Category: Safe and Effective

Safe and Effective®

The Telegraph- How the long-term sickness epidemic wrecked Britain’s public finances

Lockdown wreaked havoc across the economy, devastating children’s education, hammering the public finances and piling pressure on a health service already struggling with the ageing population. But among its more pernicious and long-term consequences appears to be a steep and sustained rise in the numbers of people of working age who have left the jobs market because of ill health.

Nothing to worry about. After all winter is coming.

Trust the Evidence- Looking forward to the next winter crisis

On 5 October, we pointed out the recurrent and seemingly intractable recurrence of the NHS winter crisis. Year in and year out, we have the same screaming headlines around Christmas time.

Safe and Effective

Vancouver Sun- Vancouver man who opened store selling hard drugs dies of a reported overdose

…supporters say Martin was a drug legalization advocate who wanted to provide a safe supply of drugs to users amid B.C.’s overdose crisis wrought by a poisoned illicit drug supply.

In May, he opened The Drugs Store on the corner of Main and Cordova streets, selling illicit hard drugs up to quantities of 2 1/2 grams per customer — the possession limit allowed under recently relaxed drug decriminalization laws.

Lockdowns= “a global policy failure of gigantic proportions”

The data are in and it’s about as ugly as it gets.

This paper should be mandatory reading for every politician, bureaucrat, health care worker, media pundit and wanna be tinpot dictator out there. We should never, NEVER go through anything like this again.

Institute of Economic Affairs- Did lockdowns work? The verdict on Covid restrictions

COVID-19 lockdowns were “a global policy failure of gigantic proportions,” according to this peer-reviewed new academic study. The draconian policy failed to significantly reduce deaths while imposing substantial social, cultural, and economic costs.

The comprehensive 220-page book, began with a systematic review of 19,646 potentially relevant studies. For their meta-analysis, the authors’ screening resulted in the choice of 22 studies that are based on actual, measured mortality data, not on results derived from modelling exercises. A meta-analysis is considered the ‘gold-standard’ for evidence, as it combines comparable, independent studies to determine overall trends.

Direct link to the whole paper

Dr. John Campbell gives us an excellent overview of the analysis.

Safe and Effective®

back in the halcyon days of the 90’s, a young bill clinton played to perfection a certain form of crisis/criticism response:

deny, deny, deny, it’s old news.

the goal was simple: you lie and lie and lie some more. you do not expect to get away with it in the long run. you expect to get away with it long enough for people to stop caring and for it to become “old news.” and unfortunately, it works. well. because humans have the memory of goldfish and by the time it’s clear you were telling porkie pies, everyone is onto the next thing and no one cares anymore.

the modern version would seem to be:

it’s misinformation, it’s misinformation, it’s misinformation, it’s old news.

The Sound Of Settled Science

The Illusion of Consensus

The project of science calls for rigor, humility, and open discussion. The pandemic has revealed the stunning magnitude of the political and institutional capture of science. For this reason, both of us — Rav and Jay — are launching a podcast devoted to investigating the concoction of pseudo-consensus in science and its ramifications for our society. To start — and for quite some time — they will be examining the illusory consensus during COVID. However they will soon branch out into issues pertaining to transgender care, mental health, psychiatry, and nutrition — topics that have been wholly corrupted with one monolithic consensus that has proven to bear many costs on our society.

Safe and Effective®

Michael P Senger- The Great COVID Ventilator Death Cover-up

This practice of prolonged intubation was apparently consistent with guidance from China. As Zeynep Tufekci had put it, “Chinese scientists” advised “many COVID-19 patients need to stay on mechanical ventilators as long as four weeks.”

The New Yorker featured a harrowing account of one early victim’s final moments before he was put on a ventilator and died—even though he didn’t even “feel sick” at the time he was intubated.

A study in JAMA later revealed a 97.2% mortality rate among those over age 65 put on mechanical ventilators. Patients over age 65 were more than 26 times as likely to survive if they were NOT placed on mechanical ventilators.

Safe and Effective®

The British Medical Journal;

Whether Pfizer’s maternal respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine candidate increases the risk of preterm birth dominated discussions at a meeting last week of the committee advising the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).1 While all members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) voted positively on efficacy, four out of 14 voted that the data were not adequate to support safety.

As The BMJ revealed earlier this month,2 Pfizer’s clinical trials showed increased levels of preterm births among vaccinated women, and GSK, which was working on a similar vaccine, halted vaccination in its phase 3 trials after observing an increase in neonatal deaths and preterm births.34

Paul Offit, professor of paediatrics at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and VRBPAC member who voted “no” on safety, said at the meeting that he had “no problem” with efficacy. On safety, however, “the GSK experience” troubled him.5 “If preterm births are in any way a consequence of this vaccine it would be tragic.”

In Pfizer’s phase 2 trial, there were three preterm births (2.6%) in the placebo group v six (5.3%) in the vaccine group. In the phase 3 trial, which studied preterm births as an “adverse event of special interest,” 5.7% of babies were born preterm among vaccinated women v 4.7% in the placebo group. There was also an imbalance in babies with low birth weight (5.1% in the vaccine group v 4.4% in the placebo group).6 None of the differences were statistically significant.

It’s insignificant that the statistically insignificant differences all go in the same direction.

Maybe climate change?

The post-pandemic spike in excess deaths is simply becoming too large even for the leftist corporate media to ignore, but it seems that most favored approach is to throw up one’s hands and declare that it’s all just a baffling mystery.

Statistics Canada last week published what are called “provisional” mortality counts for New Brunswick, which estimated 9,288 people died in the province through 2022.

If confirmed, the number will be a record for the province, obliterating the previous high set in 2021 by a stunning 1,179 deaths.

New Brunswick’s Department of Health is aware of the record 2022 death estimate but it has no theories about a cause — and isn’t prepared to draw any broad conclusions about what it means.

Safe and Effective®

Doubled risk: This study by Taiwanese and Stanford researchers on the US vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals shows an alarming statistical increase in the retinal vascular occlusion.

Abstract:

We aimed to investigate the risk of retinal vascular occlusion after COVID-19 vaccination. This retrospective cohort study used the TriNetX global network and included individuals vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines between January 2020 and December 2022. We excluded individuals with a history of retinal vascular occlusion or those who used any systemic medication that could potentially affect blood coagulation prior to vaccination. To compare the risk of retinal vascular occlusion, we employed multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models after performing a 1:1 propensity score matching between the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts. Individuals with COVID-19 vaccination had a higher risk of all forms of retinal vascular occlusion in 2 years after vaccination, with an overall hazard ratio of 2.19 (95% confidence interval 2.00–2.39). The cumulative incidence of retinal vascular occlusion was significantly higher in the vaccinated cohort compared to the unvaccinated cohort, 2 years and 12 weeks after vaccination

Navigation