Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

HELP THE NHS ~ I've let my adjoining empty house (fully furnished) to four NHS nurses free of charge during this National Emergency. We have a very large General Hospital at the top of the r

Very very Harsh Geko. I see a man, in an unenviable position, doing his utmost to balance the impossible tasks of trying to control the spread of a new novel virus - for which there is no treatme

By the book...

Posted Images

If vitamin D was so effective at protecting from covidwe would likely not have seen so many deaths from Covid in the many elderly already taking vit D supplements.

In the early days of the pandemic when there was no effective vaccine and no treatement, lots of things were grasped at when a great many were scared that a vast swathe of the population would die.  The vit D was an idea that was postulated to explain the ethnic differences in death rates.  Lots more factors than vitamin D may explain the differences such as diabetes, heart disease, obesity, genetics to name but a few.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that any vaccine is not 100% safe any more than applies to any drug.  (Drink enough water and it is harmful) Being natural like vitamin D does not automatically translate to safe (Ok vit D is pretty safe) and quite frankly most herbal medicines are sold under food regulations and not subject to anything like the testing modern drugs are subjected too. Why are drugs so expensive? - not because of production costs but because of all the failures that don't make it to the market that have to be factored in to the costs of those that do)

No drug is 100% safe. It's about risk to benefit.  Most chemotherapy agents tiptoe on the fine line that devides killing the cancer from killing the patient.

Vaccination is not new and to a large exent the tech that underpins the Covid vaccines is not new. What is new is the payload. By and large the payload is or generates part of the virus. If you catch the virus you will be subjected to the payload but also the rest of the virus and all the impact that has. Clotting is one of the impacts of the virus too.

If you are the unlucky sole that gets a severe reaction to the virus that is sad for you and your family but on a wider level the numbers that are significantly damaged by the virus is vastly lower than those who have been and continue to be damaged and killed by Covid which is just as sad but for many many more.  Why do armed response officers wear bullet proof vests? Because the inconvenience of wearing them is outweighed by the protection it offers. They won't save you from a shot to the head of a bigger weapon.  Likewise a vaccine won't save everyone but they have already saved many. 

Ask yourself why the overwhelming majority of Drs did not hesitate to be vaccinated? After all they are applied scientists with considerable training and experience of reading and interpreting scientific papers. How many journalists and politicians are?

Contrary to much of the waffle Covid is not going away, it's not going to turn into a cold.  Like many of the coronoviruses that we call colds it will linger. Kill off the vulnerable, generate immunity in the survivors.  Every few years the numbers will surge, infecting the previously uninfected children and re-infecting those that have previously been infected or immunised but whose immunity has been reduced by time and age.  This time killing only a few of the frail and giving a cold to the others who's immune system switches on quickly enough.  There is no survival advantage for a coronovirus to not kill it's host. Once it has hi-jacked the host and replicated it has done it's genetic task. It will either be killed by your immune system or die with it's host. (Notable exceptions being herpes and a handful of others)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Andy Moltu said:

If vitamin D was so effective at protecting from covidwe would likely not have seen so many deaths from Covid in the many elderly already taking vit D supplements.

 

Doesn't follow Andy. As has been stated here many times, the UK-recommended dose is only 400IU which is probably sufficient for osteoporosis but one tenth of the dose necessary to have any immune-system effect. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please will the advocates for VitD against Covid keep in mind that it was Linus Pauling, one of only four people to have been awarded TWO Nobel prizes, and the only one who got them solo, who also advocated megadose VitC.    A great man and mind.

But to avoid scurvy, you need about 100 milligrams of VitC a day.    Pauling and his followers used 2 GRAMS a day, in the belief that it would let them live longer in better health and to avoid cancer.     There has never been any substantial evidence of this, and the parallels between that school and that for Megadose VitD are striking.

JOhn

 

Edited by john.r.davies
Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the vaccine needed in the first place? Was fear of the disease, hospitalisation, and it’s treatment planned and promoted in order to develop a vaccine ?

PLEASE, make you own mind up on this piece by Dr Peter McCullough . It is NOT necessarily my opinion but a potentially valid and interesting interview.

 

Kevin

Edited by boxofbits
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, john.r.davies said:

Please will the advocates for VitD against Covid keep in mind that it was Linus Pauling, one of only four people to have been awarded TWO Nobel prizes, and the only one who got them solo, who also advocated megadose VitC.    A great man and mind.

But to avoid scurvy, you need about 100 milligrams of VitC a day.    Pauling and his followers used 2 GRAMS a day, in the belief that it would let them live longer in better health and to avoid cancer.     There has never been any substantial evidence of this, and the parallels between that school and that for Megadose VitD are striking.

JOhn

 

Unike vitamin C, D3 is not a vitamin. D3 has defined physiological rates of production from sunlight oon skin and defined serum levels. A Nobel laureate is no guarantee of sciencific certitude, jsut as there is no guarantee that vaccine experts have got experimental mRNA vaccines right. Pandremix passed all experts yet in some recipients led to auto-immune attack on a receptor in the brain controlling sleep. Result: narcolepsy. The mRNA vaccines use nano-encapsulation and both are new in humans. Nanoparticles are able to cross the blood-brain barrier and the longer term effects on brain function are not known. Unlike D3 vaccines  are irreversible and also fail to address the viruses evolutionary strategy to circumvent our innate immunity. The virus has evoved to exploit our low D3  status and hence poor innate immunity. It has not evolvedd to defeat poor  adaptive immunity and vaccines, But it will, and at some point new mRNAs will be needed and with that new risks, like Panmdremxi if unforseen autoimmune attacks. What happened to " First do no harm" ? when a pan-specific answer to rhe pandemic is available.  Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2021 at 6:04 PM, john.r.davies said:

Peter,

As an academic, you must recall why research and the development of vaccines (not your field, but same difference) has taken so long previously.   The various stages of testing were done serially, with each stage delayed until funding is obtained, the management of the trial organised and the reports written and published.  The next stage was not started before the previous one completed.   

For the Covid vaccines, in the acute need for an effective product, the entire process through Phases I, II and III were planned in advance, with funding for all provided.    The results were  reported, in the UK to MRHA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) almost in realtime, not after the trial was completed, so that licensing could be as swift as possible.      Because people were keen - nay, desperate! - for something to protect them, volunteers were easy to recruit.     This accelerated trial method might be described as "experimental" but the processes were the same as before, just elided togther.     

Similarly, the vaccines produced under this scheme are not "experimental".     The AstraZeneca used well-established vaccine technology, used for years, safe and effective.    The Pfizer (now "Comirnaty" vaccine, made by Pfizer, just as AZ is now named Vaxzevria) is an mRNA vaccine, not used before in large vaccination campaigns, but again well established.       In all vaccines, the "Phase IV" stage when their use is extended to populations might be considered 'experimental' in that rare complications or side effects may turn up when very large numbers of people receive them, for instance the Vaccine-Induced Thrombosis and Thrombocytopenia (VITT) syndrome, but this is so rare that it only appeared when miilions had been given the vaccine.

You are quite wrong, and wrong to say so, Peter, that either vaccine have not been properly tested.  There have been several attempts by other Pharma giants to develop a Covid vaccine uner the same timetable, that failed.     GlaxoSmithKline, Merck and Sanofi  are just three who have given up after the Phase I or II trails meant their vaccines could not continue to be tested.     

Anyone who wants to read a plain language account should read this from the eminent and unimpeachable science journal, Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03626-1       With so many other diseases that could benefit from a vaccine, from Malaria to Zika, we can hope for simliar schemes to accelerate their development.

John

 

Pandremix passed all those committees and then was found to cause narcolepsy. Messing with the immune system is fraught with danger, and  doing it irreversibly more so. There is no way that short-term trials will pick up all side-effects. In the absence of safe alternaitves to vaccination the risk in worthwhile. But there is a much safer alternative : D3. It took years for narcolepsy to be recognised as a risk form Pandremix and it was withdrawn. The C-19 vaccines have been rushed into service and adverse brain effects have not had time to manifest. D3  is vastly safer, but not profitable for big pharma.  If you had not been in this website JOhn, I doubt you would know about it.  Peter  

Link to post
Share on other sites

As pointed out by Andy Moltu, above, no medical treatment or medicine is without risk (Thank you, Andy, I sometimes feel I'm the only one offereing a counter view here!)    The narcolepsy association with Pandemrix may be as high as 1 in 20,000 in Phase IV of its release, when it was given to over 30 million people.    No Phase III trial, that can include few thousands of people, could possibly have found it.      The same is true of AZ and VITT, cardiomyositis etc. where those very rare complications emerged only when millions had received Covid vaccine.   But you should read Weibel, Sturkenboom, Black et al (Vaccine, 2018 Oct 1;36(41):6202-6211: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30122647/) who noted the time-associated rise in the incidence of narcolepsy in Sweden, but found none in Argentina, Canada, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the Netherlands.  

I referred to Pauling in respect for a great man, led astray by some quirk of thinking.   The same could be said of Dr.Anderson, a cardiologist who advocated, and still advocates, hydrochloroquine ( a treatment for malaria, an infection by a parasitic protazoal organism, not a virus, proven to ineffective against Covid), and was sacked from his last job because the hospital he worked for considered that his anti-vaccination advocacy brought it into disrepute.    He was an  eminent and innovative physican, whose previous work I respect, as I am in awe of Pauling's.      Similarly, I respect my opponents here,  and I would ignore their mistaken views if they were not dangerous, in that they denigrate the value and safety of vaccine treatment.      That is why I try to present a counter view, in the hope that others, less polarised, can gain a balaced opinion.

Yes, Peter, humans can synthesise VitD, so it may be designated a hormone.     We cannot synthesise VitC, so there is no question that it is a Vitamin to us, but this is a quirk of evolution - all other mammals with the exception of guinea pigs, fruit bats, capybaras, and all primates, synthesise their own VitC, which must therefore be a hormone to them.        This differentiation is irrelevant to the argument on the effect of VitD against Covid.

John

 

Edited by john.r.davies
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving aside if I may the debates about Vit D and vaccines, I just watched the latest John Campbell vid (posted last night). 

 

As usual he gives deepish and well-narrated dive into a range of data resources.

My take on his analysis is that once Omicron cases (already 90%+ of UK infections, 95% in London) have fully back-filled the hospital caseload (ie the Delta cases have all recovered, or died), the case fatality rates from the 'pure' Omicron wave will end up being at extremely low levels versus the previous variants. I presume this reflects, in large part, the early reports of Omicron as very largely an upper-tract only disease which is what the South African medics have been saying since mid-Dec.

It seems to me that unless you live in a cave, practically all of us will be exposed to Omicron in the next few weeks. But with 90% of the UK population having antibodies of one variant of another, this is now basically a disease of the unvaccinated (and/or with D3 insufficiency, if you prefer), and then a mild one.

Campbell's conclusion is that "it's going to be interesting for a little while, but then we can all go back to normal life, even if not just quite yet".

Happy New Year!

Nigel

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, john.r.davies said:

humans can synthesise VitD, so it may be designated a hormon

Now John,  you know that is not correct. The sole source of D3 is sunlight on skin with minor contribution from oily fish. Skin production is not enzyme-induced, it is purely chemistry. In that sense D IS a vitamin.  D3 has hormonal actions after hydroxylation to 1,25(OH)D as you will have learned decades ago in lectures on bone.' However that role is minor compared with the intracellular action of 1,25(OH)D in almost every cell in the body. This autocrine and paracrine signalling role has been shonw to be important ina host of chronic conditions over the past 20 years. But the medical  profession has not kept up with the science. The immune system actions of 1,25 are summarised by Holick here: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/7/2097  1,25(OH)D regulates expression of 350 genes - 1 in 15 of our  genes. No other vitamin does that. Comparison with vit C or any other vitamin masks its importance. And  condemns D3 to an also-ran in medical curricula.

IF vaccination were the only option for reducing severity of C-19 I would agree with you that the risks far outweigh the  benefit. BUT D3 does offer a safe, more easily administered and effective preventive  solution. And one that covers all variants. Failure of the senior medics to embrace D3 will eventually be manifest, it is the nature of science that their feet of clay will be revealed. When that happens the pandemic will end. And dismissing D3 by senior medics and  expert committess such as NICE will come to be recognised as Medicine's Worst Ever Mistake. The mistake is not that of GPs, consultants, or nurses but by senior academic medics across almost all disciplines. Professors.......dont you hate them !!

Peter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ntc said:

This topic should go we are all fed up of it and you only have to watch the news or the internet for all the information if you need it. Happy New Year 

The response to that's obvious: feel free to ignore it and make your contributions in other sections of the forum instead.

Cheers, Nigel

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bleednipple said:

Leaving aside if I may the debates about Vit D and vaccines, I just watched the latest John Campbell vid (posted last night). 

 

As usual he gives deepish and well-narrated dive into a range of data resources.

My take on his analysis is that once Omicron cases (already 90%+ of UK infections, 95% in London) have fully back-filled the hospital caseload (ie the Delta cases have all recovered, or died), the case fatality rates from the 'pure' Omicron wave will end up being at extremely low levels versus the previous variants. I presume this reflects, in large part, the early reports of Omicron as very largely an upper-tract only disease which is what the South African medics have been saying since mid-Dec.

It seems to me that unless you live in a cave, practically all of us will be exposed to Omicron in the next few weeks. But with 90% of the UK population having antibodies of one variant of another, this is now basically a disease of the unvaccinated (and/or with D3 insufficiency, if you prefer), and then a mild one.

Campbell's conclusion is that "it's going to be interesting for a little while, but then we can all go back to normal life, even if not just quite yet".

Happy New Year!

Nigel

 

Omicron evolved ca 30 mutations in proteins, none of them in  the spike region. As it sweeps across the globe the gazillions of virus replications open the door to yet more variants. Current vaccines are directed against the spike, and are known to produce antibodies that are less efective against omnicron ( https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-12-omicron-variant-largely-resistant-current.html ).   Omicron's ongoing evolution has yet to be driven by natural selection to avoid vaccines. My expectation is that it has many tricks still to evolve somewhere on the  planet. Normal life resumed ? - only when ,like flu, several thousand winter deaths each winter are acceptable to the public. Aged coffin dodgers beware!

Best wishes for 2022

Peter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Evidence for D3 for C-19 is firming up

Italian researchers have found convincingly that 75 nmol/L or above is associated with reduced severity of C-19:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.736665/full

Very recent molecular virology research shows that the alpha variant expressed more proteins in the virus capsid ( not the spike), These proteins (N and two Orfs) act to suppress the  triggering of innate defences:  https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-12-dominant-alpha-variant-evolved-evade.html  This is the first instance of a virus inhibiting our innate signalling.

We do not yet know if omicron's capsid proteins are even more effective at suppressing innate immunity. But omicron does not invade the lungs where the Ace2 receptors targetted by the spike abound. Innate immunity is well known to be promoted by D3.  looks to me that the virus has evolved to exploit the poor  D3 status of most of the global population since the start of the pandemic.

Maybe 2022 will be the year when D3 comes good and sees off those capsid proteins ?

Peter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, you may have seen a Covid doctor telling Sajid Javid why he wasn't going to be jabbed, in the spirit of fairness to the 'other side', of which I am not one having been fully jabbed, here are his views, cheers, Andrew

Dr Stephen James article in the Spectator

A few months ago, Sajid Javid was asked how he could justify sacking unvaccinated care home workers if they had been infected with Covid and had natural immunity. The Health Secretary replied as if such people were plainly idiots. ‘If they haven’t taken a vaccine — despite all the effort that’s been made to persuade them, encourage them, provide them with information, introduce them to trusted voices — then at some point you have to move on.’ By ‘move on’ he meant thousands of them should be fired.

NHS staff are next in line: we have until 1 April to get jabbed or get out. On a recent visit to King’s College Hospital, Javid asked some of us what we thought of this. I’m an intensive care doctor and have seen all too much of Covid but I disagree with his vaccine mandate — and told him why. I’ve had the virus, I have antibodies and I am not significantly more likely to spread Covid than someone who has been vaccinated. The Omicron variant, I said, offers a chance to rethink the government’s policy.

Our exchange was caught on camera. The clip went viral and seems to have hit a nerve with the public. But why, you might wonder, would a doctor working on a Covid-19 intensive care ward not want to have the jab? Doesn’t he understand the science?

I do follow the science, and I can find no clear evidence to support compulsory vaccination. The situation is complicated. For some people, the decision to take the jab is an easy and obvious one; for others, they prefer to weigh up the risks vs the benefits.

I’ve had the virus, I have antibodies and I’m not significantly more likely to spread it than someone who’s jabbed

My principal objection is to a ‘mandate’ where my colleagues and I are forced to decide between retaining bodily autonomy or retaining our jobs. Different people hold different points of view. Deriding those who disagree with you — like turning to coercion or overturning bodily autonomy — marks the point where we begin to fail as a free society.

It is notable that most of the people I treat with Covid are unvaccinated. I don’t need any lectures in how vaccines can protect a previously unexposed individual. The vaccines work and offer reasonably durable protection against contracting Covid-19 and it leading to serious illness and death. The older or more vulnerable you are, the greater the reason to take the vaccine. Some 95 per cent of over-sixties are boosted, which is probably the main reason why the numbers of patients in critical care has been falling.

But the idea that a vaccine can give you an impenetrable shield against infection is not backed up by the science. A Public Health England report in August warned that ‘there is limited difference in viral load (and Ct values) between those who are vaccinated and unvaccinated… [suggesting] limited difference in infectiousness’. What this effectively means is that jabbed and unjabbed individuals carry similar amounts of the virus, and this is now backed up by a number of studies.

In July, a Sage advisory panel warned of ‘limited vaccine effect against onward transmission for the Delta variant’. The data for Omicron is still coming in, but it already appeared that the initial reduction in transmission with a vaccine wanes over a fairly brief period of time. For the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, the reduction in transmission is zero at five months. This is why I put it to Javid that healthcare workers would need to be vaccinated every month or so if the policy of reducing transmission is going to be effective. That is simply not going to happen.

Next, we need to weigh up whether or not someone has already contracted Covid-19 and developed an appropriate immune response. After vaccination, antibody levels are high (which is probably what leads to the reduction in transmission), but they drop off fast. With natural immunity, antibody levels are initially lower but they decrease more slowly. Scores of studies have shown that, broadly speaking, natural immunity is equivalent to the immunity provided by the vaccination programme. Most of these studies were carried out before Omicron, which we know to be more likely to cause breakthrough infection in vaccinated people and onward transmission generally.

Being unvaccinated is a huge risk for some, but low-risk for others. As I have seen in intensive care wards, a serious case of Covid-19 is life-threatening, but nearly all unvaccinated patients presenting to critical care also have risk factors such as obesity or other comorbidities. Not having the vaccine has weighed very heavily against these people. Even with our growing knowledge about the disease, Covid still kills around one in 33 over-seventies who are not care home residents. But for those in their twenties, it’s closer to one in 11,000. Even within these age groups, there are vast differences between those who are fit and well and those who have a lower functional status.

You might ask, yet again: why don’t I take the vaccine? Perhaps I could gain some extra protection on top of my natural immunity. But having had an asymptomatic Covid infection once, there is a minuscule chance that I am going to get it again and be sick with it. Secondary infections tend to be milder. I’m happy to keep topping up my natural immunity with micro-exposures.

There are about 85,000 unvaccinated NHS workers. All those I have spoken to say they will not have the vaccine. Will the NHS really benefit from losing all these dedicated members of staff? If the government does intend to fire us, it is incumbent on ministers to explain the scientific basis for doing so. Any law that could end the careers of so many doctors, nurses and other health professionals demands evidence and scientific proof. If ministers cannot produce such proof (and Javid had no answer when I spoke to him) then they should stop threatening NHS staff with the sack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a doctor, an intensivist, retired.   I've had my two initial vaccinations, and my booster, and because I volunteered for study of antibody levels (simple skin pricks samples) I know I have high levels of antibodies.   And, I'm 74 years old, and 3/4, so I'm more vulnerable than most.    Or I would be, if it wasn't for those vaccinations.  And

 I continue to see dozens of the public, several times a week to vaccinate them.

My colleague, Dr.Stephen James, offers no rational reason or evidence for his refusal to be vaccinated, except previous exposure and "micro-exposure".    He will previously have been required to be vaccinated against Hepatitis B, lest he infect his patients.   He cannot have refused that or he would have already broken his contract of employment and lost his job.   His support for other NHS employees without the benefit of of his education and experience who also refuse,  is not acceptable.  He should reconsider.

John

Edited by john.r.davies
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Dr Stephen James. For  the reasons I expressed above I very much doubt that vaccines agains the virus spike offer much protection against severe C-19 at all. Omicron is going great guns , transmitting much  faster despite mass vax, as James writes. Falling hospitalisations and deaths may well reflect the virus evolving, not vaccine success. A coincidence. Virologists the world over will be on the back foot over that one paper. Its a game-changer, never before recognised in any virus. Heres the lay summary again:  https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-12-dominant-alpha-variant-evolved-evade.html  

Peter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the contrary, Peter, I have the advantage of seeing hundreds of the public every week, who are persuaded that they should be vaccinated, and now boosted.     A standard question in their assessment is to ask about previous Covid infections, and while I have kept no records and have no figures, I am impressed by the number who say that they have had Covid since their vaccinations.

This is not remarkable - no vaccine (except possibly smallpox) offers perfect protection.    What is remarkable is that these peoples' Covid infections, proven by PCR testing as they should be, have  been no more than an unpleasant illness lasting a week or less, because they were previously vaccinated.   Vaccination is effective, in reducing the incidence and severity of Covid infection, and consequently the hospital admission and death rates.

It is of great interest to virologists and epidemiologists that SARS-Covid-2, in its Alpha variant had evolved innate immune antagonists, that suppress innate immunity responses such as interferons.     We already know, in science and in daily life, that corona-viruses, including the common cold, evolve rapidly to confound our natural immune responses.   The discovery proves nothing, but is a further demonstration of the power of evolution, the genius of Darwin in recognising it and as the authors say will point to further targets for research and possible future vaccines.

But Alpha was overtaken by Delta, and Omicron has replaced that, as new infections.     Yes, repeated booster vaccinations will become less and less effective as they are designed against Alpha.    Pfizer say that, using their mRNA technology, they hope to have an Omicron-specific vaccine by March this year.    No doubt virlogists' imagination will be directed by the discovery of the evolution innate immune antagonists, and alterntive vaccines will appear in the future.

John

 

Edited by john.r.davies
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, john.r.davies said:

On the contrary, Peter, I have the advantage of seeing hundreds of the public every week, who are persuaded that they should be vaccinated, and now boosted.     A standard question in their assessment is to ask about previous Covid infections, and while I have kept no records and have no figures, I am impressed by the number who say that they have had Covid since their vaccinations.

This is not remarkable - no vaccine (except possibly smallpox) offers perfect protection.    What is remarkable is that these peoples' Covid infections, proven by PCR testing as they should be, have  been no more than an unpleasant illness lasting a week or less, because they were previously vaccinated.   Vaccination is effective, in reducing the incidence and severity of Covid infection, and consequently the hospital admission and death rates.

It is of great interest to virologists and epidemiologists that SARS-Covid-2, in its Alpha variant had evolved innate immune antagonists, that suppress innate immunity responses such as interferons.     We already know, in science and in daily life, that corona-viruses, including the common cold, evolve rapidly to confound our natural immune responses.   The discovery proves nothing, but is a further demonstration of the power of evolution, the genius of Darwin in recognising it and as the authors say will point to further targets for research and possible future vaccines.

But Alpha was overtaken by Delta, and Omicron has replaced that, as new infections.     Yes, repeated booster vaccinations will become less and less effective as they are designed against Alpha.    Pfizer say that, using their mRNA technology, they hope to have an Omicron-specific vaccine by March this year.    No doubt virlogists' imagination will be directed by the discovery of the evolution innate immune antagonists, and alterntive vaccines will appear in the future.

John

 

John,  It is entirely feasible that the entire vaccine approach has been mis-guided. MERS provided the focus on the spike and design of SARS vaccines, The paper shows that the virus evolved to weaken innate immunity using its proteins to suppress type1 interferon signalling. That ahs nothing to do with the spike,and spike-targeting vaccines. The paper is  first fro science, new to virology.  The virus has outsmarted all virologists. Fortunately the central importance of D3 to innate immunity is known in considerable depth. No vaccine invention needed. Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452318622000125

25(OH)D above 50 nmol/L improves antibody response to Pfizer vaccinnation.

In winter half the UK population are  below 50 nmol/L.

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume that everyone here who is 75 or more will either have, or will soon get their "Spring Booster" vaccination?   (Especially, if I may, you too, Peter!)

Our first Booster clinic was, perhaps unwisely, offered as a 'walk-in', no appointments.      As a result they were queuing three deep right around the square and up the hill, almost before we started at 1130.     By 1430 we had to turn people away as we couldn't hope to  do any more that day, despite working until 1930.   In the event we expected  360 and vaccinated 470 with just four vaccinators!    The next day's clinic was the same, people willing with few moans to  wait for up to three hours to get their jab.   

It made me feel better about people, because I'd been seeing more and more previously, turning up for their FIRST VACCINATION - never had one before, after they've been available for a year and a half - because they want to go on holiday.      And then they demand the 'little blue cards"  we used to give out because the database was so flaky:

image.thumb.png.73192508bed919cc0882c5b519f647f7.png

They haven't even done their due diligence about what evidence their host country or transport demand to show that they are vaccinated! These are NOT "Covid Vaccination Passes"!!!

I trust you are all fully vaccinated!   If you do plan to go abroad this year (and why not, Classic Le Mans beckons!) make sure what documentation is  required!   I've heard of people being turned back before the departure lounge, when they didn't have the right docs.      I met a guy who travels for business in Germany, who asked me to sign THREE different docs, one national German, one for a German state and his copy of the WHO Vaccination booklet, as he said, he might be asked for any or all of them, over there!

For France, and Le Mans, see: https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/france/entry-requirements?msclkid=40be4a7bab8011ec9f3ad3452ae87b7a 

AND: https://uk.ambafrance.org/COVID-19-rules-for-travel-between-France-and-the-UK-28918#t1-Travelling-from-the-UK-to-France

Bonne chance!

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.