The P&R Plague Thread (Covid-19)

Shocked to find this out.

Reports of careless, irregular, or contentious research practices, as well as authorship disputes, may not meet the standard for research misconduct but may be a research integrity violation.”
Click to expand...


Importantly, the study on 
which Dr. Ladapo’s subsequent analysis is mirrored, that of Nafilyan et al., came to the opposite conclusion and found that “although there is a risk of myocarditis or pericarditis with COVID-19, there is no evidence of increased risk of cardiac or all-cause mortality following COVID-19 vaccination in young people aged 12-29.” Numerous analyses (Nafilyan, CDC, etc.) have 
demonstrated the risk of cardiac death following SARS-CoV-2 infection, whose risk is greatly 
reduced by receiving COVID-19 vaccines. Therefore, there are a number of reasons to be skeptical of the claim that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines increase cardiac death by 84% in young men. The analysis does not weigh benefits against risks, as the guidance purports to do. 
A recommendation to withhold COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for certain age groups, should be 
supported by a careful risk-benefit analysis. Such an analysis could have been performed, and 
indeed has been performed by the US and other governments, and by academics. Conversely, 
Dr. Ladapo’s FDOH analysis and associated policy are of highly questionable merit. Importantly, 
Dr. Ladapo’s report and policy have furthered the dubious claim that mRNA vaccines are leading 
to vastly increased numbers of cardiac death in young men, a claim which has been repeated 
and defended by Dr. Ladapo despite its shortcomings. These statements further elevate our 
concerns that he has “knowingly published material that will mislead readers”. In summary, the committee has concerns that Dr. Ladapo may have violated Sections 3.B.3 of the UF faculty policy on research integrity and has referred the matter to the University of Florida Research Integrity Officer (RIO).
Click to expand...

 
This is a really good interview by Bob Wachter with Ashish Jha, the White House Covid Response Director, on where we are at with Covid funding, research, vaccine and treatment development, testing, when to wear masks, long Covid, etc.  Jha has always been very pragmatic about his approach to mitigation steps based on science. 

One thing that stood out in the interview is you could see his frustration with Congress and their lack of funding for next generation vaccines particularly the mucosal and pan-SARS vaccines.  There will be another coronavirus that jumps to humans in the future, it's only a matter of when not if.  These types of vaccines would most likely reduce the chances that the world goes through what we have been going through the past three years.  But the anti-science, anti-vax mouth breathers like MTG and Desantis are driving the bus and slurping up disinformation simply to please their intellectually challenged base.  

It's worth the hour to listen to this interview. The first 15 or 20 minutes are more about the politics in DC that JHA deals with.  The rest of the interview deals more with where we are at now in dealing with Covid as a society.  I know 2023 is the Year of the Ostrich and everyone is done with Covid.  If that's you then move on.  Unfortunately, a virus doesn't give a f#&% about that.



 
Scarlet said:
But the anti-science, anti-vax mouth breathers like MTG and Desantis are driving the bus and slurping up disinformation simply to please their intellectually challenged base.
Click to expand...
You make a semi-good post for once and then can’t help yourself but to put this BS in there.  
 

1) as far as funding goes, blame the Democrats if you want to froth about it as they have been in charge of the House since Covid hit and this past fiscal year Omnibus had Nancy in charge.

2) DeSantis’s FL has vaccinated over 90% of its senior population, the population that encompasses almost 80% of the deaths from Covid. 

 
Scarlet said:
A long thread that I don't expect @Archy1221to read nor understand.
Click to expand...
Just checking to see if you read her thread?

If you did, you would realize she didn’t dispute the study outside of saying it involved RCT’s.  Yet on post 7, she says the earlier non-RCT’s came to the same conclusion.  Hmmm

She is basically just complaining that there isn’t more data on the subject while stating all the data to date agrees with the outcome of the Cochran analysis :dunno    

Do you understand this? 

 
If there is one thing I have found to be true it is that mask lovers will NEVER stop loving masks even though they don't actually ever wear them anymore, at all.

The anti-maskers are just as crazy and will also never wear a mask, ever.

Then you have like 99% of the population that is normal and they wore masks but didn't really like it or care for it, then they got used to it but still didn't like it and now they don't wear them anymore.

 
Back
Top