PS In case it’s not clear, I’m with @slawa on this one.
You guys are adults and make up your minds for yourselves.
I don’t think there is much ambiguity here about where you stand on the matter. 
Guy
Once again, with feeling…
Guy: “Let’s ignore science!”
Or something like that.
1 Like
The article I linked talks about those asymptomatic cases and links studies. The numbers vary by a lot because everyone has different definitions for ‘symptoms’.
Studies have demonstrated that at least 20% of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 remain asymptomatic
1 Like
Yes, I saw that. Thanks. The article I posted from the BMJ also discusses asymptomatic cases, with linked studies.
True that. Symptoms can be very similar to other things, as well, compounding the issue. CDC: “You cannot tell the difference between flu and COVID-19 by the symptoms alone because they have some of the same signs and symptoms.” UK NHS: “The symptoms are very similar to symptoms of other illnesses, such as colds and flu.” The Mayo Clinic, in their article on “Covid” vs the flu, states that the only difference in symptoms between the two is that they “appear at different times.”
I’m not aware of any symptoms or collections of symptoms completely unique or specific to covid and only covid. Covid symptoms appear common to many other diseases and conditions, including the collection of common respiratory infections colloquially known as “the flu.” It’s a dilemma. Hence the emphasis on testing to confirm.
1 Like
I seem to recall ‘asymptomatic’ was based on a 2020 Chinese study of 10 million people? And I recall posting that here back then. Eight tested positive. Of those, three had taken meds to mask their symptoms.
The gophers in office across the world, acting on their diktats, miraculously presented more opportunities for the totalitarian technocrats. Asymptomatic was a scam.
1 Like
During the lockdowns in Melbourne in July 2020, 9 Public Housing Towers were locked down and surrounded by police for 14 days. The rest of the lockdowns elsewhere did not force people to stay in their home/apartment for a given period, as they could still go out for work, exercise, walk the dog, get food as long as they stayed within a given radius which was about 10km from memory.
The residents have now agreed to AUD5 Million Compensation, which works out at around AUD2200 each.
1 Like
“lawful, necessary and proportionate” lol.
It’s a shame they’ve taken the money, but I understand their situation.
Politicians have got away with it with a relatively small amount of other people’s money.
2 Likes
Many of them were recent legal refugee immigrants - that $2200 will be a big deal for most.
1 Like
Wasn’t quite sure where to put this, but IMO this is one of the most important interviews I’ve seen that elucidates what was going on during “the pandemic”. No doubt a lot of people are just bored with it all and want to move on, but moving on isn’t going to be possible when this level of fraud and malice is now the norm in pharma/medicine/The Science™.
If you don’t have time to watch it - and I really suggest you do, to fully grasp the extent of the story - the TL;DW is as follows:
“They” attempted to shut down glucocorticoids (“steroids”) for ARDS in the same way they shut down vitamin D, ivermectin, HCQ, and several other drugs, but they fluffed it.
They had to take a fundamentally different approach with steroids because:
a) Unlike Ivermectin and HCQ, steroid therapy had been observed to work in COVID-related ARDS exactly as you might expect it to work. There was nothing particularly earth-shattering about the fact that it did work. It would therefore have been very hard to convince doctors that it was harmful.
b) It would have also been difficult to attempt something like “You are not a bodybuilder. You are not an athlete. You don’t need steroids. Stop it, y’all” on the public. Even the most boneheaded patient knows, at least in a vague sense, that corticosteroids aren’t the same as anabolic steroids, and that they are widely used and relatively safe.
c) If they’d tried to ban steroids outright, as they did with Ivermectin, doctors would have been up in arms, simply because they’re used in such a wide range of applications. Everyone would have seen clearly what was going on. Even the MSM might have figured it out.
The approach, therefore, was to set up some designed-to-fail experiments (which worked well for both IVM and HCQ), smear and harass doctors who were publishing on the subject, and put pressure on the professional organisations who might support their research to disown or downplay the conclusions. It backfired, and they had to do an about-face; steroids went mainstream in COVID management and fewer people died. However, They managed to delay and obfuscate the correct use of steroids for several months, at which point the vaccines were pretty much ready. Job done.
I would really like to know how people who have been consistently cheering for the official narrative - COVID is untreatable and the only solution is vaccines - think of all this. Was the accusation of fraud against Meduri justified? Are Drs Marik and Meduri simply slandering the Pharma industry, and none of this is even true? Did the Pharma industry really arrange for thousands of people to die to make more profit, or is there a benign explanation?
There’s an interesting secondary point in the video: it wasn’t just about vaccines. Extended lockdowns were justified on the basis that economic collapse was somehow preferable to the collapse of the health service (under pressure from an avalanche of COVID patients). Steroid therapy (and all the other treatments - Dr Marik mentions “about twenty” possibilities) would have shortened hospital stays, put less pressure on equipment and staff, and improved long-term outcomes, and the whole rationale for lockdown would have evaporated. One wonders how much political support was involved, and whether there were any nudges, winks, and secret handshakes in high places.
2 Likes
Interesting pod.
It’s amazing how little
resembled actual science 
1 Like
@cake: as the evidence that it was a massive scam becomes overwhelming, there seems to be a distinct lack of people going on about how it was all necessary, millions of lives were saved, the authorities were only doing their best, etc etc.
It was never about science in the first place. It was about politics and money, and the public fell for that “following the science” stuff while the movers and shakers were setting up horrific conspiracies - such as the one mentioned in the video - in order to magnify the number of deaths and thereby make their snake oil look appealing. How anybody can defend this kind of behaviour is beyond my comprehension. It simply should not happen in “civilized” nations; and if it does, the people responsible should find themselves in jail before the money even hits their Swiss bank accounts. And the only outstanding question is: why are they still walking around, claiming to have saved the world?
Incidentally, there’s an answer in that video for all the people who keep hectoring me (us) with statements like this: “you don’t even know who is doing the things you claim, so you must be wrong”. Well, Meduri names names; and the answer to the question “who is doing it?” is “people you’ve never heard of”. As anybody might have guessed.
2 Likes
Interesting….
Official China figures on Covid deaths since opening is 60.000 while when looking at excess deaths during 2 months there are 1.87M…
Cover up or just bad at math?
Are these deaths solely from covid?
Maybe the 60,000 is the good math.
Excess deaths are typically defined as the difference between the observed numbers of deaths in specific time periods and expected numbers of deaths in the same time periods .
So it could be 1.8M additional people eaten by Cows than the compared period, but I think we would have heard about that 
1 Like
Might be the same thing that’s causing the excess deaths in the UK and other places.
1 Like
Not if the cows didn’t want you to hear about it.
The more I think about it, the more I dislike this concept of “excess deaths” because - as you intimated - it doesn’t capture what people are dying of, and unless you drill down into different age bands, it doesn’t describe how much of a problem it is.
If the excess deaths are entirely at the top end of the age range, this is roughly equivalent to a reduction in expected lifespan, and although it might be something to investigate, it doesn’t suggest a massive problem. If you see the excess in the 20-40 bracket, it might be a good idea to find out why.
Whatever the “every life is precious!” crowd might think, the bottom line is that some deaths are preventable and some aren’t. Some are preventable only at great cost to society. And the idea of an “expected number of deaths” is problematic; why, exactly, is the five-year average (or whatever) the definitive reference baseline? These things are picked quite arbitrarily, and although it’s not unreasonable to say “we should not expect more people to die this year than last year”, you could also make a reasonable case for a ten-year or twenty-year average. And if you do that, it makes the COVID pandemic disappear. It also makes this year’s inexplicable “died suddenly” epidemic disappear. At some point, you have to make more nuanced decisions about what’s going on in the now, and whether something should be done about it.
1 Like
Thx, that was my point!
Probably wasn’t due to the clotshots.
I just read the article. Reuters really are on top of their game here.
China’s abrupt move to dismantle its strict COVID-19 regime, which unleashed the virus onto its 1.4 billion residents, could have led to nearly 2 million excess deaths in the following two months, a new U.S. study shows.
Isn’t it traditional to criticise China for being cruel and authoritarian? It seems Reuters are caught between a rock and hard place here, unwilling to call out China for being China because they need to claim that lockdowns saved lives.
China’s decision last December to end the three-year zero-COVID policy, which included mass-testing and stringent and persistent quarantine lockdowns, led to a massive surge in hospitalisations and deaths that health experts say were largely unreported by the government.
Could it be that they were unreported because they didn’t happen? I mean, I wouldn’t trust anything China says, but I wouldn’t trust Reuters either. It’s very hard to fudge mortality figures, so they couldn’t possibly have been “unreported”. What they mean, I suppose, is that the government failed to report a sufficiently apocalyptic number of COVID deaths.
1.87m, if true, represents an uptick of about 15%, which is comparable to the West. However, here’s a chart from Statista, which suggests that no remarkable discontinuity occurred at any point during 2020-2022:
China: number of deaths 2022 | Statista.
… and whatever increase in crude mortality may have occurred was due merely to an increase in population. Their claim just doesn’t seem to hold water. We’d need to see ASMR numbers to make a reasonable judgement.
“Eris” nicknamed after the Greek Goddess of strife and discord
Whoever is pulling the COVID puppet strings, they really are just taking the piss now.
2 Likes
It could also be that extended lockdowns, effective house arrest, and restricted access to healthcare aren’t great for people’s health. Who would have thought? 
I happen to be on my way to meet my former supervisor from Nanjing, who’s visiting Taipei for a conference. He was saying a couple of days ago on the phone that COVID was pretty rough on him when he caught it back during the massive wave in December/January/February - he talked about being stuck in bed unable to breathe or get medical attention and thinking he was going to die (he’s around 40, reasonably healthy IIRC but with quite a stressful lifestyle, I’m not sure about vaccination status).
2 Likes