News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

chedca21

Scientists: we can't always predict whether energy will behave like a wave or particle

Telecom: cellphone radiation is strictly non-ionizing

Re:Milgram experiment (1963) (02:17 minutes) on Saturday December 17, 2022 @04:19PM (#34032344)
Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University, quotes an infection fatality rate (IFR) for Covid of 0.00-0.57% (0.05% for under 70s), far lower than originally feared and no different to severe flu [3]. This paper is published on WHO’s own Bulletin but ignored by UK mainstream media.

Just a flu but crash the economy and mandate medical interventions for all?

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/why-some-doctors-... , this PIP protocol for ventilators kills people but its important for everyone's safety

You're just like the Germans of the third rich. Institutions giving you insane instructions and you comply and comply.

Milgram may have faked his data but you are proof that he may as well have. He was right anyway.

Ioannidis did a antigen survey and found the vast majority of cases were mild; https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/340124

A survey by the most cited epidemiologist alive is not a forecast for one. It is the best appeal to authority one can make. I've seen it shown that h1n1 in england in 2009 had a IFR of 0.05% which is greater than the revised figure for covid.

Amazing how all the proof in the world makes such little difference to the average Luddite who will just defer to authority regardless. Stanley Milgram was clearly right about everything he said.

VAERS includes thousands of reports of death including broad anaphylaxis following their vaccination for CV. So what are you saying? Those lives are an acceptable cost for the convenience of skipping failsafes?

You're essentially giving full confidence to an industry - so why stop at covid? Shouldn't you prophylactically vaccinate yourself against all the viruses on earth?

That's like saying you don't need to look both ways before crossing the street because its not the status quo
The risk: benefit analysis that supports vaccination is considering the earliest standards of care we had which were criminally misguided - no steroids allowed, plug patient respiration up with a machine to not spread the virus ,

These protocols are what killed people mostly and ultimately they are what is being used to justify universal recommendations for a vaccine.

Did their stances actually contribute to public health policy, if so then they bare responsibility unfortunately. Armchair biosecurity advocates should be left off the hook.
The vaccines confer an antibody response, which isn't all that important in terms of combating disease: "Antibodies that offer protection'? Let’s pause right here. When was it ever proven that antibodies offer protection? In fact, the opposite has been observed. Don’t we remember another prominent scientist (and a Nobel Prize winner in 1960) Sir Frank Macfarlane Burnet telling us the following regarding the role of antibodies (or rather lack thereof) for immunity in children who lacked antibody production due to a genetic condition called agammaglobulinemia:

“To everyone’s surprise [children with agammaglobulinemia] showed a normal measles course with a typical rash which faded at the normal time and was followed by just as substantial immunity against reinfection as would be shown by any other convalescent. Antibody production is therefore not necessary either for recovery from or for the development of immunity to measles.” (Burnet and White. Natural History of Infectious Disease. Cambridge University Press, 1940) "

https://www.tetyanaobukhanych.com/blog/should-you-be-afraid-...

FDA could have used T-cell expression as a standard of efficacy but chose not to despite knowing antibodies were being over sold as hallmarks of immunity.

Tetyana Obukhanych is a doctor of immunology from Rockefeller NYU. Pharma companies spun up multiple "blogs" to smear her when she started speaking out.

But wait 15 minutes to see if your child gets anaphylaxis from them. We could have tested for allergy before giving the vaccine but its more convenient to have you wait around after.

Don't worry if you experience allergic shock we have epinephrine on standby. It might not work and its use is associated with Alzheimer's onset but don't worry! Safe and effective!

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425/rr-31

Covid-19: politicisation, “corruption,” and suppression of science

"Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University, quotes an infection fatality rate (IFR) for Covid of 0.00-0.57% (0.05% for under 70s), far lower than originally feared and no different to severe flu" -March 2020

The bigger scandal is how covid case:fatality rate was so much higher in some places than the global average. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/why-some-doctors-...

Pfizer's clinical trial showed 95% efficacy as a "relative risk reduction" when researchers checked the clinical trial data (which FDA wanted to withhold for 55 years but a Texas judge ordered its release) , for the actual risk reduction it was shown to be a negative value. Here is one resource on the subject https://www.pandata.org/understanding-relative-risk-reductio... I tried to find a better reference but can not find the exact one I'm looking for which came from a Canadian university (ryerson I believe)
And young male athletes with the greatest development of blood supply in the deltoid represent the most common demographic affected by acute cardiovascular injury post vaccine. Coincidence?

The vaccines were not built to be aspirated, once the plunger is up they can not be reset. It represents a fundamental lapse in standard harm reduction.

Also "wait 15 mins to see if emergency care is needed" could well have been replaced by allergy screening given before the injection. Many thousands of cases of anaphylaxis from the shot have been documented some of which were fatal, all avoidable with allergy screening which is practically free.

BMJ in 2020 said covid was about as bad as bird flu; https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425/rr-31

"Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University, quotes an infection fatality rate (IFR) for Covid of 0.00-0.57% (0.05% for under 70s), far lower than originally feared and no different to severe flu [3]. This paper is published on WHO’s own Bulletin but ignored by UK mainstream media."

The public health measures were unjustified. We only ever should have protected seniors, rather we displaced ICU occupancy into long tern care homes. Mad world

The danger of contracting covid was inflated relatively by initial standards of care that later proved harmful; https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/why-some-doctors-...

Also using steroids like dexamethasone were a later advent in treating covid that helped a lot. (They should have been standard of care right away like they would have been for any other respiratory illness).

These early follies increased the perceived need for a vaccine then and today still; risk : benefit analysis for the vaccines consider worst possible scenarios for covid, which include defunct practices like high PIP ventilator use and forgoing of common first-line treatments

Machines not functioning? Same scrambled voter rolls? "Sorry it says you already votes absentee"? Where oversight of elections was too thorough it got changed to election month - Florida can count millions of ballots on election day but other states need more time?

Truly one has to bury their head in the sand if they are to stand by election integrity in 2022

Re:How the FCC Shields Cellphone Companies from Safety Concerns on Thursday November 10, 2022 @12:00PM (#33549523)
B-b-but its non-ionizing!!

"Cigarette smoke doesn't get hot enough to burn you and is therefore safe" -tobacco companies

Re:Flu and colds are back with a vengeance on Thursday November 10, 2022 @11:53AM (#33549369)
If you take an intramuscular injection without aspirating the needle to make sure it's not found a blood vessel in the deltoid, you risk cardiovascular damage pointlessly. The standard of practice is so absurd and flawed yet its going to take years longer before people like you become aware of how badly we've been mislead.
Re:Flu and colds are back with a vengeance on Thursday November 10, 2022 @11:46AM (#33549225)
If T-cell count and function is normal immunity should last. The idea that immunity wanes is coming from universities looking at antibodies (a different immune cell) as markers for vaccine efficacy. Industry prefers that way because waning antibodies means they'll sell more "boosters"