the same individuates logging in several times.The ideas mentioned in it are unsupported by existing scientific evidence, are entirely speculative and are nothing more than a fringe view. The president of UK’s Academy of Medical Sciences, Professor Sir Robert Lechler has described the idea as “unethical and simply not possible.” He also points out that the virus “is in no way benign for the young and fit” and that there is much that we still have to discover about the long term effects of the disease. The WHO and numerous public-health bodies have stated that the proposed strategy is dangerous, unethical, unscientific and would lead to a large number of avoidable deaths among both older people and younger people with underlying health conditions. In late 2020 in a document published in The Lancet more than 6,200 real scientists, health professionals, and research organizations signed a memorandum rejecting herd immunity as a legitimate strategy and described it as a “dangerous fallacy unsupported by scientific evidence.” The GBD and its extreme right wing backers in the US has been totally discredited and shown up for the nonsense that it is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@noahjbarr Thank you for your reply. Absolutely noting that you have said comes even remotely close to being evidence. All you have done is make further unevidenced claims and even then you have not even been able to fully articulate them in any way. You have also made claims that are simply not factual and you seem to have very poor knowledge of and have done very poor research on the topic.
(1) “shadows”. Here you haven’t even made a point!
(2) “1 camera was taken to Apollo 11”…..This is non-factual. The camera equipment carried by Apollo 11 consisted of one 70-mm Hasselblad electric camera, two Hasselblad 70-mm lunar surface superwide-angle cameras, one Hasselblad EL data camera, two 16-mm Maurer data acquisition cameras, one 35-mm lunar surface closeup stereoscopic camera and the Westinghouse TV camera.
(3) “Unedited NASA tape various investigation journalist received”. Another unevidenced claim. Please provide full details.
(4) “Astronaut interviews being accused”……Do you mean astronauts being stalked by a known liar, fraud and convicted criminal?
(5) “all records were deleted”…..You mean the records, footage, technical documents, plans, research papers, audio, thousands of photographs, etc that can be found all over the internet?
(6) “billion dollar investment in the Apollo program”….much closer to $300 billion in todays money.
Do better than throw out utter nonsense. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
(1) What has been the effect of covid-19 on suicide rates?
British Medical Journal, BMJ 2021; (Published 29 March 2021) (2) Deaths from suicide that occurred in England and Wales between April and July 2020, ONS Report, Emyr John, Rabiya Nasir and Ben Windsor-Shellard, September 2021. (3) Suicide in England since the COVID-19 pandemic - early figures from real-time surveillance, Louis Appleby, Nav Kapur, Pauline Turnbull, Nicola Richards and the National Confidential Inquiry team. (4) What has been the effect of covid-19 on suicide rates?, Appleby (opinion piece but gives links to several other reports) British Medical Journal, March 2021. These, and dozens of other reports suggest that thankfully suicide and self-harm rates did not increase during the lockdowns. However, this outcome shouldn't be taken for granted as the rates in many developed countries are quite high as is and also I have read one report that puts forward the idea that some effect of lockdowns could take place in the following months. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@greyaliien Hi again GA, thank you for your latest comment. "Results in countless studies have given positive results"... Basically, there have been 20 or so papers published (or preprints) which claimed to show a positive effect of Ivermectin in Covid-19 treatment. Many are interlinked and depend on each other. I have read them all. Several have been proved beyond doubt to be fraudulent and have been withdrawn. Others will soon follow leaving little, if any, evidence left. I can go into much further detail on this if you wish? Just say the word. ...."with vaccines being rolled out without sufficient trials on efficacy and safety"...As far as I am aware, the various Covid-19 vaccines are among the most tested medications ever produced. The size of the phase 3 trials dwarf anything I have previously encountered. Modena 28,207, AZ 32,449, Pfizer 46, 307, Jansen 39,321. It is very hard to sustain an argument that they have not been tested. ....."you didn't address the fact that side effects are virtually zero"....This is correct, but the negative side effects of taking an umbrella on an airplane is virtually zero but it wont be much help if you have to bail out. Take care & stay safe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fraukeschmidt8364 Hi Frauke, thank you for your comment. You have thrown a lot of ideas out there and not wanting to appear rude but you have included a good few conditional words in your comment ("Maybe", "possibility"). Perhaps if you could do the research yourself on your hypotheses and get back to me then I may be able to give you my opinion. Also, why would you think that it is not possible for scientists, statisticians and medical professionals to estimate the number of deaths, infections and hospitalisations saved by vaccination. According to the latest PHE, Vaccine Surveillance Report "The latest estimates suggest that 105,900 deaths and 24,088,000 infections have been prevented as a result of the COVID-19 vaccination programme, up to 20 August. The results were produced using the real-time pandemic surveillance model from PHE and Cambridge University’s MRC Biostatistics Unit, looking at the direct and indirect impact of the COVID-19 vaccination programme on infections and mortality. The total was calculated by comparing the estimated impact of vaccination on infection and mortality against a worst-case scenario where no vaccines and no additional non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were in place to reduce infections and mortality." The figures were not plucked out of thin air. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pipkins1972 Hi Adam, you said "The death rate does not add up to a pandemic". If you look at the figures then I feel that it most certainly does. In the UK in 2018, 616,014 people died, in 2019, 604,707 people died and then in 2020 there was a big jump of over 91k deaths and 695,812 people died. This is a year on year increase of just over 15% which is quite significant and in the last 100 years such a spike in UK mortality has previously only been observed in times of war or pandemic eg: 1918 (ww1 & great flu), 1929 (flu), 1940 (ww2), 1951 (flu). All this is very clear to see on a graph. Google "Number of deaths in the United Kingdom from 1887 to 2020" and find an excellent graph on the Statista website which illustrates this very well. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Andrew-ri5qo Hi again Andrew, it is good that you are more civil this time, I respect that. Let us not lose sight of the fact that I originally mentioned to you that your comment that "The virus is immune to these vaccines" is incorrect and politely aske you "to prove me wrong". To date you have not done that. I do not call you a liar for making this claim, I just think that you are wrong.The report from PHE that you cited showed that in a highly vaccinated population the risk of death from Covid-19 is much higher in the unvaccinated population which is the opposite of your original claim. To back my assertion that vaccines work (1)I draw you attention to the Public Health England website and the recently published document "Covid-19 Surveillance Report Week 36 ", What is really interesting in that in Table 5(b) is the comparison between unvaccinated and vaccinated cohorts for Covid-19 death rates per 100,000 of population. This shows that unvaccinated people in all age groups are far more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated. 18-29 = 4 times, 30-39 = 6.5 times, 40-49 = 6.3 times, 50-59 = 9.1 times, 60-69 = 6.7 times, 70-79 = 5.4 times & >80 = 3.2 times. (2) The ONS report, "Deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 2 January and 2 July 2021", 13 Sept 2021, which states "Of the 51,281 deaths from Covid-19 in England between 2 January and 2 July 2021, 50,641 were of people who were not fully vaccinated. It is sad to see so many needless deaths of so many unvaccinated people." and from US data (3) ""Unvaccinated face 11 times risk of death from delta variant, CDC data show", Author: Owen Dyer, Published in British Medical Journal, 16 Sept 2021.". Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AlienFrequency Hi again AF, thank you for your reply and I hope that you continue to be well. In your original comment you wrote "There are so many weird, unexplainable videos and other circumstantial facts that debunk that they actually went (to the moon)" and I asked you if you would be good enough to elaborate on this comment. You did, thank you, but I find it interesting that most, if not all, of your back-up comments do not directly refer to the Apollo Missions but things that happened decades later. Your comments are also vague, you fail to give specific details of anything that you claim eg: Source, video, date, website etc, so it makes it difficult for me to be specific in my reply. That said: (1) "Obama", "low earth orbit". What exactly was this comment?, what was it's context? Please provide the original source, otherwise I can not comment on it. (2) "NASA "losing" the original footage". Some magnetic tapes used for Apollo 11 Mission where reused in the late 1980's due to cost reasons. However there is no missing footage from Apollo 11 as all the video transmissions that were relayed to the Mission Control in Houston during the mission was also recorded on a format which could be broadcast on television. (3) "NASA saying we don't have the tech anymore". From the end of the Apollo Program in 1972 to the current Artemis Mission this is basically an accurate statement. Grumman are no longer making Lunar Lander Modules. Boeing, Douglas and North American Aviation were no longer building Saturn V rockets, the Apollo Program was wound down, it's objectives reached, and tens of thousands of scientists, engineers etc, were moved to other tasks or lost their jobs. The NASA budget was slashed from 4% of US government spending during Apollo years to less than 0.5% today and NASA priorities in the 1970's had moved on to projects such as Voyager and Mariner probes and the space shuttle. All the plans, blueprints, designs and technical documents for all the Apollo Mission hardware all still exist but the knowledge base of the 400,000 plus employees is long gone and the Apollo Mission technology is lost to time. To go to the moon again, NASA will have to start from scratch, which is exactly what they are doing with the Artemis Program. (4) "astronaut opens the hatch door and it flops around like it's made of paper". Where in any of the footage from any of the Apollo Missions did this occur? Are you perhaps referring to the thermal covers over the hatches on the ISS? Please explain. (5) "ISS footage where there are clear green screen or CGI effects". I am aware that such ridicules notions are peddled by certain individuals that will "cherry pick" certain video artefacts and streaming errors and weave a narrative around them. The questions that you have to ask yourself is are these people suitably qualified to make such judgements and also why do the only ever show tiny snippets of the thousands of hours footage available? The YouTube video titled "Debunking the 'FAKE' claims once and for all" on the channel of professional photographer Dave McKeegan, will debunk all this better than I. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@raven_wondervocals2166 Dust kicked up on the lunar surface will behave differently compared to an equilivent situation on Earth. On Earth dust will billow and form clouds as it encounters air resistance. It will also deaccelerate along the horizontal (x-axis) as air resistance slows its movement down. An analysis of the behaviour of the Apollo mission footage shown no such deacceleration of the dust. A perfect example of this is the "Rooster Tail" dust trails kicked up by Apollo 16's John Young during his "Grand Prix" in April 1972. This very situation has been analysed, studied and the published results are easily obtained online. "Ballistic motion of dust in the Lunar Roving Vehicle dust trails", Hsu, Hsiang-Wen, Horányi, Mihály, (University of Colorado), American Journal of Physics, Volume 80, Issue 5, pp. 452-456 (2012). They conclude that the lack of particles’ deceleration along the x-axis of their coordinate system, could only be the case if Apollo 16’s rover footage was filmed in a vacuum. Enjoy reading, take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is not simply a matter of "funds". The Apollo Program, landing men on the Moon and successfully returning them to Earth has few, if any, equals in terms of human exploration. The sheer level of manpower, resources and finance needed for this endeavour as well as political will and imperative mark this out as a unique event without comparison. The Apollo Program required over 400,000 people in the US to be involved. These included some of the top engineers, chemists, Physicists and other subject experts that were available. In addition there was the involvement of some 50,000 individuals oversees in such tasks as the various tracking stations of the MSFN (Manned Space Flight Network) right across the Globe. The MSFN used a network of giant satellite dishes and radio antenna such as Goldstone (70m), Parkes, Australia (64m), Honeysuckle Creek, Australia (24m) and Madrid, Spain (34m). The Saturn V Rocket was manufactured by multinational companies such as Boeing, Douglas and North American Aviation. The Landing Module by Grumman and computers by IBM. Dozens of other firms were involved. NASA budget was 4.41% of the Federal Budget in 1966 compared to 0.48% in 2020. The Apollo Program lasted over a decade and built upon the work done in the Mercury and Gemini Programs. During the Apollo era NASA had basically just one aim, to fulfil Kennedys promise of "landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth". The geo-political situation of the 1960's and the Cold War also gave huge impetus to the project. Although all 6 Moon Landings occurred in the presidency of Richard Nixon they were very much in the public mind associated with JFK. Nixon was not particularly keen in continuing the Apollo Missions. By 1972 the Apollo Program had fulfilled all of its objectives and more. The space exploration agenda moved on to satellites, Skylab, Voyager Probes and the Space Shuttle. Thankfully after over five decades the scientific, financial and political conditions have aligned once again and the Atriums Program looks set to return humans to the Moon. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AthelstanEngland Hi arch, thank you again for your comment. What I wrote was not an "effort" it is simply a fact, the different sizes of the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts have to be taken into account. I followed your instructions and found on the Public Health England website the "Covid-19 Surveillance Report Week 36 ", which I think is the document that you referred to, and found Table 5(b), which seems broadly in line with what you said. What is really interesting in that Table is the comparison between unvaccinated and vaccinated for Covid-19 death rates per 100,000 of population. This shows that unvaccinated people in all age groups are far more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated. 18-29 = 4 times, 30-39 = 6.5 times, 40-49 = 6.3 times, 50-59 = 9.1 times, 60-69 = 6.7 times, 70-79 = 5.4 times & >80 = 3.2 times. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mikeatcora Mike, thank you for your reply. ."that means antibodies must have been produced in every person that recovered" Yes, this does seem to be a common assumption. However there is quite a lot of research that indicates otherwise. Also as you probably know, antibodies are not the only immune response and defence against infections although many assume that they are. You might consider reading (1) "Predictors of Nonseroconversion after SARS-CoV-2 Infection", Liu et al, Journal of Emerging Infectious Diseases, Sept 2021, which found that "36% of those who had had Covid-19 didn’t have antibodies against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in their blood". (2) "Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 following the largest initial epidemic wave in the United States: Findings from New York City", May 13-July 21, 2020", Pathele et al, Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2020, which put the figure of non-seroconversion at around 20%. I have read other studies that put the rate of non-seroconversion at lower and also much higher rates. (It will be interesting to research what this depends on). So in short, not everybody who recover from Covid-19 will seroconvert/develop antibodies. Take care & stay safe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@matthewhall7976 Hi Matthew. The statement "there's no evidence that people where (sic) forming blood clots due to covid until the vaccination programmes had been underway for months" is totally incorrect. The link between Covid-19 infection and an increased risk of blood clots was well established long before any vaccination programs began. Published research showing this link go back to Feb 2020 and to date there are literally hundreds of studies, reports and papers on this topic from a large variety of sources and countries. What follows is just a sample. (1) COVID19 coagulopathy in Caucasian patients, Fogarty et al, British Journal of Haematology, April 2020. (2) Thrombosis and COVID-19 pneumonia, Price et al, European Respiratory Journal, April 2020. (3) Thromboembolism risk of COVID-19 is high and associated with a higher risk of mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Malas et al, The Lancet, Nov 2020. (4) Covid-19 and thrombosis: what do we know about the risks and treatment? , Wise, British Journal of Medicine, May 2020. These are just a sample of the 100's of studies, research reports and papers that I am aware of which demonstrate clearly that the link between Covid-19 infection and blood clots was well established well before vaccines were available. Take care & stay safe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You asked "how is moon landings not a common thing or haven't happened again?" (It did happen again of course, 5 times). The Apollo Program, landing men on the Moon and successfully returning them to Earth has few, if any, equals in terms of human exploration. The sheer level of manpower, resources and finance needed for this endeavour as well as political will and imperative mark this out as a unique event without comparison. The Apollo Program required over 400,000 people in the US to be involved. These included some of the top engineers, chemists, Physicists and other subject experts that were available. In addition there was the involvement of some 50,000 individuals oversees in such tasks as the various tracking stations of the MSFN (Manned Space Flight Network) right across the Globe. The MSFN used a network of giant satellite dishes and radio antenna such as Goldstone (70m), Parkes, Australia (64m), Honeysuckle Creek, Australia (24m) and Madrid, Spain (34m). The Saturn V Rocket was manufactured by multinational companies such as Boeing, Douglas and North American Aviation. The Landing Module by Grumman and computers by IBM. Dozens of other firms were involved. NASA budget was 4.41% of the Federal Budget in 1966 compared to 0.48% in 2020. The Apollo Program lasted over a decade and built upon the work done in the Mercury and Gemini Programs. During the Apollo era NASA had basically just one aim, to fulfil Kennedys promise of "landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth". The geo-political situation of the 1960's and the Cold War also gave huge impetus to the project. Although all 6 Moon Landings occurred in the presidency of Richard Nixon they were very much in the public mind associated with JFK. Nixon was not particularly keen in continuing the Apollo Missions. By 1972 the Apollo Program had fulfilled all of its objectives and more. The space exploration agenda moved on to satellites, Skylab, Voyager Probes and the Space Shuttle. Thankfully after over five decades the scientific, financial and political conditions have aligned once again and the Atriums Program looks set to return humans to the Moon. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JohnThomas-c7e "news flash: there are very few people being killed by covid 19" Sorry, this is just more misinformation which again you have failed to back up. Almost every country in the world is showing a significant rise in mortality. The UK had more deaths in 2020 than any year since 1918 during ww1 and at the height of the great flu, Italy had more deaths in 2020 than any year since ww2. The USA had 2,813,503 deaths in 2017, 2,839,205 in 2018, 2.854,838 in 2019 then a big jump to 3,358,814 in 2020. Research is showing that India has had about 4 million excess deaths (over and above 5 year average). Yes, people are dying of the disease Covid-19, to say otherwise is nonsense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rob4924 Robert, thank you for your reply, sorry for my long answer. (1) there is no evidence whatsoever that any of the vaccines causing, as you put it, "harm". Many large scale studies show no difference at all between vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts. Social media chats etc are not research, are nobody would consider them to be fair, balanced or in any way factual. I doubt very much if a ukgov website is suggesting that vaccines cause harm, could this be a misinterpretation? People that are vaccinated will still suffer illness in the weeks and months after receiving a vaccine and these have to be recorded, analysed and compared to what should be expected in an unvaccinated cohort. For example, statistically almost 750,000 people that have received a vaccine so far in the US will die within a year of receiving the vaccine but this will have nothing to do with the vaccine. (2) "these jabs have no covid cells in any of them" This sentence makes no sense whatsoever. Viruses do not have cells and Covid is a disease not a virus. Good luck in the future Robert but please be aware that there is a lot of nonsense being spread on the internet. PS: (3) Your point that the whole vaccine process has occurred more expediently then might normally have happened is still a fair one but this in itself doesn't mean that vaccines are not safe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Jon Snow went MGTOW (1) COVID19 coagulopathy in Caucasian patients, Fogarty et al, British Journal of Haematology, April 2020. (2) Thrombosis and COVID-19 pneumonia, Price et al, European Respiratory Journal, April 2020. (3) Thromboembolism risk of COVID-19 is high and associated with a higher risk of mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Malas et al, The Lancer, Nov 2020. These are just a sample of the well over 1000 studies, research reports and papers that I am aware of which demonstrate clearly that the link between Covid-19 infection and blood clots was well established well before vaccines were available. Take care & stay safe.
1
-
@Jon Snow went MGTOW You are now obfuscating to avoid the central point that there is a huge amount of evidence that shows (1) That the link between blood clots and Covid-19 infection was well established long before any vaccinations took place or any vaccines were available. (2) the benefits of being vaccinated far outweighs the very small risk of clots and that the risk of serious blood clots is far greater as a result of Covid-19 infection and (3)I am also aware of research that shows that there is a very small risk of rare blood clots associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine in particular. The research that I have read indicates that this risk is of the order of between 1 in 50,000 and 1 in 100,000 vaccinations. This is much lower than the risk of blood clots associated with various brands of contraceptive pill on the market for example. Again, the overwhelming body of evidence shows that the benefits of being vaccinated far outweighs any risk and that the risk of serious blood clots is far greater as a result of Covid-19 infection. To understand and evaluate the risks you could read the following opinion piece from The British Medical Journal. "Putting risks into context: covid-19 vaccines and blood clots", Alexandra Freeman, Executive Director, Winton Centre for Risk & Evidence, Communication, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Cambridge, May 2021. Take care & stay safe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I honestly don't think that people realise how much hard work and effort it takes to be a space denier/ flat earther/reality denier. Firstly you have to ignore all of Physics, geology, astronomy, meteorology, mathematics, geometry, as well as much of chemistry, geography, engineering, navigation and electronics. Secondly, you must never get information from any normal sources such as schools, colleges, universities, libraries or competent, skillful and qualified experts. You must instead seek snappy one liners and memes from YouTube and social media sites from suitably unqualified and incompetent individuals. Next you must totally ignore the evidence that you see with your own eyes such as sun rise, sun down, 2 points of stellar rotation, existence of a clear sharp horizon, etc. yet also accept the existence of such things as a firmament enclosing the Earth and a Sun some 5000km away with out the slightest bit of evidence. It is also of help if you have have never studied any science or engineering at any decent level and if you also believe in many other conspiracy theories. This is not for everybody.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dust kicked up on the lunar surface will behave differently compared to an equilivent situation on Earth. A perfect example of this is the "Rooster Tail" dust trails kicked up by Apollo 16's John Young during his "Grand Prix" in April 1972. This very situation has been analysed, studied and the published results are easily obtained online. "Ballistic motion of dust in the Lunar Roving Vehicle dust trails", Hsu, Hsiang-Wen, Horányi, Mihály, (University of Colorado), American Journal of Physics, Volume 80, Issue 5, pp. 452-456 (2012). They conclude that the lack of particles’ deceleration along the x-axis of their coordinate system, could only be the case if Apollo 16’s rover footage was filmed in a low gravity (g = 1,6 m/s2) vacuum environment. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@helenhenthorn4948 Hi again Helen. But not only is it true that the Lavrie's review was not peer reviewed, is it not also true that there are major issues with some of the reports that she cites. For example the paper Elgazzar A, Eltaweel A, Youssef SA, et al. Efficacy and safety of ivermectin for treatment and prophylaxis of covid-19 pandemic. Res Square. 2020, was actually withdrawn in July 2021 due to issues of fabrication of data, plagiarism and also, bizarrely, it turned out that it contained data from patients who had died before the trial had actually started! This, surely, is not the "rigor of methodology" to which you refer! Take care & stay safe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@braddo7270 Hi again Dan. So you are a "literal virologist", what ever that is. (1) "Putting somebodies immune system through a covid vaccine after having BAD covid in the first place is VERY dangerous and WILL cause deadly autoimmune diseases". I honestly am not aware of any research that suggests that most individuals can not have a Covid-19 vaccine after some period of time has elapsed after infection. The advice from the National Health Service, UK, is "Adults can have the vaccine 28 days after a positive test for COVID-19 or 28 days after symptoms started, whichever is earlier. This is in line with Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) guidance." The advice in Ireland is also to wait 4 weeks and the WHO website states "Persons with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection can consider delaying vaccination for 6 months based on the fact that natural infection leads to some protection against infection. Ask your health worker for advice." (2) There is research that suggests vaccination after infection is beneficial. For example, "Vaccination boosts naturally enhanced neutralizing breadth to SARS-CoV-2 one year after infection", Wang et al, Nature, June 2021. (3) As for no reason to get vaccinated if recovered from the illness. The NHS in the UK, The HSE in Ireland, the World Health Organisation and many other health systems disagree. Take care & stay safe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@codygolden7074 Hi Cody, you should check out the total deaths in the USA over the last few years. Total deaths USA: 2017 = 2,813,503, 2018 = 2,839,205. 2019 = 2,854,838, 2020 = 3,358,814. I wonder why there was such a big increase in 2020?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shadowbandedfortruthspreading Hi d, hope you are well. Since you haven't done the research, I have done it for you. (1) A Prospective Cohort Study of COVID-19 Vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 Infection, and Fertility, Wesselink et al, American Journal of Epidemiology, 2022. This large scale study "no association between COVID-19 vaccination in either partner with fecundability (probability of conceiving). However, they did find "that SARS-CoV-2 infection among male partners was associated with a ....decline in fertility that may be avoidable by vaccination". (2) Fertility rates and birth outcomes after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccination, Hillson et al, The Lancet, which concluded "We found no evidence of an association between reduced fertility and vaccination". (3) Ovarian follicular function is not altered by SARS-CoV-2 infection or BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, Bentov et al, Journal Human Reproduction, 2021. (4) SARS-CoV-2 spike protein seropositivity from vaccination or infection does not cause sterility, Morris, which states "Reports claiming that COVID-19 vaccines or illness cause female sterility are unfounded". This is just a sample of the Worldwide research that has taken place relating to vaccination and infertility. All the evidence shows that there is no connection. I am not aware of a single piece of research that says otherwise.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"touch the moon and immediately leave".................They went to the moon 9 times with 6 successful landings.
"no exploration or anything".........Some 382kg of lunar rock and soil samples were returned to Earth, thousands of photographs were taken and hundreds of hours of film obtained. Numerous scientific experiments were deployed such as EASEP, ALSEP, both active and passive seismic experiments, temperature probes, several magnetometers, a Cold Cathode Ion Gauge was deployed to measure the density of neutral particles in order to determine the amount of gas present at the lunar surface, a mass spectrometer, solar wind, & cosmic ray detecting experiments, etc.
"Makes zero sense"......Yes, if you don't know a single thing about what you are talking about then everything will make "zero sense". Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Vali Nova "Normally, a small control group of people are tested", Sorry that is not correct. In a scientific/medical trial the Control Group are the group given the placebo not the vaccine being tested. Also you do not seem to be aware of the extent of the testing of the various Covid-19 vaccines. In the phase 3 trials alone the numbers were: Pfizer 43,000, Moderna 30,000, Astrazeneca 24,000, Jansen 39,000. Also, vaccines are not a "treatment", they help the body's immune system to produce an immune response pre infection. Ivermectin, yes there is some evidence to suggest that this drug will prevent SARS-Cov-2 replication in vetro but further studies have not shown any great evidence of its effectiveness in a clinical setting. However, it may have a part to play but it certainly can not be regarded as an "alternative" to vaccination as it is administered post-infection.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Several people in the comments are seeking the scientific research that shows vaccine efficiency.
This is a fair question to which I will attempt to give answers. A very large amount of research has been carried out on this issue by a broad number of organisations from many different countries. The overwhelming bulk of this evidence shows that vaccines are very effective in reducing infection, transmission, serious illness, hospitalisation and death. In short, vaccinated people are less likely to get serious ill and less likely to pass the virus on to other people.
(1) ICNARC (Intensive Care National Audit & Research Center) Report on Covid-19 cases in Critical Care, England, Wales & NI, 24 Dec 2021. This report shows 75% of patients admitted to critical care in May 2021 had not received any vaccine. This figure drops to 48% by November as vaccination rates increased but is still far higher than percentage of unvaccinated in population.
The report shows clearly (p44-48) that people who have not received any vaccine are many times more likely to get seriously ill and need ICU care than people who are vaccinated as demonstrated in graphs on p45, 46 and table 48.
(2) Whole period age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status, per 100,000 person-years, England, deaths occurring between 1 January 2021 and 31 October 2021. Dataset available on ONS website. This data shows that the age-standardised mortality rate of Covid-19 deaths per 100,000 population = 938.9 for unvaccinated and just 33.6 for people who have received 2 doses of vaccine.
(3) Report “Vaccination status of Covid-19 cases June-December 2021, HSE (Health Service Executive, Ireland). This data shows that during the months July –November 2021 unvaccinated individuals were at least 4 times more likely to be admitted to hospital with Covid-19 and at least 11 times (up to 15 on some months) more likely to be admitted to ICU (Intensive Care Units) than individuals who had received 2 doses of vaccine.
(4) The U.S. COVID-19 Vaccination Program at One Year: How Many Deaths and Hospitalizations Were Averted? Schneider et al, 2021. This report concludes that without the U.S. vaccination program, COVID-19 deaths would have been approximately 3.2 times higher and COVID-19 hospitalizations approximately 4.9 times higher than the actual toll during 2021.
Take care & stay safe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"Show us proof that masks are fit for purpose" (1) An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19, Howard et al, National Academy of Science (USA), 2021. (2) The Impact of Community Masking on COVID-19: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in Bangladesh, Abaluck et al, 2021. (3) Face masks: what the data say, Nature, 2020. (4) Face masks help control transmission of COVID-19, Clapham et al, The Lancet, 2021. (5) Covid-19: Are cloth masks still effective? And other questions answered, Mahase, British Medical Journal, 2021. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You correctly mention how dust kicked up on the lunar surface will behave differently compared to an equilivent situation on Earth. A perfect example of this is the "Rooster Tail" dust trails kicked up by Apollo 16's John Young during his "Grand Prix" in April 1972. This very situation has been analysed, studied and the published results are easily obtained online. "Ballistic motion of dust in the Lunar Roving Vehicle dust trails", Hsu, Hsiang-Wen, Horányi, Mihály, (University of Colorado), American Journal of Physics, Volume 80, Issue 5, pp. 452-456 (2012). They conclude that the lack of particles’ deceleration along the x-axis of their coordinate system, could only be the case if Apollo 16’s rover footage was filmed in a vacuum and low gravity environment. Enjoy reading, take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@justadude8369 HI JD, yes, I am sure that they all know that but it doesn't suit the narrative. Either way, the normal method for assessing deaths in a pandemic is to measure excess mortality. Studies on India suggest that that sub continent has close on 4 million excess deaths on its own during the pandemic. UK deaths spiked in 2020 by an incredible 15% when an extra 91k people died compared to 2019 and in the US Total deaths USA: 2017 = 2,813,503, 2018 = 2,839,205. 2019 = 2,854,838, 2020 = 3,358,814. again showing a huge jump of over 500k deaths from 2019 to 2020. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hi Rick, hope that you are well. You wrote (2) "Temperature swings by magnitudes in the sunlight vs darkness". While it is correct to state that the moon's surface experiences a wide temperature range over the course of a lunar day (in the range 140K to 400K) However these temperatures were never encountered during any of the Apollo missions. All the Apollo landings were planned to occur at lunar dawn, when the lunar temperature is somewhere in the middle of the range. For example, during the Apollo 11 mission, the measured temperature range was between -23°C to 7°C (250K to 280K). (2) " the radiation levels outside of the magnitosphere". (I assume that you mean magnetosphere). The main radiation danger was the Van Allen Belts and the risk here was minimised by spending as little time as possible in this region. (3) " In 2 hours at the beach on earth we get sunburned". Sunburn is caused by Ultra Violet radiation which will not penetrate clothing let alone a multi-layer spacesuit. (4) "if it was so easy". Absolutely nobody has ever even hinted that travel to the moon is "easy". In the Apollo era it took over a decade of planning, over 400,000 workers in the US, another 50,000 internationally, a global network of giant satellite dishes, many billions of dollars and over 4% of US annual spending. (5) "why didn't the space shuttle go to the moon for a fly-by?". The space shuttle was designed and used in Low Earth Orbit. It was never intended to, nor could it, go to the moon! Good luck with your future education on space travel. Take care.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@peacefuljourney4994 Again more rhetoric and claims but no evidence and no citations?? Try, Effect of Ivermectin on Time to Resolution of Symptoms Among Adults With Mild COVID-19-A Randomized Clinical Trial, Eduardo López-Medina, MD, MSc1,2,3; Pío López, MD1,2; Isabel C. Hurtado, MD2,4; et al, Published 2021, which concluded "Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms. The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19," Take care and speak with truth.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@peacefuljourney4994 Thank you again pj. You have told me that several times without still being able to actually direct me to the evidence and reports. This time I draw your attention to "Ivermectin for preventing and treating COVID‐19, Maria Popp, Miriam StegemannMaria Metzendorf, Susan Gould, Peter Kranke, Patrick Meybohm, Nicole Skoetz, Stephanie Weibel, Late July 2021, from the Cochrane Organisation which is a not for profit independent network of researchers and health professionals, which after reviewing the available reliable studies, concluded "Overall, the reliable evidence available does not support the use of ivermectin for treatment or prevention of COVID‐19 outside of well‐designed randomized trials". Take care, stay good.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@grahamhilder2064 Hi again Graham, you do churn out the misinformation don't you. (1) You do realise that obtaining a specimen from an infected patient, culturing it to allow it to multiply then extracting its genetic material then sequencing its genome is exactly how a virus is isolated, don't you? (2) Science is not carried out by FOI requests. We are all aware of the conspiracy theory exercise where they asked Public Health England for information on isolation of the SARS-Cov-2 virus, were told that PHE did not hold this information but were clearly directed to where it could be obtained yet still lied about the answer. All there FOI requests and their answers are easily found online using a Google search. (3) I have shown you the evidence, can you not read the Lancet article? If the words in The Lancet are too hard for you then try "Virus Isolation from the First Patient with SARS-CoV-2 in Korea", Park et al, Journal of Korean Medical Science, Feb 2020. (4) Do you realise (obviously not) that Dr Kary Mullis never said that the PCR test can not detect infection. Seriously, how much critical thinking does it take to realise that a Nobel Prise winner won't suddenly and out of the blue state that all his work is somehow wrong. Again you are propagating lies and misinformation and cannot cite a source. Seriously man, you need to have a think about all this. Take care & stay safe.
1
-
1