Coronavirus, Covid 19 Discussion and How It Has Affected Your Daily Life Chat Thread

From the uk. Total cases 10,464,389 total recovered 9,220,626. So 90 percent survival rating. Thats better odds than the lottery. Thats better than HIV. Not trying to be insensitive but HIV is far more deadly a coronavirus than covid is. At least from these numbers.
Something considerably more than 90% partly because of the time gap between cases and outcome. It used to be something like 14 days even for mild cases because of the tendency of the serious cases to turn so a week to ten days into it. At 40,000 -50,000 cases per day, that is 560,000 - 700,000 who are currently counted as cases but none of whom are counted as recovered yet.

Some unknown number of mild cases aren't counted at all because the people didn't get tested.

Edit to add
From the definitions page of worldometer

"Recoveries = ...WHO recommends following the criteria of [symptoms resolve + 2 negative tests within 24 hours] or [symptoms resolve + additional 14 days], but this is only a recommendation. In some countries, when a patient is discharged from the hospital it is counted as "recovered" even if no test is performed. Some health officials now consider anyone who was diagnosed with COVID-19 three or more weeks ago and has not died to be recovered from the disease. ..."
 
Last edited:
Here you go:

ARTERIOSCLEROSIS, THROMBOSIS, VASCULAR BIOLOGY​

SESSION TITLE: DAMPS, INFECTION AND CARDIOVASCULAR METABOLISM​

Abstract 10712: Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning​

Steven R Gundry
Originally published8 Nov 2021Circulation. 2021;144:A10712

Abstract​

Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test (GD Biosciences, Inc, Irvine, CA) a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein biomarkers including IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine, soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF)which serves as a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue, among other markers. Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score.The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.This report summarizes those results. A total of 566 pts, aged 28 to 97, M:F ratio 1:1 seen in a preventive cardiology practice had a new PULS test drawn from 2 to 10 weeks following the 2nd COVID shot and was compared to the previous PULS score drawn 3 to 5 months previously pre- shot. Baseline IL-16 increased from 35=/-20 above the norm to 82 =/- 75 above the norm post-vac; sFas increased from 22+/- 15 above the norm to 46=/-24 above the norm post-vac; HGF increased from 42+/-12 above the norm to 86+/-31 above the norm post-vac. These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.
But at least people will be possibly protected from serious cold, I mean Covid symptoms. Isn't that worth it?
 
But at least people will be possibly protected from serious cold, I mean Covid symptoms. Isn't that worth it?
I actually think COVID is very real, and very serious for certain people who fall into a high risk category. But, I have been researching since the beginning of this virus, and I believe the research (that you have to dig for, yourself, because mainstream media won't report it and social media won't allow it) shows that there are serious risks with blanket "vaccinating" the general public - and, the risks of the "vaccine" outweigh the short-lived benefit, for otherwise, healthy individuals. And they should absolutely NOT be given to children.
Why, why, WHY are successful, highy available, very inexpensive, long-researched, safe, off-label therapies for early disease being withheld from patients?? That's the million dollar question. And we'll leave it at that.
 
The one problem with news articles, and the like, is that they only tell you about the bad news. Say 10 people got the vaccine, 2 of them got COVID, 1 of them died.
"MAN (Or lady) DIED FROM COVID SHOT"
"LADY KILLED FROM COVID VACCINE"
They don't tell you how many people are completely fine, they only tell you about the people who aren't.

That's my option anyway. :)
Sadly, negative news like negative attitudes seem to draw more attention.

Went to the movies yesterday - everyone masked.
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom