Jump to content

tube fanatic

Regulars
  • Posts

    2822
  • Joined

Posts posted by tube fanatic

  1. 11 hours ago, RandyH000 said:

    C.D.C. Will Not Investigate Mild Infections in Vaccinated Americans

    At least 10,000 vaccinated people were infected with the coronavirus through the end of April. Now the agency has stopped pursuing the mildest cases.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/25/health/cdc-coronavirus-infections-vaccine.html


    I consider this a tragic mistake, especially since the PCR cycle times they are now using to evaluate the breakthrough cases are far lower than those used for the unvaccinated.  This, of course, makes the vaccines look far more effective than they really may be.  
     

    Maynard

  2. The concerns expressed here have been mirrored by some of the doctors and other medical professionals I know.  My EMT neighbor says that most of the COVID patients her unit has transported to the hospital have been fully vaccinated.  My point in posting stuff like this is to raise awareness that mainstream media is presenting a one sided view.  A person’s choice should only be made after consideration of all relevant information.
     

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33113270/

     

     

    Maynard

    • Like 1
  3. 2 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

    Because one hasn't been found. It's explained in the article.

     

    This is all actually a good sign that the system is working exactly as intended.


    I get concerned when adverse reactions are deemed “coincidental” as happens far too often in my opinion.

     

    Maynard

  4. Apparently, vaccine passport requirements are not considered a HIPAA violation:

     

    https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2021/05/is-it-a-hipaa-violation-for-a-business-to-ask-for-proof-that-you-got-a-covid-vaccine.html

     

    My concern is that if this is allowed to take place, proof of not having other communicable diseases like tuberculosis could follow.  Sadly, this comes at a time when immunity from the vaccine may be gone after  a few months.  The newer vaccine candidates, which presumably will provide T cell immunity seem a much better bet to me.

     

     

    Maynard

  5. From the CDC vaccine faq:

     

    “We don’t know how long protection lasts for those who are vaccinated. What we do know is that COVID-19 has caused very serious illness and death for a lot of people. If you get COVID-19, you also risk giving it to loved ones who may get very sick. Getting a COVID-19 vaccine is a safer choice.

    Experts are working to learn more about both natural immunity and vaccine-induced immunity. CDC will keep the public informed as new evidence becomes available.”

     

    So, it is quite possible that those who were vaccinated 5 to 6 months ago may no longer have sufficient resistance to the spike proteins to avoid getting as sick as the unvaccinated, or whether they even developed sufficient resistance in the first place.  It seems to me that the public has been given a very false sense of security regarding removal of the mask mandate.  Of course some scientists have said from the beginning that using a mask to contain a virus (unless specifically virus rated) is analogous to trying to keep out mosquitos with chicken wire.

     

    Maynard

    • Like 1
    • Sad 1
  6. Another interesting change which only applies to breakthrough cases:

     

    “In the coming weeks, CDC will transition from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only vaccine breakthrough infections that result in hospitalization or death. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance.”

     

    https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html


    Another agenda at work here?

     

     

    Maynard

     

  7. Many prominent scientists have long warned that the PCR cycle times of up to 45 used to diagnose “cases” are way too high and lead to a huge number of false positives.  That number of cycle times will pick up viral fragments which pose no health risks to the individual or others.  Well, in a blatant display of hypocrisy (in my opinion of course), the CDC is now using a cycle time of only 28  MAXIMUM when testing for breakthrough cases!  Am I the only one to suspect an agenda here?

     

    https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/downloads/Information-for-laboratories-COVID-vaccine-breakthrough-case-investigation.pdf

     

     

    Maynard

  8. Tubes which are matched for dc operating conditions only (I.e. for setting bias) can be very dissimilar under ac conditions (i.e. signal present).  The only way to do it correctly is with a curve tracer.  Small signal tubes can be grid leak biased.  This eliminates the need for a cathode resistor/bypass cap and truly ensures self adjusting operation for the life of the tube.  I use it almost exclusively.

     

    http://aeaaudio.com/matching-tubes-with-a-curve-tracer/

     

    You can also look up work by Daniel Schoo on using curve tracers.

     

    Maynard
     

     

    • Like 1
  9. 41 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

    Sure it is and I suggest folks talk to their doctor instead of listening to pundits and politicians. 


    There is one of the problems.  Around here some tell patients that the vaccines seem to be safe so far and may confer some degree of extra protection, but long term consequences are unknown, while others say that it is perfectly safe/tested/and there are no worries.  Meanwhile, a cardiologist I know asked me for my thoughts on the J&J vaccine!  Seems a bit backwards (of course he knows about my ties to the medical field and extensive research tendencies.....).  Putting trust in certain agencies (which have negated all claims about harm from vaccines like Gardasil) is something I will never do.

     

    Maynard

  10. 52 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

    Fwiw, I think the problem is instead of listening to the top scientists some people search out opinions to bolster their own view regardless how fringe it is. 


    But you did not answer my question about why McCullough’s recommendation is not acceptable to the mainstream “experts.”  I understand your apparent belief in agencies you have often referred to.  They are not, in my opinion, so trustworthy.  
     

    A parallel which is valid is someone posting a question about a Klipsch product.  They usually receive many opinions, some based on the technical knowledge of the respondent, and some which are mere opinion.  It is up to them to sort things out.  Medicine is no different.  A person needs to read differing points of view and draw their own conclusion.  If Klipsch censored anything with which they disagree, the forum would serve no purpose.

     

    Maynard
     

     

    • Like 1
  11. So, McCullough said:

     

    “There's only one doctor whose face is on TV now. One. Not a panel. (As) doctors, we always work in groups, we always have different opinions. There's not a single media doctor on TV who's ever treated a COVID patient. Not a single one. There's not a single person in the White House Task Force who has ever treated a patient,” he said.

    “Why don’t we do something bold. Why don’t we put together a panel of doctors that have actually treated outpatients of COVID-19, and get them together for a meeting. And why don’t we exchange ideas, and why don’t we say how we can finish the pandemic strongly.”

     

    Perhaps some of the forum pedants can explain what is wrong with this.  In the medical field there are usually multiple ways to deal with illness.  There is no secret about the suppression of points of view which do not fit a particular agenda.  Do some research about studies which turned out to be written by ghost writers with no real credentials to have an idea about our being manipulated.  Even the so called fact checkers who “debunk” misinformation often have no medical training (research that as well).  
     

    To me, the problem is that we are considered too stupid to read various opinions and draw a conclusion which best suits our needs.  I certainly don’t need someone like Zuckerberg or CNN to tell me what I need to believe.

     

    Maynard

    • Like 2
  12. 38 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

    No but I googled "lifesitenews" and found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_Life_Coalition

    From the link:

    According to the fact-checking website Snopes.com, LifeSiteNews is "a known purveyor of misleading information."[13] The Associated Press described the website as "ultraconservative."[14] In May 2019, Philip Pullela, in a Reuters article, wrote that the website "often is a platform for attacks on [Pope Francis]."[15] The LGBT magazine The Advocate has described LifeSiteNews as an anti-LGBT outlet, and criticised it for articles blaming clerical sex abuse, including that of children, on homosexuality.[16] Research has shown no evidence that sexual orientation affects the likelihood of a person's abusing children....

     

    And

     

    LifeSiteNews Media's YouTube channel was banned in 2021 for persistently promoting COVID-19 misinformation. For instance, one video claimed that it was "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public". Another promoted anti-vaccine sentiment claiming that fetal cells from new abortions are used to produce them when currently available vaccines were not produced using stem cells. Doubts about the efficacy of vaccines were also pushed and the gravity of the virus minimized. These claims contradict the scientific consensus and reports from authorities like the World Health Organization, violating YouTube policies in relation to the promotion of health misinformation.[24][25]


    I have no interest in the web site or its position.  Rather, I want to know more about this doctor, who is apparently highly respected, and why his beliefs were not given due consideration.

     

    Maynard

    • Confused 1
  13. My next door neighbor was given a disclosure on her way out of the vaccination site.  

     

    Interestingly, she is one of four folks I know who would not consider the vaccine but suddenly decided to do it while relaxing watching TV.  It makes me wonder if subliminal messaging is being employed as was used in movie theaters to create an urge for popcorn, etc.  

     

    It is common knowledge among those I know that mainstream news outlets are heavily promoting the “accepted” agenda and ridiculing anyone who presents a different point of view.

     

    Maynard

  14. 8 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

    "V-safe is a smartphone-based tool that uses text messaging and web surveys to provide personalized health check-ins after you receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Through v-safe, you can quickly tell CDC if you have any side effects after getting a COVID-19 vaccine. Depending on your answers to the web surveys, someone from CDC may call to check on you and get more information. V-safe will also remind you to get your second COVID-19 vaccine dose if you need one."


    V-safe isn’t so wonderful either.  As of Feb. 21st only 7.9% of vaccine recipients completed at least one report.  Almost all of my acquaintances did not bother to participate because they believe that no one gives a “s**t” anyway.  I also know some docs who will not be bothered as well.

     

    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778441

     

    Maynard

  15. 1 hour ago, billybob said:

    Totally counterproductive having a thread for such pdf documents speculation, yet posting it here.

    Strange...


    Speculation?  This is HHS saying that the reporting system is vastly underutilized.  You know the situation is bad if the gov. admits that their own agency is not working!

     

    Maynard

    • Like 1
  16. Although this study ended in 2010,  I have read that adverse event reporting has not improved at all.  The results on page 6 of the following document suggest that the adverse events (including death) from the coronavirus vaccines are massively underreported.  All who are still undecided about taking them should keep this in mind.

     

    https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf

     

     

    Maynard

    • Sad 1
  17. 58 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

    Before you read that, read this.(by a MD, PhD):

     

    https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/christian-elliots-18-reasons-i-wont-be-getting-a-covid-vaccine-viral-antivaccine-misinformation/

     

     

    Christian Elliot is a self-proclaimed “natural health nerd” and entrepreneur who recently published 18 reasons why he wouldn’t take the COVID-19 vaccine. Unfortunately, it’s viral disinformation based on conspiracy theories, bad science, pseudoscience, and nonsense.

     

    But I'm keeping an open mind, if I get crystals from the other person, and buy/subscribe to Christian Elliot, I can avoid all drugs, all vaccines, and don't need to see a doctor.  

     

    I will have new Jubilies much, much sooner.


    As I said, Christian Elliot is a lay person with concerns.  The real info is contained in the links he provided in his list.  Those raise many questions in my mind as they are from sources which, in my opinion, are respectable (and not from laymen) and which is why I recommended reading ALL of them.  I would welcome reading challenges to those and debating why those sources should be ignored.

     

    Maynard

×
×
  • Create New...