Gubu.ie

Just going to post all the graphs from a thread Fergal O Doherty just compiled on Twitter.



I think there are some interesting pieces of information to be taken from them. Main one (IMO) being the low CFR, which would mean an even lower IFR. This has to be an important factor in how we view SARS COV 2 as initial responses which have been maintained throughout this pandemic were based on a significantly higher IFR being advertised, and generally assumed by many people.

I am posting one slide out of sequence - the first one - because it shows the percentage of deaths with underlying conditions, and (again IMO) it is important to be able to use the information in it to contextualise the ''unvaccinated'' statistics in the slides as a while.
That is, I think many of the unvaccinated showing up in the stats that follow may not be vaccinated due to health status. Some have calculated this recently at about 60-75% of unvaccinated in ICU.























This last image is almost illegible because of the very low numbers it portrays. Remember weekly cases recorded will still be lower than actual cases in real life, so the percentages would be even smaller if every single case was recorded.

It is really a case of managing the health service in such a way as to cope with an illness with an IFR approximating seasonal influenza, and not of instituting medical authoritarianism against those who do not want to take the trial mRNA shots. It is unfortunate that the disease is so infectious that it causes problems for the health service by force of numbers, but the mRNA shots do not stop the infectiousness so therefore cannot be the solution to that issue.

It appears that a Ms Li has taken some 12,000 documents from Pfizer and the company has gone to court ...... read it here dated 23 Nov 2021



It should be interesting to see if anything is made public from those documents.

An interesting document about the major part of Africa and Covid (I used google translate)

https://scenarieconomici.it/covid-e-afr ... cinazione/

schmittel wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 5:45 pm If somebody wants to inject my five year old the law says they have to get my, or my wife's, consent. And to do that it would have to be a better job than just a few quick online tick boxes that was deemed sufficient for the adults.

No doubt they'd explain the risks, and stress that they are very small risks, but an important principle of informed consent is the rewards as well.

Would anybody in favour of vaccinating 5-11 year olds care to spell out the rewards to me? Whatever they are, they don't seem too obvious to me.

Well one reward is you and your family would go on Scotty's christmas card list

kadman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 8:48 pm Well one reward is you and your family would go on Scotty's christmas card list

Tight for time this year. Check back with Scotty and I in 12 months!

I suspect a lot will have changed in the Covid/vaccine landscape in that time, for better or worse.

PureIsle wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 8:33 pm It appears that a Ms Li has taken some 12,000 documents from Pfizer and the company has gone to court ...... read it here dated 23 Nov 2021



It should be interesting to see if anything is made public from those documents.

From a quick look at that it seems like Pfizer is a lot more worried about trademarks and IP rather than any sort of vaccine safety smoking gun info. If that's the case nothing will be made public, and some judge will give Pfizer whatever protection they need pretty quickly.

Though interestingly the employee in question was "Associate Director of Statistics in Global Product Development".

I would have thought the IP would be pretty closely guarded amongst the research boffins even in-house, and a statistics boffin would be more likely to have access to testing data than NPD secrets.

Might be a perfect way to ensure that any related document to this case stays out of the public domain as its part of a law suit.

"But we always knew we'd need boosters....after three months"

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/h ... .html?s=09

Just tells how little they knew about the short term (lack of) effects of these vaccinnes. You wonder what the long term effects might be

kadman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:50 pm Might be a perfect way to ensure that any related document to this case stays out of the public domain as its part of a law suit.

Perhaps, but you'd like to think that the judge would ascertain the difference and if the employee was a whistle blower acting in the public interest, I reckon any judge would make a very different ruling than if it was apparent the employee was trying to make a few quid selling IP to her new bosses.

But I do take your point, it certainly wouldn't surprise me if it turned out that the trademark/IP angle was simply to create a smokescreen, gets picked up by various media as an IP issue and would be whistleblower ends up demonised and discredited, and anybody who dares on a discussion board to say "Hmm look what this statto from Pfizer is saying" gets lambasted for spreading misinformation and denying facts.

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest!

schmittel wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:08 pm Perhaps, but you'd like to think that the judge would ascertain the difference and if the employee was a whistle blower acting in the public interest, I reckon any judge would make a very different ruling than if it was apparent the employee was trying to make a few quid selling IP to her new bosses.

But I do take your point, it certainly wouldn't surprise me if it turned out that the trademark/IP angle was simply to create a smokescreen, gets picked up by various media as an IP issue and would be whistleblower ends up demonised and discredited, and anybody who dares on a discussion board to say "Hmm look what this statto from Pfizer is saying" gets lambasted for spreading misinformation and denying facts.

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest!

When you think of it, the 12000 documents are evidence in a law suit and that may be a sure fire way for them to be protected from publication. And it could be classed as an act of a domestic terrorists, that alone guarantees a plethora of Patriot Act and executive orders coming into play, that could wrap this up nice and tight. Its happened before many times when they need evidence to be suppressed.
And Pharma have the money to keep this in the courts, protected for decades.

Banshee Bones wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 9:54 pm Just tells how little they knew about the short term (lack of) effects of these vaccinnes.

How so?

kadman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:23 pm When you think of it, the 12000 documents are evidence in a law suit and that may be a sure fire way for them to be protected from publication. And it could be classed as an act of a domestic terrorists, that alone guarantees a plethora of Patriot Act and executive orders coming into play, that could wrap this up nice and tight. Its happened before many times when they need evidence to be suppressed.
And Pharma have the money to keep this in the courts, protected for decades.

Yep, depressingly, I think you could be right.

But idealistically, I find it hard to believe an independent judge, even a US one, could sit on evidence of some sort of malpractice relating to the covid vaccine whilst mandatory vaccines are being rolled out across the US and the world.

For sanity, I'll still cling to a little faith in the idea that if there is some sort of smoking gun about vaccine safety in there, it will become public sooner rather than later, either by accident or design. I've lost faith in nearly everything else!

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:34 pmHow so?

The article suggests the vaccine effectiveness meaningfully wanes after only three months. I certainly don't recall any of the experts warning us of this back at the start of the rollout.

Quite the opposite. In early May Tony Holohan was reassuring the newly vaccinated that all was well, writing an open letter to dispel any anxiety they might have about the vaccines effectiveness:

In an “open letter”, Dr Holohan said some people might be nervous about the prospect of increased activity and interaction.

“While this anxiety is understandable, you can have confidence in your vaccine, no matter which one you received,” he said.

Three months later, (i.e by the time the effectiveness had started to wane), he was a little less bullish, but still praising the vaccine and certainly no mention of waning or boosters:



About 80% effective at preventing symptomatic disease?! You really think Holohan knew this back in May when he was urging the most vulnerable to get out and about and have confidence in their vaccine?!

Why no mention of asymptomatic disease? You know the type you don't realise you have and thus end up transmitting to others and spreading the infection. Given that the more vaccinated we have the higher our numbers have risen, it suggests the vaccine is not very effective at all at preventing asymptomatic disease.

"How so?" Pfft!

schmittel wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:44 pm Yep, depressingly, I think you could be right.

But idealistically, I find it hard to believe an independent judge, even a US one, could sit on evidence of some sort of malpractice relating to the covid vaccine whilst mandatory vaccines are being rolled out across the US and the world.

For sanity, I'll still cling to a little faith in the idea that if there is some sort of smoking gun about vaccine safety in there, it will become public sooner rather than later, either by accident or design. I've lost faith in nearly everything else!

If and when it gets a domestic terrorist tag then all sorts of things can come into play. And any crime against american interests will more or less guarantee that this will happen. And then public scrutiny will go out the window, and the new legal system that will hear this case will be a closed military court, with her having no legal representation, similar to what would happen with Julian Assange if he was extradited to the US. And a severe penalty here would scare off any other potential whistleblowers.

schmittel wrote: ↑Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:15 pm The article suggests the vaccine effectiveness meaningfully wanes after only three months. I certainly don't recall any of the experts warning us of this back at the start of the rollout.

The article is based on the latest analysis of the data from Isreal to which I posted a link to earlier yesterday.

I said there was good news and bad news. The bad news is that the vaccine (and we're specifically talking about Pfizer) does indeed wane. It really peaks after about 20 days and then slowly fades out over several months. 90 days was used as the yard stick for the analysis and that's why the media are using 'after 3 months' as the headline.

Many vaccines wane and require the use of boosters, the flu vaccine (redeveloped every year), MMR, hepatitis, tetanus . Maybe even most vaccines? So I don't think this came as a shock to anyone, let alone medical professionals.

But the good news is that in the meantime you are highly protected from infection. Have a look at the chart. It's based on 83,000 tests on fully vaccinated people. The yellow is the infection rate of those vaccinated 3-4 months ago, purple 4-5 months, blue 5-6 months, and red over 6 months ago. As you can see, 3-4 months is dramatically lower than the observed infection rates for 4-5 and and 5-6 and so on. It's particularly good news for the over 60's as even after the 6th month they are still more protected than the other age cohorts.

This is concrete real world evidence (proof?) that the vaccine is highly effective against transmission and infection at least for a while and it's the reason the millions of vaccines we currently hold in stock should be getting put in arms as soon as a vaccinated person hits 5-6 months. (I'm aware there is a moral dilemma to deal with there too.)




Full report here > https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-067873

I missed this information last week ......

German states with a high vaccination rate have the highest excess mortality

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/11/20/ge ... mortality/

EDIT:

Also this
https://www.ukmedfreedom.org/open-lette ... ty-figures

about their

alarming recent trend in Scottish excess mortality

These injections were sold universally and definitively as the 100% safe and effective way out of the pandemic.

Since then
they are not effective against incubation,
same viral loads,
not effective against transmission,
more vaccinated than unvaccinated infected,
not as effective against disease and death,
efficacy wanes after 3 months,
needs boosters, fast,
booster shows signs of waning,
needs fourth shot, who knows how many, regularly,
Quick! inject the children,
show notably remarkable adverse events in official recording systems,
will not be mandated, whoops yes they will,
lose your job if not jabbed, barred from shops, transport etc,
need lockdown because cases are growing so fast they will overwhelm.

Many people nod and smile as if this is normal and think anyone who says otherwise is a crazed lunatic.

isha wrote: ↑Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:13 am they are not effective against incubation, - WRONG! See above BMI article
same viral loads, - peak the same but subside much quicker
not effective against transmission, - WRONG! See above BMI article
more vaccinated than unvaccinated infected, - 95% vrs 5%, go figure.
not as effective against disease and death, - WRONG! See Schmittel'ss analysis of figures.
efficacy wanes after 3 months, - WRONG! after 21 days or so.
needs boosters, fast, - like several vaccines
booster shows signs of waning, - *yawn*, like several vaccines
needs fourth shot, who knows how many, regularly, - Will likely need shots for decades to come.
Quick! inject the children, - which is when most vaccines are given
show notably remarkable adverse events in official recording systems, - *yawn* like all vaccines/pills/medication/beauty products.

Are you still claiming you're not anti vax?

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:36 am Are you still claiming you're not anti vax?

The so-called vaccines are not working anything at all like they were advertised, Scotty - you can use all the red ink in the world, it won't change reality.

isha wrote: ↑Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:40 am The so-called vaccines are not working anything at all like they were advertised, Scotty - you can use all the red ink in the world, it won't change reality.

can you show me one of these 'adverts'?

95% reduction in hospital and ICU and you're not happy. No pleasing some people.

There won't ever be a 100% working vaccine from any Pharmaceutical company as it would kill off the goose thats laying the golden egg.
At least Joe public wont get it.
If thats happened, then the world would be vaccinated with it in about 2 years, and the income stream would stop....pause....

Then lo and behold...Covid 22 would appear, new vax....rinse and repeat.


Its happening already, this morning a new south african variant thats more transmissable, and already they are saying the current vaccine is only 60% effective, as opposed to 95% effective with the existing variants. How do they know this so quickly

Rinse repeat, rinse repeat. plus a little bit of fear

A compilation of global news reports advertising efficacy to the public. The second tweet has the relevant video.

He says it's 90 - 95% effective on mild to moderate disease. He was and is 100% correct.

The constant quest to knock the vaccines (and failing miserably) must be exhausting?

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:13 am He says it's 90 - 95% effective on mild to moderate disease. He was and is 100% correct.

The constant quest to knock the vaccines (and failing miserably) must be exhausting?

Here is a doctor who believes the vaccines are ineffective, would you believe her? She holds a prestigious position, so presumably she is not an idiot. And she maintains she is not an anti vaxxer .

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/06/us/p ... aring.html

ublished Dec. 6, 2020Updated April 26, 2021

WASHINGTON — A doctor who is skeptical of coronavirus vaccines and promotes the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine as a Covid-19 treatment will be the lead witness at a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on Tuesday, prompting criticism from Democrats who say Republicans should not give a platform to someone who spreads conspiracy theories.

Dr. Jane M. Orient is the executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, a group that opposes government involvement in medicine and views federal vaccine mandates as a violation of human rights.

“A public health threat is the rationale for the policy on mandatory vaccines. But how much of a threat is required to justify forcing people to accept government-imposed risks?” Dr. Orient wrote in a statement to the Senate last year, calling vaccine mandates “a serious intrusion into individual liberty, autonomy and parental decisions.”

In a phone interview on Sunday, Dr. Orient, an internist who received her medical degree from Columbia University in New York, resisted being cast as an “anti-vaxxer” and said she would not get a coronavirus vaccine because she had an autoimmune condition. She added that she opposed the government’s push for all Americans to be vaccinated against the coronavirus, noting that both vaccine candidates — one made by the Pfizer and the other by Moderna — use a new scientific method.

kadman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:46 am Here is a doctor who believes the vaccines are ineffective, would you believe her?

No. I can see the data for myself. Anyone with 5th class level math can see the vaccines are highly effective. Schmittel posted it for us the other day, 5% of the population make up 27 (out of 30) of those in ICU unvaccinated with no underlying health conditions. That's from around 250,000 people in the state.

From the other 4,700,000 people in the state who are vaccinated we got just 3 cases in ICU with no pre existing health issues. THREE CASES!!!!!

And yet we still have morons trying to insist that vaccines are ineffective. They're only fooling themselves. It's like a sickness. Scouring the internet looking for bad news stories, mostly while sitting on the toilet scrolling through facebook and then calling it 'their own research', and then coming on here to link dump and have a little gloat that they found something mildly negative to post about vaccines, often, if they took the time to check it out, complete nonsense. Like Isha's 'remove the aborigines' story.

There is no amount of research/science/studies that could change their minds now. It's been instilled in them and they won't be convinced otherwise no matter what facts are put in front of them or from whom the facts come from. Vaccines = bad, anti vax = good. Luckily for them 95% of us have taken a different stance.