Forum Replies Created

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
    • Sat, Sep 11, 2021 - 10:01pm   (Reply to #2)

      #5
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder1

      How to purchase Ivermectin. I live in the UK

    https://offshoredrugmart.com/generic-equivalent-to-stromectol-12mg.html

    Says you need a prescription.

    • Sun, Jul 04, 2021 - 08:24pm   (Reply to #511)

      #517
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder2

      A very dark view of mRNA vaccines; The warning from Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche

    India arrested a WHO scientist for suppressing Ivermectin. She might be facing a life prison sentence, or even execution!

    When the general public figures out how bad the science and medical community has screwed them over… there’s gonna be doctors and scientists “hanging from trees like leaves”.

    We’re already seeing admissions of doctors being afraid to speak up about “lab leak” for example out of “fear” of being associated with “the racist” Donald Trump. How many others also had the same fear? I’ll bet A LOT.

    Is there a scientific name for fear of things that don’t exist? There seems to be an epidemic of it now.

    • Sun, Jul 04, 2021 - 08:20pm   (Reply to #1)

      #516
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder3

      A very dark view of mRNA vaccines; The warning from Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche

    Nah… it SO juvenile. What would they have done if it was “Covid-20”?

    Anyways, the virus’ real name should be the “W.A.R.S. Virus” Wuhan Accute Severe Respiratory Virus. Just like in the “SPARS” Scenario from Johns Hopkins.

    But I guess the “WARS Virus” was too obvious?

    • Sun, Jul 04, 2021 - 08:00pm   (Reply to #5)

      #6
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder1

      Pregnancy, Covid, and Ivermectin

    It’s amazing (TERRIFYING) how many people can’t read a study.

    The study looked at 3958 women from the V-Safe Pregnancy Registry. The study was of 3958 pregnant women…

    Over a two-and-a-half month period only.

    OF those 3958 women ONLY 827 had a conclusion (pregnancy or death). Remember the results are out of 3958.

    The article also tells you how many women got vaccinated and in which trimester:

    Preconception: 92
    First Trimester (14 weeks or less): 1132
    Second Trimester (between 14 and 28 weeks): 1714
    Third Trimester (Over 28 weeks): 1019
    No data: 1

    So when that footnote says that 96 women in their first trimester had a spontaneous abortion, that is 96 out of 1132 (out of the total of 3958). So 8.5% of women in their first trimester had a spontaneous abortion.

    Which is actually LESS than the average of 10-15% in the first trimester, under normal circumstances.

    This report REALLY seems to be “punking” everybody. Even Dr. Mobeen Syed got punked, and had to issue a correction video…

    • Sun, Jul 04, 2021 - 07:55pm

      #3
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder3

      Study: Pfizer and Moderna Vaccination During Pregnancy a High Risk

    It’s amazing (TERRIFYING) how many people can’t read a study.

    The study looked at 3958 women from the V-Safe Pregnancy Registry. The study was of 3958 pregnant women…

    Over a two-and-a-half month period only.

    OF those 3958 women ONLY 827 had a conclusion (pregnancy or death). Remember the results are out of 3958.

    The article also tells you how many women got vaccinated and in which trimester:

    Preconception: 92
    First Trimester (14 weeks or less): 1132
    Second Trimester (between 14 and 28 weeks): 1714
    Third Trimester (Over 28 weeks): 1019
    No data: 1

    So when that footnote says that 96 women in their first trimester had a spontaneous abortion, that is 96 out of 1132 (out of the total of 3958). So 8.5% of women in their first trimester had a spontaneous abortion.

    Which is actually LESS than the average of 10-15% in the first trimester, under normal circumstances.

    This report REALLY seems to be “punking” everybody. Even Dr. Mobeen Syed got punked, and had to issue a correction video…

    • Sat, Jan 02, 2021 - 07:46am

      #79
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder1

      Scientific history of RaTG13

    Re: The Polybasic Furin Cleavage Site and HIV.

    I’ve been digging through the literature for the past couple of weeks to try and understand a little bit more about what’s going on, and a couple of things have caught my attention of late.

    Recently in Australia, they had to cancel their vaccine trials because people who got the vaccine were testing positive for HIV! When I read the press release, they mentioned using the GP41 protein from HIV…

    Update on The University of Queensland COVID-19 Vaccine

    December 11, 2020

    https://www.csl.com/news/2020/20201211-update-on-the-university-of-queensland-covid-19-vaccine

    And I said “that’s weird”… wasn’t there that paper from India that said that SARS-CoV-2 has parts of the HIV virus in it? but everyone said they were full of it?

    Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag
    January 31, 2020
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338957445_Uncanny_similarity_of_unique_inserts_in_the_2019-nCoV_spike_protein_to_HIV-1_gp120_and_Gag

    So I checked and their paper says that the Virus has the GP120 protein from HIV in it (this is what connects to the CD4 receptor in immune cells). So I looked into the two proteins, and thought it was rather curious that these two proteins work together to infect cells, the GP120 to bind to the CD4 receptor and the GP41 to enter the cell.

    So then I compared the India HIV paper with Holmes’ Polybasic Furin Cleavage insert, and I see that this insert is among one of the 4 inserts the Indian researchers identified as coming from HIV!

    This is around the 680 mark in the spike sequence.

    The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32284615/

    So… why would the Australian vaccine be using this GP41 protein? Does mean that the GP41rotein is also part of SARS-Cov-2? How common is the GP41 protein, etc. etc.?

    • Mon, Dec 28, 2020 - 04:19am

      #2
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder2

      The India Covid Gene-Sequencing Study

    Well, I found the study.

    Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag
    January 31, 2020
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338957445_Uncanny_similarity_of_unique_inserts_in_the_2019-nCoV_spike_protein_to_HIV-1_gp120_and_Gag

    They mention finding the GP120 protein from HIV in SARS-CoV-2. What’s interesting is that the trials for Australia’s vaccine had to be shut down when people started testing positive for HIV. According to the press release from the institution making the vaccine, their vaccine was using part of the GP41 protein from HIV.

    Envelope glycoprotein GP120
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envelope_glycoprotein_GP120

    “Gp120 is anchored to the viral membrane, or envelope, via non-covalent bonds with the transmembrane glycoprotein, gp41. Three gp120s and gp41s combine in a trimer of heterodimers to form the envelope spike,[8] which mediates attachment to and entry into the host cell.”

    I’m no scientist, but it certainly rates as “curious” that the Indian scientists said they found part of the HIV virus on SARS-CoV-2 and then the vaccine is using parts of the HIV… to target SARS-CoV-2?

    Sure thing!

    The GP120 molecule of HIV-1 and its interaction with T cells
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20088758/

    HIV-1 gp41 Residues Modulate CD4-Induced Conformational Changes in the Envelope Glycoprotein and Evolution of a Relaxed Conformation of gp120
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29875245/

    Update on The University of Queensland COVID-19 Vaccine

    December 11, 2020

    https://www.csl.com/news/2020/20201211-update-on-the-university-of-queensland-covid-19-vaccine

    • Mon, Dec 28, 2020 - 04:11am

      #2
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder3

      HCQ factory blown up

    I looked into the AMA rescinding their previous announcement in March against HCQ and it seems that the resolution did not pass. According to documents on their website, they were more concerned about how embarrassing it would be for the AMA to come out now and admit they were wrong. So they’re gonna stick with it to the bitter end.

    Back when they made this announcement in March, the AMA president was on CNN giving clap-back snap-back responses to Trump, rather than acknowledging the whole mountain of research that had been released concerning the success of HCQ.

    So, if the president of the AMA is too lazy to do her own damn research and/or too much of a political hack, what about literally everyone else we have to depend on?

    • Sun, Dec 27, 2020 - 12:00pm

      #13
      joe6167

      joe6167

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 16 2020

      Posts: 18

      count placeholder0

      What studies are available on D vitamin and Covid?

    Greetings all,

    I was looking through Italy’s AIFA (Italian Medicines Agency) and came across a press release about something called Nota 96:

    It’s all in Italian, so I’m wondering how much is lost in translation. Here’s the Google Translate Version:

    Vitamin D – Consumption and expenditure reduced by more than 30% since the introduction of Note 96
    October 8, 2020

    https://www.aifa.gov.it/en/-/vitamina-d-consumi-e-spesa-ridotti-di-oltre-il-30-dall-introduzione-della-nota–1

    Nine months after the AIFA provision, data on consumption and expenditure of vitamin D-based drugs suggest a recovery in the prescribing appropriateness of this class of drugs.

    This is what emerges from the monitoring carried out by the Agency to verify the effects of the application of Note 96, through the analysis of national and regional data.

    In the first nine months of application of Note 96 (November 2019 / July 2020) there was an overall decrease in consumption and expenditure for this class of drugs of over 30% compared to previous periods, both in terms of packs dispensed and expenditure supported by the National Health Service, with an average monthly saving of approximately 9.8 million euros.

    On the other hand, there are no significant increases in the consumption and expenditure of other Vitamin D analogues not covered by the Note.

    The impact at the level of the different regions is heterogeneous and depends both on the different regional scenarios that existed before the application of the Note, and on the responses observed on the territory after the AIFA provision.

    With Note 96, published on 28 October 2019, the Agency redefined the conditions for the prescription by the National Health Service of vitamin D-based drugs classified in group A (reimbursable by the NHS) – cholecalciferol, cholecalciferol / salts calcium and calcifediol – exclusively for the prevention and treatment of Vitamin D deficiency in the adult population (> 18 years).

    Here is the actual announcement for this Nota 96:

    https://www.aifa.gov.it/en/nota-96

    And related documentation:

    https://www.aifa.gov.it/documents/20142/1030827/Nota_AIFA_96_Allegato_1.pdf/de3d0a06-f5a9-5bd7-a7e9-bdec88ec0187

    -A flowchart to determine when it is and is not appropriate to prescribe Vitamin D.

    https://www.aifa.gov.it/documents/20142/1030827/Determina_n.1533_2019_Nota96.pdf/82e17738-8ea7-c77e-3d1c-6403385703cc

    https://www.aifa.gov.it/documents/20142/1030827/NOTA_96_12mesi_24.12.2020.pdf/98e5d811-eabb-99be-6053-6a742e03091a

    “5) The 40-50 age group is the one that recorded the greatest reduction in consumption, especially among women;”

    ——————————————-

    To me, it sounds like that press release is saying that in November 2019, the Italian health care system restricted the prescription of Vitamin D to only a few specific conditions, and that people weren’t purchasing other Vitamin D products to compensate.

    This certainly raises some questions concerning Vitamin D levels and Italians.

    Are there any Italian residents or Italian speakers around here who might be able to offer some insight on Nota 96?

    —————————————

    Now, “I’m not saying its aliens” or “SACS” (Severe Andrew Cuomo Sickness), but I’m really curious to see what effect, if any, and on whom, there was in creating a restriction on the prescription of Vitamin D… minutes before the covid pandemic hit Italy, and what impact it had on the elderly when Covid finally arrived.

    … Maybe elderly Italians still get plenty of sunlight in the winter time (where I live we have next to no daylight, AND perpetual cloudiness for 5 months straight…), or just take Vitamin D supplements on their own initiative. But if they managed to save 9 million euros a month… hmm, a 3-month pack of Vitamin D tablets cost me perhaps SIX Euros, it sounds like they pulled a massive amount of Vitamin D out of circulation…

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)