Coronavirus - potential Black Swan?

[Ah-so]

10 hours ago, Arpeggio said:

This might have something to do with how they now have to prove in court why they are opening some venues and not others. If they lose the case it might weaken the argument to have vaccine passports later down the line, so are pushing domestic passports now.

Also...

Scientists Find Evidence Of Toxic Chemicals In Your Face Masks

I thought you didn't trust scientists. Make up your mind.

[anonguest]

Just now, Ah-so said:

Despite apparently being a London-based consultant, with a reasonably unusual name in this country, the internet only throws up a couple of findings in relation to 'K Polykova':

1) The BMJ comments section referred to above

2) An article on 'Conservative Woman', which is an anti-vaxx article, referring to the BMJ comment

3) A Twitter article that refers to the BMJ comment

So "K Polyakova", after a career that has led  her reach the esteemed level of consultant has managed to avoid any presence on the internet until April 2021 (I wonder how she manages to run her private business) and then only in the comments section of an article, and in which the she makes relatively outrageous claims about whole teams being struck down by the virus (with no evidence) and then uses comparisons to the Nazis. 

I need a bit more evidence that Polyakova isn't a troll.

 

Would reflect badly on the BMJ if it turned out to be that, for so easily allowing said comments/report to be published without some basic verification of claimed credentials.

Did you check the medical register for a listing?

[scottbeard]

12 hours ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

So quite literally I do think the vaccines are quite literally useless for healthy people. I didn't have any symptoms and my 5K sprint score was not impacted, probably like the time I contracted C19 and didn't notice.

Lucky you.  I have a friend who's 30, keen runner, very healthy.  She got COVID and then had breathing issues for months.  COVID does impact some healthy people, making vaccines not useless.

14 hours ago, moonriver said:

I cannot understand why any young person would feel the need to seek a covid vaccine though bearing in mind how they have been constantly told covid is not a problem for younger people.

Whilst unlikely to die from COVID, young people can still get long-lasting unpleasant effects eg my runner friend above.  If a young person on balance doesn't want a vaccine then so be it, but to say COVID is "not a problem for younger people" is not true, and not even what people are being told.

[skinnylattej]

11 hours ago, Arpeggio said:

This might have something to do with how they now have to prove in court why they are opening some venues and not others. If they lose the case it might weaken the argument to have vaccine passports later down the line, so are pushing domestic passports now.

Also...

Scientists Find Evidence Of Toxic Chemicals In Your Face Masks

The evidence in the article is not sufficient to support the claim.

Image of 1 GCMS trace alone is meaningless without a lots more information such as sampling, sample preparation, running conditions of the equipment, detector configuration, carrier gas characteristics etc.

The article is noteworthy for the absence of numbers, stating 'trace'.  Using state-of-the-art equipment detection at parts per billion is achievable, although not easy.  If the concentrations of the chemicals mentioned are below the limit of detection, then in my view they present no hazard.

[Ah-so]

1 hour ago, anonguest said:

Would reflect badly on the BMJ if it turned out to be that, for so easily allowing said comments/report to be published without some basic verification of claimed credentials.

Did you check the medical register for a listing?

Yes, I checked the GMC database - no one of that name. Remember, it is nothing more than the comments section below the article, although it would reflect badly on the BMJ if they allowed subscribers to misrepresent themselves as consultants, as appears to be the case here.

But then again, I guess this is the equivalent of a subscriber to the Economist writing a comment under an article and signing it "Professor of Economics" - I wouldn't necessarily blame the Economist for not rigorously checking the signature of every BTL commenter.

Edited April 8, 2021 by Ah-so

[Ah-so]

13 hours ago, Arpeggio said:

Interestingly one of these news reports is the J&J vaccine (1:02)....

Dozens of Schools Close As Teachers Get Sick from the Vaccine

 

Gosh - I thought that this might be interesting, then hovering over the link I see it is just a Bitchute video.

Your sources do not have any credibility.

Edited April 8, 2021 by Ah-so

[Riedquat]

7 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

Gosh - I thought that this might be interesting, then hovering over the link I see it is just a Bitchute video.

You have no credibility and nor do any of your sources. 

Hey, my arm still feels very, very slightly sore when I touch it.

Knew I should've drunk a load of beer that night in order to make sure I felt bad the next day.

[Bruce Banner]

12 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Hey, my arm still feels very, very slightly sore when I touch it.

Knew I should've drunk a load of beer that night in order to make sure I felt bad the next day.

Long may it continue.

My wife had the AZ a month or so back and is fine, so far, although she now wishes she'd held out for Pfizer.

[Ah-so]

18 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Hey, my arm still feels very, very slightly sore when I touch it.

Knew I should've drunk a load of beer that night in order to make sure I felt bad the next day.

Beer is probably the best cure for your ongoing adverse side effects.

[Riedquat]

2 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

Beer is probably the best cure for your ongoing adverse side effects.

It would at least fit in with an Arpeggio-level standard of "must be due to the vaccine" side effects.

[Flopsy]

2 hours ago, Ah-so said:

Despite apparently being a London-based consultant, with a reasonably unusual name in this country, the internet only throws up a couple of findings in relation to 'K Polykova':

1) The BMJ comments section referred to above

2) An article on 'Conservative Woman', which is an anti-vaxx article, referring to the BMJ comment

3) A Twitter article that refers to the BMJ comment

So "K Polyakova", after a career that has led  her reach the esteemed level of consultant has managed to avoid any presence on the internet until April 2021 (I wonder how she manages to run her private business) and then only in the comments section of an article, and in which the she makes relatively outrageous claims about whole teams being struck down by the virus (with no evidence) and then uses comparisons to the Nazis. 

I need a bit more evidence that Polyakova isn't a troll.

Edit: I just checked the GMC database of all registered doctors in the UK - no doctor with that surname in the UK. Likely conclusion is that Polyakova is not real, but given that you need to pay to join the BMJ, probably from a Russian troll farm.

I have had rapid responses published on the online BMJ previously (as a patient) with no need to pay to join or buy a subscription. Not sure how much checking they do.

There is a Neurologist (now in private practise) I know of making all sorts if claims online previously but has gone quiet.  Not the same name. This has more if the sound and feel of a USA/Canada anti-vaccine anti lock down group.

As some of you may know (from another thread)  I had a severe reaction to the Astra Zeneca vaccine.

I have other health issues and patients in the different groups I belong to have been setting up polls online to judge side effects and severity and compare vaccines.

 We aren't seeing a huge percentage of longer term (I.e. over 30 days) and severe (I.e. had to see Dr urgently). They do exist and it gets bigger everyday (the %) as more people are done. Some of us were just really unlucky it seems.

[Ah-so]

2 minutes ago, Flopsy said:

I have had rapid responses published on the online BMJ previously (as a patient) with no need to pay to join or buy a subscription. Not sure how much checking they do.

There is a Neurologist (now in private practise) I know of making all sorts if claims online previously but has gone quiet.  Not the same name. This has more if the sound and feel of a USA/Canada anti-vaccine anti lock down group.

As some of you may know (from another thread)  I had a severe reaction to the Astra Zeneca vaccine.

I have other health issues and patients in the different groups I belong to have been setting up polls online to judge side effects and severity and compare vaccines.

 We aren't seeing a huge percentage of longer term (I.e. over 30 days) and severe (I.e. had to see Dr urgently). They do exist and it gets bigger everyday (the %) as more people are done. Some of us were just really unlucky it seems.

I wasn't aware of your severe reaction - very sorry to hear that. Anaphylactic shock, for example, is a side effect of vaccines and there is no doubt that vaccination is not entirely risk free.

However, the claims in the post do seem to be exaggerated. Apparently whole teams of medics are knocked out, yet I know quite a lot of people who have had vaccines and have only come across one who was unable to work for a couple days after the vaccination (damn immune system doing its job).

The style of writing, the fact that it is this individuals first and only comment on the BMJ site, and the exaggerated claims leads me to comfortably conclude that this is not a consultant, even before I check the GMC database.

However, I have now re-searched on the name and this time a Linkedin profile has popped up to a consultant child psychiatrist, which didn't before.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/katya-polyakova-b27b97a4/?originalSubdomain=uk

So I will take back what I say about her not existing. But she also claims to be the medical director of a hospital and yet is writing anti-vaxx posts on the BMJ site, which seems very peculiar.

 

[Sour Mash]

4 hours ago, Ah-so said:

Gosh - I thought that this might be interesting, then hovering over the link I see it is just a Bitchute video.

Your sources do not have any credibility.

LOL.  Not from an approved and controlled media outlet so not going to listen to any evidence.... Not much of a comeback but that's to be expected from you.

 

[Sour Mash]

4 hours ago, Riedquat said:

It would at least fit in with an Arpeggio-level standard of "must be due to the vaccine" side effects.

COVID standard seems to be to blame it for any deaths where the person had a positive PCR test in the previous 28 days so not really setting the bar high.  Strange how such lax requirements only work one way, though.

[The Spaniard]

Why has the BBC removed all archived episodes of BBC Breakfast from iPlayer? 🤔

Could they be embarrassed by their relentless promotion of COVID vaccination over the past few months? 😲

[Ah-so]

17 minutes ago, Sour Mash said:

LOL.  Not from an approved and controlled media outlet so not going to listen to any evidence.... Not much of a comeback but that's to be expected from you.

 

If people have credible evidence, it can be published and peer reviewed. If it is just a random collection of conspiracy twaddle, it can go on a site that mainly distributes far right videos and conspiracy nonsense.

In the days before the internet, I don't remember worthwhile medical research being published in Combat 18 or in the Aetherus Soceity newsletter, and I don't suppose things have changed much since.

[Ah-so]

6 minutes ago, The Spaniard said:

Why has the BBC removed all archived episodes of BBC Breakfast from iPlayer? 🤔

Could they be embarrassed by their relentless promotion of COVID vaccination over the past few months? 😲

If they repeated the medical advice that was sound at the time based on the available evidence they were in the right. If the medical advice has changed on the available evidence, it seems sound to either remove that section, or caveat that it is no longer sound.

[moonriver]

2 good news articles.

Herd immunity to be reached by Monday according to UCL model..

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/07/exclusive-britain-will-pass-covid-herd-immunity-threshold-monday/?WT.mc_id=tmgliveapp_iosshare_Aw7LNsyd1Jh0

Quote

Exclusive: Britain will achieve herd immunity on Monday

UCL modelling says number of people with protection either through vaccination or previous infection will hit 73.4 per cent on April 12

And...Covid cases back to July levels..

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9448733/Covid-19-UK-Number-Britons-getting-tell-tale-coronavirus-symptoms-HALVED-week.html#reader-comments

Quote

Why ARE we still in lockdown? UK's Covid outbreak is now in a similar position as it was in JULY as figures show cases are falling in every age group, only ONE area saw a tiny rise and 94% of over-70s now have antibodies following vaccination drive

 

[Will!]

1 hour ago, Ah-so said:

If people have credible evidence, it can be published and peer reviewed. If it is just a random collection of conspiracy twaddle, it can go on a site that mainly distributes far right videos and conspiracy nonsense.

I encounter quite a few anti-vaxxers in real life.  One of their favoured 'debating' tactics is to make outrageous claims and then try to move the burden of proof onto the medical profession to debunk it.

For example:

Me: Here's why vaccines are safer than the diseases they prevent.  https://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/

AVer: But what about what happened in Peru?  (Or it may be Uzbekistan or somewhere else that doesn't have easy to access medical safety information).

Me: What happened in Peru?

AVer: You don't know what happened in Peru?  How can you be credible on vaccine safety when you don't know what happened in Peru?

Nothing happened in Peru of course, but it's philosophically difficult to prove a negative and the human imagination has no limits, so even if I did research what happened in Peru and find nothing the AVer would move onto another outrageous claim and the cycle repeats.

 

[Ah-so]

1 minute ago, Will! said:

I encounter quite a few anti-vaxxers in real life.  One of their favoured 'debating' tactics is to make outrageous claims and then try to move the burden of proof onto the medical profession to debunk it.

For example:

Me: Here's why vaccines are safer than the diseases they prevent.  https://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/

Them: Why would I trust an Oxford University site that is funded by governments and corporations when you can't even be bothered to watch a Bitchute video? You dismiss out evidence out of hand and we do the same with yours.

[Dr Doom]

1 minute ago, Ah-so said:

Them: Why would I trust an Oxford University site that is funded by governments and corporations when you can't even be bothered to watch a Bitchute video? You dismiss out evidence out of hand and we do the same with yours.

Oxford University is funded by Bill Gates. 

 

[Will!]

2 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

Them: Why would I trust an Oxford University site that is funded by governments and corporations when you can't even be bothered to watch a Bitchute video? You dismiss out evidence out of hand and we do the same with yours.

True.  To the AVer every source they disagree with is tainted.  That's how they can trust a Bitchute video; it's all unsubstantiated so it cannot be tainted!

Edited April 8, 2021 by Will!

[Ah-so]

49 minutes ago, moonriver said:

2 good news articles.

Herd immunity to be reached by Monday according to UCL model..

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/07/exclusive-britain-will-pass-covid-herd-immunity-threshold-monday/?WT.mc_id=tmgliveapp_iosshare_Aw7LNsyd1Jh0

And...Covid cases back to July levels..

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9448733/Covid-19-UK-Number-Britons-getting-tell-tale-coronavirus-symptoms-HALVED-week.html#reader-comments

 

Excellent news, down to the success of lockdown and vaccination. But I tend to agree that waiting around until 21 June for some things to re-open is probably a bit too late given that pretty much everyone will have had at least one jab by then.

[Ah-so]

1 minute ago, Will! said:

True.  To the AVer every source they disagree with is tainted.

Unless that source then says something that fits their narrative.

[Confusion of VIs]

7 hours ago, skinnylattej said:

The evidence in the article is not sufficient to support the claim.

Image of 1 GCMS trace alone is meaningless without a lots more information such as sampling, sample preparation, running conditions of the equipment, detector configuration, carrier gas characteristics etc.

The article is noteworthy for the absence of numbers, stating 'trace'.  Using state-of-the-art equipment detection at parts per billion is achievable, although not easy.  If the concentrations of the chemicals mentioned are below the limit of detection, then in my view they present no hazard.

+20 years ago I was working on software for scene of crime forensic system and was shown round the lab it would be used in. One of the scientists when asked how sensitive a gas chromatograph was, "if you went into the middle of an aircraft hanger and farted this beauty could find sh1t on the walls". 

Since then the tech has moved on to a stage where it is possible to find traces of just about anything anywhere.