Getting the blubber off and forcing ones self to exercise may be the "vaccine" that is needed.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/one-man-s-...ix/ar-BB18IMXH

I was getting my quarterly haircut today and this topic came up with my barber.

We both intend to get vaccinated when a proven vaccine becomes available, but, like me, she is skeptical of any vaccine that seems to have been rushed into distribution for any reasons other than medical ones.

As Frank Bell said, it was vaccination that got rid of polio — and he could have added smallpox. And if everyone complied, we could get rid of measles. When I read threads like this, and people talking about their "right" to decide, yet again I thank the gods that I don't live in the USA.

I shall certainly get vaccinated against covid if a vaccine is approved. I had a letter from my GP yesterday inviting me to make an appointment for a flu vaccination and I intend to do so tomorrow. No more just walking into the flu clinic and waiting your turn, unfortunately!

It occurs to me that if all of us oldies and everyone else who is vulnerable (fat people, people with type 2 diabetes, maybe all BAME people over 40) get vaccinated, it won't matter any more about the others, as they wouldn't get covid badly anyway. We could open everything up again and save the economy.

I think it's pretty clear by now that influenza doesn't kill as many people, even ones who are weaker and sicker to start with (e.g., I don't ever recall hearing about influenza killing half the people in a nursing home in a few weeks).

The correct link seems to be https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/on...ix/ar-BB18IMXH

Wherein I see So I think it's reasonable to say that the average U.S. resident is not a healthy person, no?


AFAIK, that doesn't quite work, because (even if the vaccine works) getting vaccinated isn't a 100% guarantee that you acquire immunity.

It usually takes years for a vaccine to be developed and approved. Rushing it and getting it approved in months could be dangerous. I'm actually less worried about the vaccine making people sick than I am about people being vaccinated, believing they're immune, then going out and catching it because the vaccine wasn't actually effective. I fall into the camp of waiting to see if the vaccine or vaccines are safe and effective. It takes a long time to find out for sure. I remember well the thalidomide fiasco, which resulted by not thoroughly researching it before approving it. In the current situation, I'm doubly skeptical.

Yes. Or at least not as healthy as a generation ago.

50 years of illegal drug usage which damages the health and mind, can cause genetic damage that can be passed on to the next generation.

30 years of psychiatric drugs being prescribed, which has millions of brain chemistry's messed up, permanently.

Running to the doctor for every sneeze, which results in a population being over medicated, which has consequences like antibiotic ineffectiveness.

Increases in smoking tobacco and vaping, which damages the heart and lungs, which lowers ones ability to fight pathogens.

Large decrease in physical activity which leads to poor blood circulation, slow metabolisms, increases in disease.

Very poor quality diets of junk food, which lead to obesity and poor health, heart attacks and strokes.

Workplaces that are now so stressful and offensive that people can't sleep at night, which leads to all kinds of illnesses like hypertension.

The political climate which permeates every area of life, and effects peoples health.

A huge out of control illegal acting government and court system, which endangers everyone's freedom, safety and health.

Police that thinks it's us against them, which endangers our health.

Millions of women trying to raise kids all by themselves, which is almost impossible so the taxpayer have to pick up the bill, and kids and woman may not be eating well from lack of fiances.

And the kids don't have Dads to kick their butts and make them behave, so they wind up in trouble or prison, which results in poor health.

And the youth are too busy looting, killing, trying to burn cities down to learn anything.

I could go on...

No, The US isn't at it's healthiest right now.

As far as I can tell, the thinking behind pushing people to get vaccinated for things like measles and the flu is because they want to prevent outbreaks, or prevent others from getting sick. The logic I don't understand is... if people aren't getting vaccinated, that should only present a problem to unvaccinated people. Instead, we hear stuff like, "get your children vaccinated so they don't spread ... to other children." So is the main reason people are made to be pariahs for not getting vaccinated, or having their kids vaccinated, because vaccines aren't very effective, or because they're not 100% effective and therefore getting vaccinated means at least a lower risk?

I don't know if this is too far off-topic, but

How a False COVID-19 Narrative Was Created & Sustained for Six Months

I normally don't put much stock in what comes out of President Trump's mouth, but is it possible that hydroxychloroquine could actually be helpful? If this article were true, what would the motives be for resisting the use of HCQ? I mean.. having a pandemic is bad for the economy, so I don't see a financial motive. Even if there was an argument that people want to make money off vaccines, how could they not realize that that any profit they make from vaccines would be offset by the extremely negative economic impact of prolonging the pandemic? Doesn't really make sense to me either, why Trump would promote that drug. I don't see much financial motive there either (as far as the possibility of helping out some cronies), as it hasn't been under patent for years.

I might of given some credibility to the AHRP until the posted article mentioned America's Frontline Doctors or the Bill Gates conspiracy theory. If I remember correctly the doctor speaking made the claim of "cysts are caused by sex with spirit husbands and spirit wives, DNA from aliens is being used in medicine and scientists are developing vaccines to prevent people from being religious."

Articles by the Heritage Foundation and Nature conclude that without a double blind study it is unknown whether HCQ is really useful in treating COVID19.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41419-020-2721-8
https://www.heritage.org/public-heal...treat-covid-19

My 18 year old niece came from a very locked down Singapore to North Carolina a number of weeks back. She complained that the girls in the dorm were flaunting everything that Singapore has been forcing on the public. She got Covid and had little to no symptoms. Now she thinks it was all a hoax since half the university tested positive and no one seemed to be sick.

I have said this a hundred times before. Why are the under 21 so immune to this?? They are not normally immune to other types of virus. Maybe the cure is to simply find out why they do so well against it.


In the US the military was one of the first to start looking at covid in San Antonio and the work to find a solution has been on many desks.

The solutions range from prior work on SARS and MERS to some unique snippets of covid molecule to help not only the sick but the not sick.

Is any vaccine safe? Safe by medical terms seems to be better than 50% effective. What is effective? If 100 were to die then if only 50 die from vaccine and covid is it a success?

I'm old enough to remember scientists saying we are entering a new Ice Age, asbestos should be put in baby clothing, and ddt is not that bad.

What makes anything safe is time. Any so called tested vaccine could have any number of very deadly outcomes. The time needed to prove is a lifetime and longer to include many generatios. Any vaccine will be unsafe. It can't be proven safe by anyone. It can ONLY be prove safe by time and a few generations. You have to decide.

Quite a number of people where I work have tested positive and a few complained of symptoms but none has died. (thank God)

It is possible. But the article looks pretty BS to me. For example, their nice looking graph has a URL supposedly pointing to its source. But the URL is embedded in the image instead of text, which makes it harder to follow it and check. And going to https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/CO..._covid_19_data doesn't have the actual graph, it's just a bunch of .csv files which I'm not quite patient enough to see if it could correspond to the graph or not.

I've been looking at a few of the other links in the article. This made me particular curious.

[...]
The effort to undermine hydroxychloroquine appears to have begun months prior to Trump’s announcement. Chloroquine was first shown to have strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection in primate cells back in the 2005 publication Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection. [6] Pharmaceutical companies were likely aware that if hydroxychloroquine was shown to be effective against SARS-CoV-2 it would diminish the value of patented therapeutics or vaccines. Through lobbying efforts, regulation may have been the first step to control the availability of hydroxychloroquine.

This may have been what occurred in France. Hydroxychloroquine was available without prescription in France for years. This came to an end on January 13, 2020, when hydroxychloroquine was classified “in all its forms” as a “list II poisonous substance.” [7] After decades of widespread use, hydroxychloroquine quickly became a restricted substance in France in the earliest days of the COVID-19 pandemic. Just several weeks later, Dr. Didier Raoult in the South of France would report his landmark clinical trial demonstrating hydroxychloroquine’s efficacy against COVID-19. [5]

Why was hydroxychloroquine—a drug safely used for over half a century—aggressively labeled dangerous while a medication that proved ineffective for hepatitis C with an unknown safety profile got a pass? Herein I outline the evidence showing hydroxychloroquine to be a direct threat to Gilead’s success as well as the massive sphere of influence Gilead has over government taskforces, the World Health Organization, medical journals, academic institutions and research scientists. These organizations provided ammunition for the media’s war on doctors prescribing hydroxychloroquine.
[...]
Gilead’s stock rises and falls based on the successes and failures of both hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir. Immediately before Trump first announced hydroxychloroquine as a promising therapeutic for COVID-19, GILD traded at a local high of $85 per share, a price unattained since early 2018. Hours after Trump’s press conference, GILD dropped 8.7%, and then continued to plummet to $69 per share the following week—erasing $21 billion from its market cap in mere days. Immediately after Dr. Fauci announced the success of remdesivir in the NIH trial, GILD stock surged back to $85 per share. Compared to the largest pharmaceutical companies by revenue, Gilead has consistently outperformed in this pandemic with GILD gaining over 20% YTD while most of its competition struggled with losses or meager gains. This growth is almost certainly attributed to remdesivir’s promise as an effective treatment for COVID-19.

Gilead has a direct financial incentive for hydroxychloroquine to fail. Actually, based on its share price, Gilead has 21 billion reasons to discredit hydroxychloroquine. Perhaps no other company has more to gain in the immediate future from hydroxychloroquine’s failure than Gilead.[...]

Gilead: Twenty-one billion reasons to discredit hydroxychloroquine

by James M Todaro, MD

There's a ~19 minute video on https://www.medicineuncensored.com/ that seems to cover most of what that publication is about.

Good example of how people fall for pseudo science articles if they're only made up nicely.
This article has "pushing for hydroxychloroquine" written all over it, right from the start. Maybe that's what it was written for?
Also the choice of embedded links seems a little one-sided (either in-house or to sth called lifesitenews, with the occasional online tabloid article), and ultimately we are asked to "Continue reading" on "anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com"... (*)

And ultimately you reach for the presented solution, inadvertently helping America's No.1 bully to keep on bullying.

(*) There's one morsel of truth in the article: the US of NA have indeed been the leading country in all Covid19 statistics for a long while - why, only yesterday I heard that India (a country that has easily thrice the population, and certainly doesn't do too much testing) "might soon push the USA from its first place with most COVID 19 cases" ... maybe that's what the orange baby meant when it said "America first"?

The obvious alternate explanation for this, is that governments were trying to prevent a shortage. Like what happened for toilet paper.

Only in absolute numbers. Surely the proper comparison should be per capita?

Which again, is only because people insist on reporting absolute numbers instead of per capita.

Didn't even bother to look at the article. For every article claiming a statistic there is another with the opposite. That being said I know I personally won't get it unless forced. Fools have been working on a flu vaccine for how many years? And it's only 40-50% effective and nothing more than an educated guess every year. They think they are gonna hit this thing and knock it out in a year or less? I'll take my chances with Covid before I let them pump that crap into me.