Covid the *** and the final stage.

[Chippy_Tea]

All i know is bugs do not like alcohol

I have been using this theory every day since day one

 

[ChrisR73]

Before Covid it was a purely economics channel, but the guy who does the covid analysis has a PHD in toxicology. Here's there 1st one Jan 25 2020 when he calls to stop flights from China, later on the 4th Feb the WHO saya there is no reason to stop flights. It's quite boring so I wouldn't bother watching unless your very interested.

I do have to admit that I was surprised that the WHO didn’t recommend an end to international travel.
Even more surprised that the UK still allows it.

 

[HSD]

How can the Earth be flat when the Tuatha Dé Danann, the teachers of all knowledge, wisdom and general druidism are inhabitants of a hollow Earth. Time for those lads to emerge again, methinks!

Great band, sure they supported the Neph back in the day

 

[An Ankoù]

Wow, did they really? What an unlikely combination of diddly-diddly and the lugubrious, tortured drone of Dawn Razor and, I think, Moon Child.
I'll have to search my ancient stack of vinyl to see if I can find the former and give them a spin.

 

[Barleylass]

It does but on lockdown many were not getting enough sun.
Someone mentioned talking vitamin D would not help stop us getting Covid well having watched this when it all kicked off I decided to take it and still am.

I have found the podcast with the three doctors I mentioned regarding vitamin D

 

[simon12]

Another John Campbell one today

I only just started watching it.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I have been taking 25 for 12 months glad I wasn't wasting money and time.

 

[ChrisR73]

I have found the podcast with the three doctors I mentioned regarding vitamin D

Problem is that the jury is still out in this one because overall the evidence is still inconclusive. There are many positive trials and also many indifferent ones, but the risk of taking vitamins is negligible.
If you’re Vit D deficient then you should be taking supplements regardless of Covid.

 

[Barleylass]

I have been taking 25 for 12 months glad I wasn't wasting money and time.

I have been taking 5000iu (125mcg) for about 6 years and 2000iu (50mcg) for at least 6 years before that.
Research taking vitamin K2 mk4 with it. It directs the calcium to your bones and teeth. Vitamin D3 helps absorb calcium but you don’t want that staying in your blood stream. That is my take on it. Someone else might know more. I take a gel tab of K2 mk4,mk7.

 

[HSD]

I never said Covid wasn’t real, it has been awful.

https://medika.life/we-call-out-reiner-fuellmich-as-a-fraud-the-covid-conspirator-investigated/

 

[Barleylass]

https://medika.life/we-call-out-reiner-fuellmich-as-a-fraud-the-covid-conspirator-investigated/

That is why as asked if anyone had heard of it! I note that first comment after was:
‘So far I have liked to read medika.life credibly. But unfortunately it has changed. Thks is pure tabloid journalism. If I read the article about Dr. Reiner Fuellmich that i saw you fighting more against his statements. This is a reaction of fear because he’s probably right. This report consists only of allegations but medika.life isn’t a court. Many readers will turn away from medika.life because of dubious and non-neutral reporting.’

I am sure it will all come out in the wash one way or another.

 

[HSD]

That is why as asked if anyone had heard of it! I note that first comment after was:
‘So far I have liked to read medika.life credibly. But unfortunately it has changed. Thks is pure tabloid journalism. If I read the article about Dr. Reiner Fuellmich that i saw you fighting more against his statements. This is a reaction of fear because he’s probably right. This report consists only of allegations but medika.life isn’t a court. Many readers will turn away from medika.life because of dubious and non-neutral reporting.’

I am sure it will all come out in the wash one way or another.

That is why as asked if anyone had heard of it! I note that first comment after was:
‘So far I have liked to read medika.life credibly. But unfortunately it has changed. Thks is pure tabloid journalism. If I read the article about Dr. Reiner Fuellmich that i saw you fighting more against his statements. This is a reaction of fear because he’s probably right. This report consists only of allegations but medika.life isn’t a court. Many readers will turn away from medika.life because of dubious and non-neutral reporting.’

I am sure it will all come out in the wash one way or another.

They are pretty even handed from what I can tell looking at there output, one persons response to an article is hardly an informed and qualified rebuttal, as we know any old loon can quote an internet article to support their viewpoint, me included. However the weight of evidence suggests he is wrong on most counts $.

 

[Barleylass]

They are pretty even handed from what I can tell looking at there output, one persons response to an article is hardly an informed and qualified rebuttal, as we know any old loon can quote an internet article to support their viewpoint, me included. However the weight of evidence suggests he is wrong on most counts $.

I am just keeping an open mind on everything. I find it difficult to understand why they aren’t going for vit D and Ivermectin as well as vaccines which are both harmless and cheap and could have possibly saved many lives. It is like they are suppressing the use of them in favour of the vaccines. There seem to be people making decisions who have a vested interest in them, and it irks me that they have been so secretive about the PPE contracts that have gone to Tory doners/friend etc. Follow the ££. Plus they have used tactics to scare the public so much you would think everyone was going to die if they didn’t get the vaccine. I knew I would probably get slated for even mentioning it, but at least it has got a conversation going on the importance vit D.

 

[Barleylass]

Problem is that the jury is still out in this one because overall the evidence is still inconclusive. There are many positive trials and also many indifferent ones, but the risk of taking vitamins is negligible.
If you’re Vit D deficient then you should be taking supplements regardless of Covid.

It is an hour long, did you manage to watch it? They have years of experience specialising in vit D. I agree with you on taking it. My family have taken it for years.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

 

[HSD]

I am just keeping an open mind on everything. I find it difficult to understand why they aren’t going for vit D and Ivermectin as well as vaccines which are both harmless and cheap and could have possibly saved many lives. It is like they are suppressing the use of them in favour of the vaccines. There seem to be people making decisions who have a vested interest in them, and it irks me that they have been so secretive about the PPE contracts that have gone to Tory doners/friend etc. Follow the ££. Plus they have used tactics to scare the public so much you would think everyone was going to die if they didn’t get the vaccine. I knew I would probably get slated for even mentioning it, but at least it has got a conversation going on the importance vit D.

Having lost people to Covid-19 and seen healthy friends left in a right state having caught and survived it, I whole heartedly welcome the vaccines and can confirm it’s a pretty **** way to die and can be a mess if you get it, people are right to be scared of it and if anything the government should be criticised for repeatedly acting too late and not being tough enough on those who break the law and spread false information.

 

[Barleylass]

Having lost people to Covid-19 and seen healthy friends left in a right state having caught and survived it, I whole heartedly welcome the vaccines and can confirm it’s a pretty **** way to die and can be a mess if you get it, people are right to be scared of it and if anything the government should be criticised for repeatedly acting too late and not being tough enough on those who break the law and spread false information.

I completely appreciate what you say, and am sorry for your loss. I have family and friends that have been ill, although nothing bad. As I said before, it has been an awful illness and nearly everyone has suffered one way or another, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t question things.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

I have no idea how true it is but this guy did call alot of things months before the government and MSM if you look at videos from Jan & Feb 2020 but also was advocating HCQ for ages which I think turned out to be a dud.

Simon, imagine if I set up a Youtube channel "reporting" that Liverpool beat Real Madrid the other night (in fact it was 3-1 to Real), and where I eg predicted that it would be Man City and Sheffield Utd challenging for the League title.

Then imagine a random stranger called Fred comes along and says "I've found this Youtube video which says Liverpool won on Wednesday. I have no idea how true it is, but he did call City for the league but was also advocating Sheffield Utd for ages which I think turned out to be a dud."

What might you think about my Youtube that Fred has found? Would you be saying I must be a pretty good source of information on football because I forecast City for the League and was "brave" enough to tell the Liverpool result "as it was" regardless of what the MSM said the result was?

Or would you be saying - forecasting City for the League is a pretty obvious call that doesn't tell you much about my football knowledge, the Sheffield Utd call suggests I don't have much of a clue, and the need to make up facts just to stick it to the MSM seems a weird attempt to rewrite history - what's the agenda?

You also want to watch out for the kind of channels that boast loudly about all the things they got right and brush under the carpet the many, many times they were wrong. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day - when someone tipped Leicester for the league a few years ago was that a one-off call based on deep analysis of the potential of Vardy and Mahrez, or was it one of many scattergun calls, along with eg Sunderland to win the league the following year or Chelsea to get relegated?

And what would you say to Fred about this kind of channel, when there are so many sources of football scores that are well established and have a reputation for accuracy?

I know you meant well, but as friendly advice - if you don't have the knowledge to judge the reliability of a source, then you're a prime target for propaganda and fake news, and it's probably best if you don't pass things on unless it's from gold-plated sources of recognised reliability. Which doesn't include random Youtube channels and Facebook pages.

To be fair, this isn't the worst - but you need to understand their agenda. If they're primarily concerned with economics and call themselves "Peak Prosperity" then the working assumption would be that their sudden interest in virology is due to a libertarian agenda that wants to discredit the threat of the virus in order to keep business open. That's the "business as usual" strategy that's cost so many lives and $$$$ in Brazil and the US, whereas the countries that took more precautions like Taiwan and NZ have seen less hit to their economies as they could reopen earlier, and with far fewer deaths. So they're arguing in a losing cause. And saying that there's lots of false positives is a losing argument, as you can measure the number of excess deaths independently of testing, and the same number of excess deaths with fewer cases just implies that the virus is much more lethal.

Attitudes to hydroxychloroquine is a pretty good test. No real scientist was ever more enthusiastic about hydroxychloroquine than "there's some interesting anecdote and small-scale trials but nothing convincing, let's wait for proper large-scale trials before commiting ourselves one way or another". And anyone pushing hydroxychloroquine after the Recovery trial announced in June that it had no effect in a trial of 4674 patients, is trying to con you. (see also the official write-up in October in NEJM)

There's plenty of other warning signs. Always be wary of people who quote facts with no sources. Be even warier of people who say "as reported by the BBC, NY Times" etc without a direct link - they're steaing credibility from a source, without giving you the opportunity to check whether that's what they said.

Another way people mislead you is by ascribing information to a link that's simply not there. For instance the first link in the header of the "Peak Prosperity" PCR video is "WHO PCR 47 (!) Cycles". The first thing to say is that although it's hosted on the WHO website, it's not an official WHO document, but the instructions for one particular test by its manufacturer. So that's one red flag.

But also it makes no mention of 47 cycles - in fact the only mention of the word "cycle" in a PCR context is on p11, where it says that the test should be run for 45 cycles. In fact on pp13-15 it states (para 10.1.1) that it can detect 0.58 copies/μl of COVID-19 viral RNA with a confidence ≥95% and that should be regarded as the limit of detection for that particular test. In 10.1.1 and 10.1.2 it then goes on to give the average number of cycles (Cq) that different machines take to detect this amount of RNA, which ranges from 32.84 to 38.33 depending on the machine. If nothing else, that emphasises how meaningless it is to talk about cycles in general, it varies a lot depending on exactly what combination of machine and test you are using.

At the top of p14 it says that it's been designed to match all known SARS2 variants, but they've tested the test on a panel of other viruses including most of the usual coronaviruses and they all come up negative. Then there's more tests of repeatability and finally a test of accuracy - all 50 negatives were reported as negatives, and 49 out of 50 positives were reported at positive.

But on p12 it tells you to use a threshold for positive/negative based on the Cq of the amplification of another target in the negative control (NEC) plus 6, and if that control has a Cq of >30, the whole set of tests is binned as there's obviously a problem with the reagents or something inhibiting the reaction. So your threshold will vary each time, but will always be <=36 cycles.

And yet "Peak Prosperity" claim that link was the WHO mandating 47 cycles! Are they deliberately lying to you or do they just not know what they're talking about?

I'm sorry that took so long - and that was just one of their links!!! But that's the trouble, lies are much quicker to circulate than the truth. I'm exhausted now but if you want more on the PCR cycles story, then this from factcheck.org ain't bad.

 

[simon12]

Simon, imagine if I set up a Youtube channel "reporting" that Liverpool beat Real Madrid the other night (in fact it was 3-1 to Real), and where I eg predicted that it would be Man City and Sheffield Utd challenging for the League title.

Then imagine a random stranger called Fred comes along and says "I've found this Youtube video which says Liverpool won on Wednesday. I have no idea how true it is, but he did call City for the league but was also advocating Sheffield Utd for ages which I think turned out to be a dud."

What might you think about my Youtube that Fred has found? Would you be saying I must be a pretty good source of information on football because I forecast City for the League and was "brave" enough to tell the Liverpool result "as it was" regardless of what the MSM said the result was?

Or would you be saying - forecasting City for the League is a pretty obvious call that doesn't tell you much about my football knowledge, the Sheffield Utd call suggests I don't have much of a clue, and the need to make up facts just to stick it to the MSM seems a weird attempt to rewrite history - what's the agenda?

You also want to watch out for the kind of channels that boast loudly about all the things they got right and brush under the carpet the many, many times they were wrong. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day - when someone tipped Leicester for the league a few years ago was that a one-off call based on deep analysis of the potential of Vardy and Mahrez, or was it one of many scattergun calls, along with eg Sunderland to win the league the following year or Chelsea to get relegated?

And what would you say to Fred about this kind of channel, when there are so many sources of football scores that are well established and have a reputation for accuracy?

I know you meant well, but as friendly advice - if you don't have the knowledge to judge the reliability of a source, then you're a prime target for propaganda and fake news, and it's probably best if you don't pass things on unless it's from gold-plated sources of recognised reliability. Which doesn't include random Youtube channels and Facebook pages.

To be fair, this isn't the worst - but you need to understand their agenda. If they're primarily concerned with economics and call themselves "Peak Prosperity" then the working assumption would be that their sudden interest in virology is due to a libertarian agenda that wants to discredit the threat of the virus in order to keep business open. That's the "business as usual" strategy that's cost so many lives and $$$$ in Brazil and the US, whereas the countries that took more precautions like Taiwan and NZ have seen less hit to their economies as they could reopen earlier, and with far fewer deaths. So they're arguing in a losing cause. And saying that there's lots of false positives is a losing argument, as you can measure the number of excess deaths independently of testing, and the same number of excess deaths with fewer cases just implies that the virus is much more lethal.

Attitudes to hydroxychloroquine is a pretty good test. No real scientist was ever more enthusiastic about hydroxychloroquine than "there's some interesting anecdote and small-scale trials but nothing convincing, let's wait for proper large-scale trials before commiting ourselves one way or another". And anyone pushing hydroxychloroquine after the Recovery trial announced in June that it had no effect in a trial of 4674 patients, is trying to con you. (see also the official write-up in October in NEJM)

There's plenty of other warning signs. Always be wary of people who quote facts with no sources. Be even warier of people who say "as reported by the BBC, NY Times" etc without a direct link - they're steaing credibility from a source, without giving you the opportunity to check whether that's what they said.

Another way people mislead you is by ascribing information to a link that's simply not there. For instance the first link in the header of the "Peak Prosperity" PCR video is "WHO PCR 47 (!) Cycles". The first thing to say is that although it's hosted on the WHO website, it's not an official WHO document, but the instructions for one particular test by its manufacturer. So that's one red flag.

But also it makes no mention of 47 cycles - in fact the only mention of the word "cycle" in a PCR context is on p11, where it says that the test should be run for 45 cycles. In fact on pp13-15 it states (para 10.1.1) that it can detect 0.58 copies/μl of COVID-19 viral RNA with a confidence ≥95% and that should be regarded as the limit of detection for that particular test. In 10.1.1 and 10.1.2 it then goes on to give the average number of cycles (Cq) that different machines take to detect this amount of RNA, which ranges from 32.84 to 38.33 depending on the machine. If nothing else, that emphasises how meaningless it is to talk about cycles in general, it varies a lot depending on exactly what combination of machine and test you are using.

At the top of p14 it says that it's been designed to match all known SARS2 variants, but they've tested the test on a panel of other viruses including most of the usual coronaviruses and they all come up negative. Then there's more tests of repeatability and finally a test of accuracy - all 50 negatives were reported as negatives, and 49 out of 50 positives were reported at positive.

But on p12 it tells you to use a threshold for positive/negative based on the Cq of the amplification of another target in the negative control (NEC) plus 6, and if that control has a Cq of >30, the whole set of tests is binned as there's obviously a problem with the reagents or something inhibiting the reaction. So your threshold will vary each time, but will always be <=36 cycles.

And yet "Peak Prosperity" claim that link was the WHO mandating 47 cycles! Are they deliberately lying to you or do they just not know what they're talking about?

I'm sorry that took so long - and that was just one of their links!!! But that's the trouble, lies are much quicker to circulate than the truth. I'm exhausted not but if you want more on the PCR cycles story, then this from factcheck.org ain't bad.

Sorry if I have got this wrong but your response seems to suggest I am promoting this channel as gospel when I clearly said "I have no idea how true it is" and then pointed out an instance when he got it wrong.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Sorry if I have got this wrong but your response seems to suggest I am promoting this channel as gospel when I clearly said "I have no idea how true it is" and then pointed out an instance when he got it wrong.

I'm not saying you're promoting it as gospel - but you are promoting it. There's so much good information out there from reliable sources about something like Covid, there's simply no need to give oxygen to these kinds of people, just ignore them.