Admin's blog

Health & Wellness Health COVID-19 much less deadly than previously thought, major study finds Will Jones
The Daily Sceptic
Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:53 UTC Dr. John Ioannidis COVID-19 is much less deadly in the non-elderly population than previously thought, a major new study of antibody prevalence surveys has concluded.

The study was led by Dr. John Ioannidis, Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology at Stanford University, who famously sounded an early warning on March 17th 2020 with a widely-read article in Stat News, presciently arguing that "we are making decisions without reliable data" and "with lockdowns of months, if not years, life largely stops, short-term and long-term consequences are entirely unknown, and billions, not just millions, of lives may be eventually at stake".

In the new study, which is currently undergoing peer-review, Prof. Ioannidis and colleagues found that across 31 national seroprevalence studies in the pre-vaccination era, the average (median) infection fatality rate of COVID-19 was estimated to be just 0.035% for people aged 0-59 years and 0.095% for those aged 0-69 years. A further breakdown by age group found that the average IFR was 0.0003% at 0-19 years, 0.003% at 20-29 years, 0.011% at 30-39 years, 0.035% at 40-49 years, 0.129% at 50-59 years, and 0.501% at 60-69 years.

covid pre-vax IFR graphThe study states that it shows a "much lower pre-vaccination IFR in non-elderly populations than previously suggested".

A breakdown by country reveals the wide range of IFR values across different populations.

IFR % by countryThe significantly higher values for the top seven suggest some of the difference may be an artefact of, for example, the way Covid deaths are counted, particularly where excess death levels are similar. Note also that the antibody studies datefrom various points during the first year of the pandemic, most of them prior to the large winter wave of 2020-21, when levels of spread and numbers of deaths were more varied than later in the pandemic as subsequent waves caused countries to converge.

The reason some countries had much lower values and some much higher is not completely clear. The authors suggest that "much of the diversity in IFR across countries is explained by differences in age structure", as per the plot below.

meta-regression IFR graphHowever, the age breakdown by country suggests that the IFR differed for each age group in each country, casting doubt on that suggestion. (In the chart below, note the logarithmic scale, and ignore the zig-zag lines, which are due to small countries having low numbers of deaths.)
graph IFR countryWhy are countries seeing differing IFRs even for the same age groups? The authors suggest a number of explanations, including data artefacts (e.g. if the number of deaths or seroprevalence are not accurately measured), presence and severity of comorbidities (for example, obesity affects 42% of the U.S. population, but the proportion of obese adults is only 2% in Vietnam, 4% in India and under 10% in most African countries, though it affects almost 40% of South African women), the presence of frail individuals in nursing homes and differences in management, healthcare, overall societal support and levels of drug problems.

Prof. Ioannidis has previously published a number of papers estimating COVID-19's IFR using seroprevalence surveys. He and his team conclude that their new estimates provide a baseline from which to assess further IFR declines following the widespread use of vaccination, prior infections and evolution of new variants such as Omicron.
Comment: See also:


Understanding the malinformative nature of pharmaceutical industry propaganda is vital. This article is a good example for analysis. So much of this manipulation of facts, and doublespeak, get blasted at us, that it is worth the time to dissect some of it closely. It helps to know the tricks, so they become easy to spot.

"Stakeholders" have high stakes simultaneously in pharma, insurance, hospitals, retirement funds, media, academia, government policy, and corporations hurt by disability expenses and paying out retirement income for decades per retiree. It is a house of cards because it depends on unaffordable, unsafe, and ineffective medical care.

Pain relief care is ok, but making people healthy is bad for the markets.


Accident Reconstruction Experts Claims Journal - Insurance news and resources for claims adjusters

View this article online: https://www.claimsjournal.com/news/national/2022/05/18/310515.htm

[bold, italics, and comments by DCforum editor]

Study Links Chiropractic Care to Lower Costs, Faster Return to Work

Chiropractors are involved in only a small fraction of workers’ compensation claims for low back pain in states where insurers or employers control the choice of medical provider, but a report released Tuesday suggests that skepticism [insurance company stakeholder worry?] about runaway costs [of medical sickness care] may be unfounded [thanks to chiropractic care].

A study by the Workers’ Compensation Research Institute found that medical care costs less and claimants return to work more quickly when low back pain treatment is provided solely by chiropractors. Costs were also lower when chiropractors provided physical medicine services but other types of clinicians were in charge of evaluation and management, but the difference was not as dramatic.

“This study will be helpful for policymakers and stakeholders who are interested in re-evaluating the role of chiropractors, especially those who have been adopting evidence-based practices and contributing to cost-effective care,” stated WCRI President and Chief Executive Officer John Ruser in a press release. ... more

Opinion The illusion of evidence based medicine BMJ 2022; 376 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o702 (Published 16 March 2022) Cite this as: BMJ 2022;376:o702
  1. Jon Jureidini, research leader1,  
  2. Leemon B. McHenry, professor emeritus2
    Author affiliations

Evidence based medicine has been corrupted by corporate interests, failed regulation, and commercialisation of academia, argue these authors

The advent of evidence based medicine was a paradigm shift intended to provide a solid scientific foundation for medicine. The validity of this new paradigm, however, depends on reliable data from clinical trials, most of which are conducted by the pharmaceutical industry and reported in the names of senior academics. The release into the public domain of previously confidential pharmaceutical industry documents has given the medical community valuable insight into the degree to which industry sponsored clinical trials are misrepresented.1234 Until this problem is corrected, evidence based medicine will remain an illusion.

The philosophy of critical rationalism, advanced by the philosopher Karl Popper, famously advocated for the integrity of science and its role in an open, democratic society. A science of real integrity would be one in which practitioners are careful not to cling to cherished hypotheses and take seriously the outcome of the most stringent experiments.5 This ideal is, however, threatened by corporations, in which financial interests trump the common good. Medicine is largely dominated by a small number of very large pharmaceutical companies that compete for market share, but are effectively united in their efforts to expanding that market. The short term stimulus to biomedical research because of privatisation has been celebrated by free market champions, but the unintended, long term consequences for medicine have been severe. Scientific progress is thwarted by the ownership of data and knowledge because industry suppresses negative trial results, fails to report adverse events, and does not share raw data with the academic research community. Patients die because of the adverse impact of commercial interests on the research agenda, universities, and regulators....  ... more

I floated this idea and found it has potential!

Here's the ingredients:

... more

Top Ten Pandemic Fables

Posted on August 13, 2021


Watch the documentary:


IT’S a year unlike any other on planet earth. Many know deep down that there is something very wrong taking place. No one is allowed to have an opinion any more, no matter how many PhD’s behind their name. No one has the freedom any longer to make their own medical choices (“My body, my choice” no longer applies). No one is allowed to engage facts publicly without being censored or even dismissed from their careers. Rather, we have entered a period reminiscent of the powerful propaganda and intimidation campaigns that immediately preceded the most distressing dictatorships (and genocides) of the past century. Volksgesundheit — for the “Public Health” — was a centrepiece in Hitler’s plan.  

In democratic societies, the needs of public health sometimes require citizens to make sacrifices for the greater good, but in Nazi Germany, national or public health — Volksgesundheit — took complete precedence over individual health care. Physicians and medically trained academics, many of whom were proponents of “racial hygiene,” or eugenics, legitimized and helped to implement Nazi policies aiming to “cleanse” German society of people viewed as biologic threats to the nation’s health.In the Name of Public Health — Nazi Racial Hygiene by Susan Bachrach, Ph.D.

With CNN’s Don Lemon calling for the “unvaccinated” to be barred from grocery stores, or Piers Morgan demanding that the unvaccinated be barred from health careVolksgesundheit has returned with a frothing vengeance — this time against those nasty, selfish healthy people who dare to trust their powerful natural immunity, as millennia of descendants did before them. Even the existence of concentration “camps” for “high risk individuals” (ie. the unvaccinated?) is no conspiracy theory and is detailed on the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) website. The fact that many are losing their jobs as we speak for refusing the jab brings this reality very much home. We are headed toward one of the most divisive and destructive periods perhaps in human history — and propaganda, once again, is playing a central role. ... more

Dynamic Chiropractic – August 1, 2021, Vol. 39, Issue 08

The Positive Wink Sign

By Thomas Michaud, DC

Weakness of the intrinsic toe flexors, specifically the flexor digitorum brevis muscle (FDB), is a common and underappreciated cause of a wide range of injuries. In 2015, Sullivan, et al.,1 examined 202 people with chronic heel pain, compared them to 70 asymptomatic people, and determined that weakness of the toe flexors was a common finding in the heel pain group.

This is consistent with research showing that heel spurs do not form at the origin of the plantar fascia as popularly believed; they form at the attachment point of the FDB.2 Researchers suggest that in an attempt to offload the neighboring plantar fascia, the FDB fires with more force and the resultant tensile strain leads to the development of a traction bone spur on the calcaneus. Over time, the bone spur gradually becomes a weight-bearing point capable of creating its own set of symptoms.

Importance of FDB Strength ... more


93 procent bloeddonoren heeft antistoffen tegen corona Do 29 juli, 16:33

Meer dan 93 procent van de Nederlanders die bloed doneren heeft antistoffen in hun bloed tegen corona dankzij een besmetting of een vaccinatie. Bloedbank Sanquin onderzoekt elke week een deel van hun bloeddonaties op antistoffen.

Hoe meer antistoffen in je bloed, hoe beter je beschermd bent tegen een besmetting met corona. De kans dat je dan ernstig ziek wordt of in het ziekenhuis belandt, is heel klein. Goed nieuws volgens OMT-lid Marc Bonten, maar wat betekent dit voor de groepsimmuniteit? En kan het beleid nu sneller versoepeld worden?

Eerst even de cijfers:

- Nieuwsuur

"Dit hoge percentage komt vooral door de explosieve groei van gevaccineerde twintigers de laatste weken", zegt Hans Zaaijer, arts-microbioloog en onderzoeker bij de bloedbank. ... more

By disrupting brain activity in a particular region,

neuroscientists can sway people’s views of moral situations. Publication Date: March 30, 2010

[Maybe they should study their own morality, if they have some? -ed.]

moral neuroscience

In the new study, the researchers wanted to go beyond fMRI experiments to observe what would happen if they could actually disrupt activity in the right TPJ. Their success marks a major step forward for the field of moral neuroscience, says Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, professor of philosophy at Duke University. ...

The researchers used a noninvasive technique known as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to selectively interfere with brain activity in the right TPJ. A magnetic field applied to a small area of the skull creates weak electric currents that impede nearby brain cells’ ability to fire normally, but the effect is only temporary. ...

Saxe’s lab is now studying the role of theory of mind in judging situations where the attempted harm was not a physical threat. The researchers are also doing a study on the role of the right TPJ in judgments of people who are morally lucky or unlucky. For example, a drunk driver who hits and kills a pedestrian is unlucky, compared to an equally drunk driver who makes it home safely, but the unlucky homicidal driver tends to be judged more morally blameworthy.

full article:


Part1: https://www.bitchute.com/video/yII1pZmVYnLN/

PANDA (Pandemics – data and analysis) has been very outspoken with regards to Covid-19, lockdowns and government’s approach to the virus. Their viewpoints have certainly ruffled a few feathers over the past year, with many speaking out against the think tank. Nick Hudson, co-founder of PANDA, spoke at the inaugural BizNews Investment Conference earlier this month.

Part 2: https://www.bitchute.com/video/Pmi2nUhmDool/

More info:

Source: Philosophers-stone.info Bitchute channel:


Ga direct naar inhoud Logo Rijksoverheid - Naar de homepage van Rijksoverheid.nl U bevindt zich hier: Home Onderwerpen Coronavirus COVID-19 Mondkapjes Mensen met een beperking of ziekte Zoeken binnen Rijksoverheid.nl Mondkapjesplicht voor mensen met een beperking of ziekte

Er geldt in Nederland in publieke binnenruimtes een mondkapjesplicht, bijvoorbeeld in winkels, in het openbaar vervoer of de bibliotheek. Dit geldt in principe ook voor mensen met een beperking. Sommige mensen hoeven echter geen mondkapje te dragen op plekken waar dat verplicht is.

Hieronder vindt u informatie wie uitgezonderd is van de plicht om een mondkapje te dragen en hoe zij dit kunnen aantonen.

voor dragen mondkapje

Er geldt een uitzondering voor mensen die vanwege hun beperking of ziekte geen mondkapje kunnen dragen. Het kan zowel om zichtbare, als onzichtbare beperkingen of ziektes gaan. Concreet gaat het om: ... more

Pages: 1 2 3 »
This is a non-commercial website, archiving information for educational purposes.
Nothing here should be considered medical advice!
If what you see here is valuable to you and others, please chip in.

You don't have to join the forum to support it.