COVID 'Lambda' Variant Showing Vaccine Resistence

CoryMack

Superstar
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
11,284
Reputation
2,366
Daps
40,898

that story about the town in Connecticut came out the same day on all the major news stations. The same ones you get your news that you come on here and regurgitate without knowing what you’re talking about. Did you google anything before you made the rush for daps?

And please don’t waste time responding. I stopped paying you any attention after you got caught blatantly lying on Brother Malcolm back during the elections.
 

Kyle C. Barker

Migos VERZUZ Mahalia Jackson
Joined
Feb 5, 2015
Messages
28,899
Reputation
9,782
Daps
124,329
Bro they don't want to hear you though. I mean the CDC stopped testing vaccinated people unless hospitalized. They want to swallow the narrative from the media hook line and sinker. The same country and government that allows all kinds of toxic chemicals and substances to be put in "food" stuffs and sold, a country that used to advertise spraying DDT on people, marketing cigs to pregnant women and all kinds fukkery throughout its history. "But no possible fukkery going on here", I mean you literally have a nation founded on bloodshed, rape, murder, slavery and oppression. Willing to assassinate their own presidents and whom they label as "dissidents" (MLK, Fred Hampton, Malcolm X etc), but no they never would be involved in that :comeon:. All kinds of conflicting interests, lobbying, regulatory capture and outright leveraging of power to get a foothold in this government.. but nah. Wont happen.

CDC: 4,115 Fully Vaccinated Have Been Hospitalized Or Died With Breakthrough Covid-19 Infections


His link looked pretty positive to me


Since December 2020 (nine months)

Unvaxed
125, 000 breakthrough cases
4,115 hospitalizations and deaths (3,907 hospitalizations and 750 deaths)
 
Last edited:

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,331
Reputation
19,940
Daps
204,108
Reppin
the ether
:beli: The article disingenuously takes advantage of the lay persons ignorance. Ppl are concerned that there could be long term deleterious effects, period. They don't know enough to ask the question properly.

Mrna does, in fact, degrade after a short period. But it can still cause problems and disease. The problems occur during the transcription process.

Theoretically, the administration of a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA sequence can cause a cell to make a protein, which in turn could directly treat a disease or could function as a vaccine; more indirectly the protein could drive an endogenous stem cell to differentiate in a desired way. :patrice:

Messenger RNA - Wikipedia

And here's a paper about the myriad diseases caused by poorly transcripted mrna.


Cellular functions depend on numerous protein-coding and non-coding RNAs and the RNA-binding proteins associated with them, which form ribonucleoprotein complexes (RNPs). Mutations that disrupt either the RNA or protein components of RNPs or the factors required for their assembly can be deleterious. Alternative splicing provides cells with an exquisite capacity to fine-tune their transcriptome and proteome in response to cues

RNA and Disease

Table 1- Trans-acting mutations affecting RNA-dependent functions that cause disease: RNA and Disease

It would be great if one of you educated folks could address these concerns.

:lupe:

You're just taking it full circle. As I already pointed out, damn near anything (including viruses and foods and numerous chemicals encountered on a daily basis) can potentially have a deleterious effect on DNA. That's why all such applications are asked to address this. The original Moderna application that @Raw Lyrics already quoted addressed why this vaccine is designed to limit any risk there and no evidence of damage at all. What specifically do you want us to say that @Raw Lyrics didn't already quote?

If people are actually worried about the potential long-term negative effects of a carefully designed and limited mRNA vaccine, then why not be concerned about the long-term effects of the mRNA virus Covid-19, which also inserts mRNA into your cells but in a far more uncontrolled and destructive manner?
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,331
Reputation
19,940
Daps
204,108
Reppin
the ether
BUT IVERMECTIN is not without controversy, and hence, despite the high levels of coronavirus worldwide, neither the FDA nor the World Health Organization have been willing to approve it for use in the fight against the virus.

Prof. Ya’acov Nahmias, a Hebrew University of Jerusalem researcher, has questioned the safety of the drug.

“Ivermectin is a chemical therapeutic agent, and it has significant risks associated with it,” he said in a previous interview. “We should be very cautious about using this type of medication to treat a viral disease that the vast majority of the public is going to recover from even without this treatment.”

During Schwartz’s study, there was not any signal of significant side effects among ivermectin users.
Ivermectin is an anti-parasite drug used for treating parasitic worms and head lice. It disrupts the metabolism of worms and insects by interfering with their nerve and muscle function. It's been around for 40+ years and has never been shown to help meaningfully for any viral illness, and the minor anti-viral effects it shows in lab settings would require dosages so high they risk toxic effects on the human brain.

Ivermectin | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

Ivermectin - Wikipedia

The study quoted in your article was based on only around 40 people getting the drug. The study was so small that even in the control group only 4 patients were hospitalized. Larger, peer-reviewed studies have either shown no effect at all or were later found to have falsified their data. It's possible that some positive effect exists, but it requires careful large studies with real control groups, which are currently ongoing. Why do you trust the conclusions of some random tiny non-peer reviewed study of an anti-parasite drug, but won't trust the results of careful double-blind vaccine trials where tens of thousands of people receive it, or follow-up studies involving millions of people?

It seems blatantly hypocritical to refuse to trust one set of huge studies with abundant evidence but then turn around and trust tiny, unverified studies with hardly any evidence at all.
 

Savvir

Veteran
Joined
Oct 8, 2014
Messages
22,256
Reputation
3,921
Daps
114,882
that story about the town in Connecticut came out the same day on all the major news stations. The same ones you get your news that you come on here and regurgitate without knowing what you’re talking about. Did you google anything before you made the rush for daps?

And please don’t waste time responding. I stopped paying you any attention after you got caught blatantly lying on Brother Malcolm back during the elections.
1. Quote the post where I show where I get my news from...

2. Radio stations are owned by media companies and you trust random unknown callers.. then turn around and try to invalidate that same media ... did you even think before you typed?

3. I research everything I speak on. Just Googling isn't enough. You need to learn how to vet info.

4. During the election I only posted videos and quotes from Malcolm. If you have a problem with that, you don't have a problem with me. You have a problem with Malcolm.
 

Raw Lyrics

Sunset Park
Supporter
Joined
May 15, 2012
Messages
8,204
Reputation
3,830
Daps
30,892
Reppin
Brooklyn
Coronavirus: Who are Israel's seriously ill patients?


As of Thursday morning, there were some 250 COVID-19 patients in serious condition. What are their ages and what is their vaccination status?

About 210 of them are individuals over the age of 60. Of those, 153 were fully vaccinated, seven were in the process of getting fully immunized and 50 were not vaccinated.

Of the 40 patients in serious condition aged under 60, however, only nine were fully inoculated, one was partially vaccinated and 30 had not received any vaccine.

Currently, there are no patients in Israel under the age of 30 who are in serious condition.

In the 30-39 cohort, five individuals are in serious condition, all of whom are unvaccinated.

Among people ages 40-49 there are 15 serious patients, 14 of them not jabbed and one fully inoculated.

In the age group 50-50, unvaccinated patients still surpass vaccinated once, eleven compared to eight (plus one partially inoculated).

Among those who are in serious condition and over the age of 60, the balance shifts: there are more fully vaccinated patients who are in serious conditions than unvaccinated ones. However, some 91% of the relevant population – almost 1.6 million people – is fully immunized, with only 109,000 people not protected.

Looking at the data of how many patients Israel has per 100,000 people, it is clear that those who are not inoculated are still getting seriously ill much more than jabbed people.

In the 60-69 cohort, 27 vaccinated people were in serious condition as of Thursday, in addition to 18 non-vaccinated individuals and one person partially vaccinated. Looking at the numbers per 100,000 people, there are 26.8 patients who were not vaccinated, 9.5 who were partially vaccinated and only 4.1 who were vaccinated.

Among those 70-79, there were 57 fully vaccinated serious patients, three partially vaccinated, and 16 not vaccinated. This translates into 73.4 unvaccinated serious patients per 100,000 people, 52.2 partially vaccinated and 12.3 vaccinated.

In the 80-89 age group, there were 52 serious patients who were vaccinated, one partially vaccinated, and 12 not vaccinated. Considering data per 100,000 people, there are 105 unvaccinated serious patients, 25.7 partially vaccinated serious patients, and 25 vaccinated serious patients.

Among individuals over the age of 90, there were 18 people fully vaccinated, two partially vaccinated and two non-vaccinated. However, taking into consideration the numbers per 100,000 people, this means 60.3 unvaccinated serious patients per 100,000, 115.1 partially vaccinated serious patients and 38.8 vaccinated serious patients.

Coronavirus: Who are Israel's seriously ill patients?



 

Kyle C. Barker

Migos VERZUZ Mahalia Jackson
Joined
Feb 5, 2015
Messages
28,899
Reputation
9,782
Daps
124,329
Coronavirus: Who are Israel's seriously ill patients?


As of Thursday morning, there were some 250 COVID-19 patients in serious condition. What are their ages and what is their vaccination status?

About 210 of them are individuals over the age of 60. Of those, 153 were fully vaccinated, seven were in the process of getting fully immunized and 50 were not vaccinated.

Of the 40 patients in serious condition aged under 60, however, only nine were fully inoculated, one was partially vaccinated and 30 had not received any vaccine.

Currently, there are no patients in Israel under the age of 30 who are in serious condition.

In the 30-39 cohort, five individuals are in serious condition, all of whom are unvaccinated.

Among people ages 40-49 there are 15 serious patients, 14 of them not jabbed and one fully inoculated.

In the age group 50-50, unvaccinated patients still surpass vaccinated once, eleven compared to eight (plus one partially inoculated).

Among those who are in serious condition and over the age of 60, the balance shifts: there are more fully vaccinated patients who are in serious conditions than unvaccinated ones. However, some 91% of the relevant population – almost 1.6 million people – is fully immunized, with only 109,000 people not protected.

Looking at the data of how many patients Israel has per 100,000 people, it is clear that those who are not inoculated are still getting seriously ill much more than jabbed people.

In the 60-69 cohort, 27 vaccinated people were in serious condition as of Thursday, in addition to 18 non-vaccinated individuals and one person partially vaccinated. Looking at the numbers per 100,000 people, there are 26.8 patients who were not vaccinated, 9.5 who were partially vaccinated and only 4.1 who were vaccinated.

Among those 70-79, there were 57 fully vaccinated serious patients, three partially vaccinated, and 16 not vaccinated. This translates into 73.4 unvaccinated serious patients per 100,000 people, 52.2 partially vaccinated and 12.3 vaccinated.

In the 80-89 age group, there were 52 serious patients who were vaccinated, one partially vaccinated, and 12 not vaccinated. Considering data per 100,000 people, there are 105 unvaccinated serious patients, 25.7 partially vaccinated serious patients, and 25 vaccinated serious patients.

Among individuals over the age of 90, there were 18 people fully vaccinated, two partially vaccinated and two non-vaccinated. However, taking into consideration the numbers per 100,000 people, this means 60.3 unvaccinated serious patients per 100,000, 115.1 partially vaccinated serious patients and 38.8 vaccinated serious patients.

Coronavirus: Who are Israel's seriously ill patients?





85% of Israelis are vaccinated. ie There are five times as many vaccinated adults versus unvaccinated adults. Just by sheer math there will be more vaccinated cases since they out number them so much.

All in all it's still effective at keeping them out of the hospital

imrs.php
 

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
45,062
Reputation
8,040
Daps
122,416
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Rawtid said:
Because the fact of the matter is fully, partially or unvaccinated people can all catch and transmit COVID.

The ACTUAL fact of the matter is that vaccinated people are prevented from getting the virus by 99%, so, a 1% chance of catching/spreading vs. a 99% chance with the unvaccinated.

Seems pretty clear that the vaccine is the better option.​
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
7,008
Reputation
848
Daps
17,830
Don't believe that. Bill Gates, in his own words, been preparing for a pandemic since ebola. There's actually a conspiracy that the Gates Foundation held an invite-only coronavirus pandemic simulation just one month before the first case of covid 19 in wuhan.

Ofc, your friendly fact checkers claim that to be false. How so, you might ask. Was there not actually a coronavirus pandemic simulation? No, there was, they just concluded that its unrelated. :skip:

Our ruling: False

Although Event 201 was a real event affiliated with high-profile medical professionals, business leaders and government actors, the claim that the event predicted the current pandemic, or is tied to it directly in some way, is unfounded. We rate this claim FALSE because it is not supported by our research. There is no reason to believe that the current pandemic will resemble the Event 201 simulation, despite coincidences in the modeling and timing of the simulation.
Fact check: A Bill Gates-backed pandemic simulation in October did not predict COVID-19
Fact checkers have been exposed for the disgusting, lying propagandists they are. Facebook has admitted this during a court hearing.
Facebook court filing: 'fact checks' are 'protected opinions'




Im thinking more of a 'woke' technofascism. :jbhmm:
I agree. It's funny, seeing left wingers and opposers of white supremacy actually loving and promoting this.
 
Top