|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x. See the ridicule that people are subjected to, That is because you're a complete imbecile putting everyone's safety at risk. And worse you think you know more about something that people have dedicated their life to, while you just google welovetrump.com Seriously, you deserve all the ridicule you get and more tbh. Rather than following the Cancel-Culture prevalent in our society, I am a man of science, and insist on dealing with emerging data, even if it contradicts earlier widely-held assumptions. I am man enough to take whatever insults are thrown at me, because I need people to respond to data and evidence, not just mock and jeer. Here is a journal article from the prestigious CIRCULATION journal, published 16 November 2021 by the American Heart Association. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712Abstract "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test … The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients. … These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac. We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."There comes a point where society will divine into two groups: those that refuse to question anything that the government doctors say, versus those that are willing to at least consider the contrary data.My stance is not fixed. I consider all emerging data. Whereas I get the impression yours is anchored to whatever the government doctors say? first off the article is NOT peer reviewed second I just did a quick google of the author and he is widely regarded as a discredited quack Having very controversial views does not equal being a quack. You do admit that has qualifications and past experience as a cardiologist are impeccable, so just because he has controversial views does not make him a quack. When you guys were studying science in high school, did your teachers train you to instantly mock new data without due consideration? Oh, the Cancel-Culture Media must have taught you that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
Ok has to be a troll
|
|
|
|
cesspit
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 357,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x. See the ridicule that people are subjected to, That is because you're a complete imbecile putting everyone's safety at risk. And worse you think you know more about something that people have dedicated their life to, while you just google welovetrump.com Seriously, you deserve all the ridicule you get and more tbh. Rather than following the Cancel-Culture prevalent in our society, I am a man of science, and insist on dealing with emerging data, even if it contradicts earlier widely-held assumptions. I am man enough to take whatever insults are thrown at me, because I need people to respond to data and evidence, not just mock and jeer. Here is a journal article from the prestigious CIRCULATION journal, published 16 November 2021 by the American Heart Association. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712Abstract "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test … The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients. … These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac. We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."There comes a point where society will divine into two groups: those that refuse to question anything that the government doctors say, versus those that are willing to at least consider the contrary data.My stance is not fixed. I consider all emerging data. Whereas I get the impression yours is anchored to whatever the government doctors say? first off the article is NOT peer reviewed second I just did a quick google of the author and he is widely regarded as a discredited quack Having very controversial views does not equal being a quack. You do admit that has qualifications and past experience as a cardiologist are impeccable, so just because he has controversial views does not make him a quack. When you guys were studying science in high school, did your teachers train you to instantly mock new data without due consideration? Oh, the Cancel-Culture Media must have taught you that. we were taught to verify the credibility of our sources
|
|
|
|
|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x. See the ridicule that people are subjected to, That is because you're a complete imbecile putting everyone's safety at risk. And worse you think you know more about something that people have dedicated their life to, while you just google welovetrump.com Seriously, you deserve all the ridicule you get and more tbh. Rather than following the Cancel-Culture prevalent in our society, I am a man of science, and insist on dealing with emerging data, even if it contradicts earlier widely-held assumptions. I am man enough to take whatever insults are thrown at me, because I need people to respond to data and evidence, not just mock and jeer. Here is a journal article from the prestigious CIRCULATION journal, published 16 November 2021 by the American Heart Association. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712Abstract "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test … The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients. … These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac. We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."There comes a point where society will divine into two groups: those that refuse to question anything that the government doctors say, versus those that are willing to at least consider the contrary data.My stance is not fixed. I consider all emerging data. Whereas I get the impression yours is anchored to whatever the government doctors say? first off the article is NOT peer reviewed second I just did a quick google of the author and he is widely regarded as a discredited quack Having very controversial views does not equal being a quack. You do admit that has qualifications and past experience as a cardiologist are impeccable, so just because he has controversial views does not make him a quack. When you guys were studying science in high school, did your teachers train you to instantly mock new data without due consideration? Oh, the Cancel-Culture Media must have taught you that. we were taught to verify the credibility of our sources Hardest thing to detect is bias. But it's dead easy to detect when people instantly dismiss a journal article just by seeing the person's name. And there's massive bias by labelling people as a "quack" when this doctor was Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery at Loma Linda University School of Medicine. There comes a point where people are so biased, they cannot see that it is biased to instantly dismiss the findings of the Circulation medical journal of the American Heart Association, of an article written by a former president of that association. I myself have not followed Dr Gundry's theories on lectins, but that does not mean I instantly label him as a quack.
|
|
|
|
cesspit
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 357,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x. See the ridicule that people are subjected to, That is because you're a complete imbecile putting everyone's safety at risk. And worse you think you know more about something that people have dedicated their life to, while you just google welovetrump.com Seriously, you deserve all the ridicule you get and more tbh. Rather than following the Cancel-Culture prevalent in our society, I am a man of science, and insist on dealing with emerging data, even if it contradicts earlier widely-held assumptions. I am man enough to take whatever insults are thrown at me, because I need people to respond to data and evidence, not just mock and jeer. Here is a journal article from the prestigious CIRCULATION journal, published 16 November 2021 by the American Heart Association. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712Abstract "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test … The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients. … These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac. We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."There comes a point where society will divine into two groups: those that refuse to question anything that the government doctors say, versus those that are willing to at least consider the contrary data.My stance is not fixed. I consider all emerging data. Whereas I get the impression yours is anchored to whatever the government doctors say? first off the article is NOT peer reviewed second I just did a quick google of the author and he is widely regarded as a discredited quack Having very controversial views does not equal being a quack. You do admit that has qualifications and past experience as a cardiologist are impeccable, so just because he has controversial views does not make him a quack. When you guys were studying science in high school, did your teachers train you to instantly mock new data without due consideration? Oh, the Cancel-Culture Media must have taught you that. we were taught to verify the credibility of our sources Hardest thing to detect is bias. But it's dead easy to detect when people instantly dismiss a journal article just by seeing the person's name. And there's massive bias by labelling people as a "quack" when this doctor was Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery at Loma Linda University School of Medicine. There comes a point where people are so biased, they cannot see that it is biased to instantly dismiss the findings of the Circulation medical journal of the American Heart Association, of an article written by a former president of that association. I myself have not followed Dr Gundry's theories on lectins, but that does not mean I instantly label him as a quack. Loma Linda is a Seventh Day Adventist university its literally an imaginary man in the sky university of anti-vaxer quackery
|
|
|
|
|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x. See the ridicule that people are subjected to, That is because you're a complete imbecile putting everyone's safety at risk. And worse you think you know more about something that people have dedicated their life to, while you just google welovetrump.com Seriously, you deserve all the ridicule you get and more tbh. Rather than following the Cancel-Culture prevalent in our society, I am a man of science, and insist on dealing with emerging data, even if it contradicts earlier widely-held assumptions. I am man enough to take whatever insults are thrown at me, because I need people to respond to data and evidence, not just mock and jeer. Here is a journal article from the prestigious CIRCULATION journal, published 16 November 2021 by the American Heart Association. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712Abstract "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test … The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients. … These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac. We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."There comes a point where society will divine into two groups: those that refuse to question anything that the government doctors say, versus those that are willing to at least consider the contrary data.My stance is not fixed. I consider all emerging data. Whereas I get the impression yours is anchored to whatever the government doctors say? first off the article is NOT peer reviewed second I just did a quick google of the author and he is widely regarded as a discredited quack Having very controversial views does not equal being a quack. You do admit that has qualifications and past experience as a cardiologist are impeccable, so just because he has controversial views does not make him a quack. When you guys were studying science in high school, did your teachers train you to instantly mock new data without due consideration? Oh, the Cancel-Culture Media must have taught you that. we were taught to verify the credibility of our sources Hardest thing to detect is bias. But it's dead easy to detect when people instantly dismiss a journal article just by seeing the person's name. And there's massive bias by labelling people as a "quack" when this doctor was Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery at Loma Linda University School of Medicine. There comes a point where people are so biased, they cannot see that it is biased to instantly dismiss the findings of the Circulation medical journal of the American Heart Association, of an article written by a former president of that association. I myself have not followed Dr Gundry's theories on lectins, but that does not mean I instantly label him as a quack. Loma Linda is a Seventh Day Adventist university its literally an imaginary man in the sky university of anti-vaxer quackery I haven't followed university rankings, but a quick search for -- "Loma Linda University" ranking -- reveals your severe bias. I suspect you cannot see that bias in yourself. Just my quick search indicates Loma Linda University is often in around top 10%. It appears your prejudice and bias targets any university with a religious background, such as Notre Dame University (Catholic), Southern Methodist University, Hebrew University (Israel), Fordham University, Georgetown University, Brandeis University. Let a person talk long enough, and he cannot but help revealing his inner heart. EDIT IN RESPONSE TO CESSPIT COMMENT DIRECTLY BELOW: Loma Linda University is around top 10% in the United States, not in the world.
|
|
|
|
cesspit
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 357,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x. See the ridicule that people are subjected to, That is because you're a complete imbecile putting everyone's safety at risk. And worse you think you know more about something that people have dedicated their life to, while you just google welovetrump.com Seriously, you deserve all the ridicule you get and more tbh. Rather than following the Cancel-Culture prevalent in our society, I am a man of science, and insist on dealing with emerging data, even if it contradicts earlier widely-held assumptions. I am man enough to take whatever insults are thrown at me, because I need people to respond to data and evidence, not just mock and jeer. Here is a journal article from the prestigious CIRCULATION journal, published 16 November 2021 by the American Heart Association. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712Abstract "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test … The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients. … These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac. We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."There comes a point where society will divine into two groups: those that refuse to question anything that the government doctors say, versus those that are willing to at least consider the contrary data.My stance is not fixed. I consider all emerging data. Whereas I get the impression yours is anchored to whatever the government doctors say? first off the article is NOT peer reviewed second I just did a quick google of the author and he is widely regarded as a discredited quack Having very controversial views does not equal being a quack. You do admit that has qualifications and past experience as a cardiologist are impeccable, so just because he has controversial views does not make him a quack. When you guys were studying science in high school, did your teachers train you to instantly mock new data without due consideration? Oh, the Cancel-Culture Media must have taught you that. we were taught to verify the credibility of our sources Hardest thing to detect is bias. But it's dead easy to detect when people instantly dismiss a journal article just by seeing the person's name. And there's massive bias by labelling people as a "quack" when this doctor was Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery at Loma Linda University School of Medicine. There comes a point where people are so biased, they cannot see that it is biased to instantly dismiss the findings of the Circulation medical journal of the American Heart Association, of an article written by a former president of that association. I myself have not followed Dr Gundry's theories on lectins, but that does not mean I instantly label him as a quack. Loma Linda is a Seventh Day Adventist university its literally an imaginary man in the sky university of anti-vaxer quackery I haven't followed university rankings, but a quick search for -- "Loma Linda University" ranking -- reveals your severe bias. I suspect you cannot see that bias in yourself. Just my quick search indicates Loma Linda University is often in around top 10%. It appears your prejudice and bias targets any university with a religious background, such as Notre Dame University (Catholic), Southern Methodist University, Hebrew University (Israel), Fordham University, Georgetown University, Brandeis University. Let a person talk long enough, and he cannot but help revealing his inner heart. Seventh Day Adventist's by definition are anti-vaxers its ranked #970... it probably ranks highly in bible studies Sydney University is #28
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
And a flog. Definitely a flog.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x. See the ridicule that people are subjected to, That is because you're a complete imbecile putting everyone's safety at risk. And worse you think you know more about something that people have dedicated their life to, while you just google welovetrump.com Seriously, you deserve all the ridicule you get and more tbh. Rather than following the Cancel-Culture prevalent in our society, I am a man of science, and insist on dealing with emerging data, even if it contradicts earlier widely-held assumptions. I am man enough to take whatever insults are thrown at me, because I need people to respond to data and evidence, not just mock and jeer. Here is a journal article from the prestigious CIRCULATION journal, published 16 November 2021 by the American Heart Association. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712Abstract "Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test … The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients. … These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac. We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination."There comes a point where society will divine into two groups: those that refuse to question anything that the government doctors say, versus those that are willing to at least consider the contrary data.My stance is not fixed. I consider all emerging data. Whereas I get the impression yours is anchored to whatever the government doctors say? first off the article is NOT peer reviewed second I just did a quick google of the author and he is widely regarded as a discredited quack Having very controversial views does not equal being a quack. You do admit that has qualifications and past experience as a cardiologist are impeccable, so just because he has controversial views does not make him a quack. When you guys were studying science in high school, did your teachers train you to instantly mock new data without due consideration? Oh, the Cancel-Culture Media must have taught you that. we were taught to verify the credibility of our sources Hardest thing to detect is bias. But it's dead easy to detect when people instantly dismiss a journal article just by seeing the person's name. And there's massive bias by labelling people as a "quack" when this doctor was Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery at Loma Linda University School of Medicine. There comes a point where people are so biased, they cannot see that it is biased to instantly dismiss the findings of the Circulation medical journal of the American Heart Association, of an article written by a former president of that association. I myself have not followed Dr Gundry's theories on lectins, but that does not mean I instantly label him as a quack. Loma Linda is a Seventh Day Adventist university its literally an imaginary man in the sky university of anti-vaxer quackery In contrast to how you instantly dismissed the following journal article, it is instructive to compare your instant response with that of Dr John Campbell, a G.P. from the UK who reviewed the same article by Gundry: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712 Here is Dr John Campbell's review: https://youtu.be/LEBGl8MVE-c @19:30 he acknowledges that Dr Gundry is controversial, and that Gundry does not have universal acceptance, however, at @20:51 he said that the science behind it is sound, and hence merits an official response from the health authorities.That is how a trained G.P. reviews and responded to this scientific paper by Gundry -- as compared to blokes on a football websites who instantly dismiss it. Can I appeal to you. The vast majority of Australians, especially the politicians, are all thinking and acting like you did. When presented with scientific data, their instant response is to dismiss it, and start insulting the scientists who are bringing this contrary evidence. It feels fun to insult people in the minority. But two fools laughing together does not convert them into wise men. The test of whether they are wise is, not that they are throwing insults at others, but to see how they respond to new data that conflicts with their prior assumptions. Our short interchange has revealed how you responded to new data. It's not good. And when the majority of Australians respond to new data like you did, it means we are a society that can not move nimbly in response to emerging data, because herd mentality crushes anyone who dares to disagree. For the sake of our children, who are being threatened with this experimental medicine, it requires ordinary Australians to come out of the crowd-mentality, and start looking at evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
Hundreds of thousands of matches involving millions of people around the globe on the weekend.
Can we get a latest death toll number?
|
|
|
|
cesspit
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 357,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
dirk vanadidas
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Young person in Watford Chelsea crowd
Europe is funding the war not Chelsea football club
|
|
|
|
|
Burztur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xYoung person in Watford Chelsea crowd Not a football player? Is this also the first incident with a person in at a game? If so, that's pretty good.
|
|
|
|
cesspit
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 357,
Visits: 0
|
anti-vaxxers love to cherry pick anecdotes to support their wild conspiracy theories
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xYoung person in Watford Chelsea crowd Not a football player? Is this also the first incident with a person in at a game? If so, that's pretty good. You'd expect, from just the law of averages, that given 100's of thousands of games played every weekend there'd be all sorts of medical incidents happening in the crowds and in the games. Just retarded logic to point out this sort of thing. People were falling over dead in matches a long time before covid. Usually undiagnosed heart issues. Usually young males. Always tragic. Just shithouse dirk. Try harder.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-coronavirus-sport/fact-check-no-evidence-covid-19-vaccines-are-linked-to-athletes-collapsing-or-dying-from-myocarditis-idUSL1N2SK160
CRY also pointed Reuters toward data published in 2008, which showed 12 ‘apparently fit and healthy’ young people (aged 35 and under) die in the United Kingdom every week from previously undiagnosed heart conditions.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
dirk vanadidas
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Scientists believe they have found "the trigger" that leads to extremely rare blood clots after the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid vaccine.The team - in Cardiff and the US - have shown in exquisite detail how a protein in the blood is attracted to a key component of the vaccine.They think this kicks off a chain reaction, involving the immune system, that can culminate in dangerous clots.The vaccine is thought to have saved about a million lives from Covid.However, concerns about rare blood clots shaped how the vaccine has been used around the world including an alternative being offered to the under-40s in the UK.It also started a scientific detective hunt to figure out what was going on and if it could be prevented. The Cardiff team were given emergency government funding to find the answers.AstraZeneca's own scientists also joined the research project after earlier results from the team were published.A spokeswoman for AstraZeneca stressed that clots were more likely to occur because of a Covid infection than the vaccine, and that the complete explanation for why they occur had not yet been established."Although the research is not definitive, it offers interesting insights and AstraZeneca is exploring ways to leverage these findings as part of our efforts to remove this extremely rare side effect," she added.  There were two initial clues for the researchers investigating the rare blood clots: - The greater risk of clots was seen only with some of the vaccine technologies
- People with clots had unusual antibodies that were attacking a protein in their blood called platelet factor four
The vaccines used in the UK all try to deliver a snippet of the Covid-virus's genetic code into the body to train the immune system.Some package that code up inside spheres of fat, while the AstraZeneca one used an adenovirus (specifically a common cold virus from chimpanzees) as its microscopic postman.The researchers thought the adenovirus might be linked to the rare clots occurring in some people. So they used a technique called cryo-electron microscopy to take images of the adenovirus in molecular-level detail. Their study, published in the journal Science Advances, reveals the outer surface of the adenovirus attracts the platelet factor four protein to it like a magnet.Prof Alan Parker, one of the researchers at Cardiff University, told BBC News: "The adenovirus has an extremely negative surface, and platelet factor four is extremely positive and the two things fit together quite well."He added: "We've been able to prove the link between the key smoking guns of adenoviruses and platelet factor four."What we have is the trigger, but there's a lot of steps that have to happen next."  IMAGE SOURCE,ASUImage caption,Incredibly detailed picture of the adenovirus, which is less than 100 nanometres across, that delivers the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.The researchers think the next stage is "misplaced immunity", but this needs to be confirmed in further research.It is thought the body starts to attack platelet factor four after confusing it for part of the foreign adenovirus to which it is stuck. So antibodies are released into the blood, which clump together with platelet factor four and trigger the formation of dangerous blood clots.However, this requires a series of unlucky events, which could explain why the clots are so rare.These clots, known as vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia, have been linked to 73 deaths out of nearly 50 million doses of AstraZeneca given in the UK."You could never have predicted it would have happened and the chances are vanishingly small, so we need to remember the bigger picture of the number of lives this vaccine has saved," said Prof Parker.AstraZeneca said the vaccine is thought to have saved more than a million lives around the world and prevented 50 million cases of Covid.The University of Oxford declined to comment on the research.Dr Will Lester, a consultant haematologist at University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, praised the "very detailed" research saying it helps explain the "most likely initial step" in clotting.He added: "Many questions still remain unanswered, including whether some people may be more susceptible than others and why the thrombosis (clotting) is most commonly in the veins of the brain and liver, but this may come with time and further research."The Cardiff team hope their findings can be used to improve adenovirus-based vaccines in the future to reduce the risk of these rare events. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59418123Covid: Trigger of rare blood clots with AstraZeneca jab found by scientists
Europe is funding the war not Chelsea football club
|
|
|
|
cesspit
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 357,
Visits: 0
|
"extremely rare"
and AZ is no longer for Australia anyway
Reuters fact check have found Pfizer perfectly safe and effective
|
|
|
|
|
dirk vanadidas
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
QED next topic
Europe is funding the war not Chelsea football club
|
|
|
|
|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Young Australian cycling star, Sarah Gigante, had the mystery condition that kept her off the bike for months, with doctors diagnosing her with myopericarditis. https://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/article/2021/11/17/gigante-mystery-condition-diagnosed-she-continues-road-recoveryMeanwhile, this article accepted by Oxford University, in Hong Kong, medical authorities tracked every single teenager who had Pfizer, and found 1 out of every 2,680 teenage boys who took 2nd Pfizer got acute myocarditis/pericarditis. See this article's "Results", and calculate the ratio for 37.32 cases per 100,000. https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab989/6445179
|
|
|
|
|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Aussie pro-basketballer Ben Magden tweets: "Ended up in the emergency room on Wednesday night after taking the 2nd Pfizer shot. Diagnosed with Pericarditis. The Dr. said this is now common after the Pfizer shot, especially with teenage boys and young males". So he's not just saying he got damaged by the vaccine, but that his doctor said it is common. 5 December 2021 https://twitter.com/iMadgen01/status/1467245175864840196?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Madgenhttps://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/former-australian-pro-basketball-player-ben-madgen-diagnosed-pericarditis-taking-second-shot-pfizer-vaccine/
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
What a fucking pussy and the man babies in the thread crying about a needle. Like little kids having a soon at the doctor ffs. 🤦♂️
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
pwoor liddle diddums 
|
|
|
|
|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+xpwoor liddle diddums https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/7-year-old-child-suffers-stroke-and-brain-hemorrhage-after-receiving-pfizer-covid-19-shot-video/"A Facebook post went viral after a man named Barry Gewin wrote about his young niece, Harper, who suffered from a stroke and brain hemorrhage after taking her first shot of the COVID-19 vaccine. According to the post that was posted on November 25th, his niece was taken to the intensive care unit due to her life-threatening condition."
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
A bloke named Barry wrote on facebook
LOL FMD......
(EDIT: OMG - look at the posts. he's batshit crazy god botherer. )
|
|
|
|
cesspit
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 357,
Visits: 0
|
its a former basketballer so he's probably not very fit your source is dubious get back to us when you get provide information from trusted sources
|
|
|
|
|
johnsmith
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Former footballer Paul Dimattina bad reaction to booster, and then he gets Covid. [img]https://ibb.co/g7GQK57[img]
https://ibb.co/g7GQK57
|
|
|
|
cesspit
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 357,
Visits: 0
|
+xFormer footballer Paul Dimattina bad reaction to booster, and then he gets Covid. [img]https://ibb.co/g7GQK57[img]
https://ibb.co/g7GQK57
another old man with a pre-existing condition who is also an anti government activisit all your sources are dubious
|
|
|
|
|
n i k o
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWhat a fucking pussy and the man babies in the thread crying about a needle. Like little kids having a soon at the doctor ffs. 🤦♂️ I haven't read your part stance on this topic but looking at your few comments on this page I'm in a bit of shock. In fact you're not the only one so i don't direct this to you specifically. I know people that know someone that's had covid. I personally don't know anyone first hand but it clearly exists without doubt. But I do know first hand a few people, friends/work colleagues that have had bad reactions to the vaccine. Case in point a work colleague. Had a reaction after both jabs, where he was previously a very healthy and positive person. Shouldn't have taken the second but in fear of the government telling him to leave the country due to his visa and because his workplace wouldn't further employ him he got the second one as well. He then proceeded to further decline in health and has seen him in hospital for some time and now for some reason it has had a big psychological impact that's affected his mood to the point hes now seeking psychiatric help. Furthermore his health improved only marginally in the time he got the second jab but he's still not good. I do speculate when I say that I have concern that he could go down the rabbit hole of doing drugs/alcohol etc with where he is at. But its a legitimate concern. This is someone who was a normal hard working person that had never had issues. I think before throwing out comments with complete disregard for something very serious and dangerous that is occurring, please reconsider some of your comments.
|
|
|
|