The HK study similarly shows it doesn't do much... It has both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients in the Paxlovid cohort. Molnupiravir may make things worse, though it lacks statistical significance.
Whenever I see "Mulnupiravir", my mind wants to say "no peer review"....not sure if there is substance to that, but it is reflexive ..kind of a hypnotic shift....hmmmmm
Excluding the vaccinated from the trials would have been acceptable had Pfizer only marketed Paxlovid to the unvaxxed. However, that would have eliminated 70-80% of the potential market depending on whose numbers you believe. Plus the unvaxxed are probably far less likely to want this stuff in the first place.
Seems pretty clear Paxlovid doesn't work in the vaxxed, Pfizer learned that early and gamed the trials accordingly, then they hid that fact to increase sales. Is anyone surprised at this point? I'm certainly not. And this is not new but has been going on for at least forty years.
This is what happens when you have corporations run by sociopaths that have lost all connection to their community. Drugs that kill us, processed foods that poison us, and electronics that spy on us. It's going to get worse unfortunately.
"A mutation means a permanent change in the amount or structure of the genetic material in a cell. Mutagen is used for agents increasing the occurrence of mutations. Many mutagenic substances are also carcinogenic, but not all."
Now that name is making me think of Paul Revere....knda sounds like his name and is sending us a warning of sorts...."Mutations are coming, mutations are coming,...."
Yes? was that you? Recently, I stole/plagiarized your "Big Harma". Killer. Love it.
I'll pay you what you demanded of me in a week. 1/2 of my 4th yacht? Correct? On it's way as I type.
Who do I pay off for the term: fuxxine? Well, on close inspection it looks like I'll be paying off myself.....yet again. Soooo, I'm taking back the 1/2 of my 4th yacht from you and giving it to myself. Again.
Forgive me as I have not been following these new antiviral therapies as close as some other fields like the mRNA tech. But it seems like all the safety protocols have gone regardless of what substance or medicine you are getting now. The newer the drug is. The more likely to actually be hazardous. Scary times.
Dr Sidney Wolfe, the co-founder and director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group, says you should never take a new drug until it's been on the market for 7 years unless your life depends on it! in that time, he feels, a drug will either have a well established safety profile or the body count will be too high to ignore. my personal mission is to stay out of the pile of bodies
The thought exercise is really just to get thinking about the following.
If you could only choose 10 drugs. You would probably be able to do a lot with just those 10 assuming a good level of thought went into which 10 you chose. But there would always be an 11th you don't have that would be useful in a few situations.
But if we had to only have 10. Those ten would probably cover 95% of most peoples needs and situations that arise. Which is far better than having none at all.
And with those 10 drugs. These are probably all tried and trusted medicines not new novel ones.
As you say we are now at a point where the last 5% is getting split into thousands of competing new drugs from the production, manufacturing and sale perspective of big pharma. This isn't good if you work in big pharma because the market is so saturated and the customer base is so tiny. But research and development is so expensive.
The second part to the thought exercise is one of possible necessity. If society collapses. Distribution collapses. Scarcity of medicines will folllw. I'm a pretty good herbalist. But I cannot manufacture my own antibiotics for example. I could make aspirin or willow bark tea which is similiar. I could make curcumin based anti inflammatories. But I cannot make homemade antibiotics. Or adrenaline. Or any corticosteroids.
So some drugs may need to be stock piled and saved.
But which ones?
I know you aren't a medic. But I was a combat medic and this type of thinking had to occur in my mind before or during planning of every activity. What do I take when I cannot carry much? It has to fit in a backpack. I can't take everything. So careful selection was necessary.
However. Being an army medic is very different again than trying to consider this same topic for a much broader and larger population base. There are kids. And old people in real life. Soldiers are all 18-50 and usually do not have preexisting conditions. All medicine in the army is acute medicine.
Yeah. Good point. But who knows, better to try and fail than never try and never succeed is my thinking. We may have years left yet or perhaps only months. Who can say with certainty.
And yes. Security. That would put a big target on your back for sure. People are animals at the end of the day. They won't just lay down to die because rules say so. If their loved one is dying or ill then the end justify the means always. Robbery, cheating and all the worst characteristics of humanity will bare teeth.
But still. I think better to try and fail than never try.
I've posted about this before. I know someone who managed some of the c0vid trials for Pfizer, and kind of talked to her about the vaxx. It is not typically a good conversation, and she gets... well, let's just say unpleasantly wound up.
As a person in Big Harma, this is her take on all of it: if you get c0vid and are not vaxxed, you will die. End of story. There are no other treatments outside of those offered in Big Harma. If you say anything about the vaxx (and I'm guessing the pills) she gets really, really hostile and accuses you of being NOT HELPFUL and wanting people to die. In her mind it has been proven that NOTHING else works but Big Harma solutions. We must give people these untested solutions, or they will die of c0vid. End of story.
Yes, I know. This is someone I've known since I've been a teen. As this goes on, I don't know how long I will be able to keep her as a friend. Thankfully, she lives on the other side of the country, and we rarely see each other. Also... just so everyone knows, she is now managing trials for mRNA flu, pneumonia and shingles vaxxes.
this is so amazing! has she not come across any people who had covid BEFORE the vaccines were even developed who lived and were just fine? who later said "it was just like a regular flu, no big deal"?
i listened to a podcast This Week in Virology throughout the pandemic. at the end of every episode, they read and answer e-mail questions from listeners. this woman wrote in asking how she could convince her grandmother in Ireland to take the vaccine.
Rich Condit, an emeritus professor from the university of florida, said (and this is a verbatim quote) "Tell your grandmother she either takes the vaccine or she gets covid and dies!"
i found that answer very NOT HELPFUL at all. i knew at that point several people who had had covid and got over it just fine, other people who had a very hard time but recovered, people who had completely asymptomatic cases and wouldn't have ever known they had it if they hadn't been tested. i also knew people who died from it.
so when Rich Condit presented this dire either/or choice, i thought "these people are nuts."
months later as the vaccines proved to be not so great, Dr Condit changed his tune some and, in answering another email from a listener, conceded that eventually everyone would either get vaccinated OR have natural immunity from a recovered infection. i suspect he's wrong even about that. i'm sure there are some people out there with such robust immune systems that they can walk into a room of covid and never get it at all but i'm not a PhD virologist so what could i possibly know?
BTW, i also happen to know the one person in the USA (NJ) who's doctor got a compassionate use waiver from the FDA to try a placental stem cell preparation from Israel on him when he'd been 40 days on a ventilator and had little hope of recovering. his distraught wife signed the consent forms and he received 15 injections into his abdomen of the stuff. a few days later, they wheeled him out of the hospital to thunderous applause and took him to rehab where he did so well, he was sent home in 2 weeks. at the time, there were local newspaper and television stories about him, interviews with his doctor, etc and then suddenly- poof- it seemed to vanish. i have been dying to know why.
in fact when another friend's brother- a NASA documentary film producer- was in Johns Hopkins on a vent with covid and very near the end, my friend asked his brother's doctor about the stem cell treatment. the doctor was shocked and said "you know that guy?" he had heard of this patient- the ONLY one in the entire country- and what were the odds that his current patient's brother knew him? but the possibility of using it was never seriously discussed and my friend's brother died. i would love to see this investigated. i had read a small study on it from Israel on maybe 7 or 8 really ill covid patients and i believe all but one recovered fully. i guess the push to make vaccination the one and only viable option killed this promising treatment and by extension, all the patients who didn't get it
Oh, she knows people who recovered from C0VID without vaxxination. She did. She knows I did. My husband got it from me, we ran out of quercetin/zinc, and he ended up in the hospital with pneumonia. And was home in two days after treatment with antibody plasma/ steroids. BTW... this was all before the vaxx rollout.
That is why I tend to say "the mass formation psychosis is strong." Also... when you make your living hammering, everything is a nail.
In the 90’s& early 2000’s, I tried many new antidepressants and Chantix. They were monitoring side effects heavily . Eventually I stuck with older medicine only, after a mold reaction with Enbrel for psoriasis, the doctor avoided me, putting off the appointment months on end. I was too ill to sue him for the carelessness .
I had suicidal thoughts on Chantix, when it was brand new. Was on the market for years before pulled for a cancer causing agent
After dr offered an addictive medicine to replace neurontin ( I’m an alcoholic who got sober) I weaned off 8 Rx , slowly & eventually found an integrative medicine doctor
Pfizer head Albert Bourla should be named Albert Ghoula. How does this guy sleep at night? Very psychopathic (sociopathic?) behavior. And he says vax deniers are criminals. Takes one to know one!
Or maybe a quick or dyslexic reader would see it as "poxlivid"...ponder and think....pox is livid! Angry pox! It's gonna cause monkey pox! Maybe it's in it! I know, it's a stretch. Couldn't resist. Who knows! Wouldn't put it past them. Oh, just stay away from all of their products. They've proven they're not to be trusted.
A personal thank you to Igor. My mother recently tested positive for covid about 7 weeks after her second booster. She had a very rough week last week.
After she was already on the mend, the doctors recommended paxlovid. Armed with your posts, we know that the risk wasn't worth the reward.
Hey Igor, one of things missing from many of our analyses of these data are the explanations of such terms as 'Hazard Ratio' and 'Risk Reduction', etc... most people (I dare say including the idiots who pen these studies) have no idea how to calculate these. Maybe include an explanation in layman's terms of what the headers mean. For example, if Table 3 shows that you are 1.18 times more likely end up in hospital of you are 40-64 with prior exposure/clearance if you take this crap, how was this number reached, bla bla... Anyway, good article. https://jessicar.substack.com/p/what-is-paxlovid?s=w
...and keep calculating absolute risk versus relative risk (spam, used to influence the numerically challenged.) We occasionally see NNT (number needed to treat) used to define clinical usefulness. NNH (number needed to harm) is usually concealed as is evident with the ClotShots.
the FDA approves everything these days. if you really wanted to reassure people, you would get rid of the liability waiver!
when my BF had covid last week, his doctor could/would only offer up paxlovid. he stayed home with his IVM and hourly nebulizing sessions of a 1% hydrogen peroxide saline solution. worked like a charm and cost pennies
If an exact same study was done using the same methodology Pfizer used but with Ivermectin...would the study be considered valid? If the results were at least as good would Ivermectin be authorized for FDA EUA or approval? I think we all know the answer.
Modeling for all other drug cartels saying "No no no, step aside, let me show you how it's done.". ( On a grand scale). While revealing their true insanity to the observant.
I have been mulling that thought over as well. Yes it works using drug A; no drug B. Drug A makes more money on all fronts, drug B is a generic. No money there
I would never give Paxlovid to my children or any single member of my family. Ever. We trust science, not $cienceTM and especially not Pfizer flavoured $cienceTM.
No , I would NOT give a child that drug , nor any Covid vaccines as is it not still in ‘ trial stages ‘ ? We are the trial and that is disgraceful , immoral medicine at its most corrupt , doctors silenced ! When will the madness end . Mandates ? Are they that stupid to think mandatory a vaccine not protecting is something bright people will not debate . Thank you for the news !
The HK study similarly shows it doesn't do much... It has both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients in the Paxlovid cohort. Molnupiravir may make things worse, though it lacks statistical significance.
https://jestre.substack.com/p/new-study-obliterates-paxlovid-and?s=w
Funny they gave both drugs to the vaccinated despite no trials in the vaccinated. Pretty unethical imo
I am going to pin your comment on top, it is perfectly on target and I hope people check your article out
Thanks, read and subscribed. Apparently it takes a “village” to uncover the truth.
Whenever I see "Mulnupiravir", my mind wants to say "no peer review"....not sure if there is substance to that, but it is reflexive ..kind of a hypnotic shift....hmmmmm
Excluding the vaccinated from the trials would have been acceptable had Pfizer only marketed Paxlovid to the unvaxxed. However, that would have eliminated 70-80% of the potential market depending on whose numbers you believe. Plus the unvaxxed are probably far less likely to want this stuff in the first place.
Seems pretty clear Paxlovid doesn't work in the vaxxed, Pfizer learned that early and gamed the trials accordingly, then they hid that fact to increase sales. Is anyone surprised at this point? I'm certainly not. And this is not new but has been going on for at least forty years.
This is what happens when you have corporations run by sociopaths that have lost all connection to their community. Drugs that kill us, processed foods that poison us, and electronics that spy on us. It's going to get worse unfortunately.
The further crime is that Paxlovid was marketed to the vaccinated and ALL unvaccinated. Despite the EPIC-SR trial...
Mulnupiravir is mutagenic.
"A mutation means a permanent change in the amount or structure of the genetic material in a cell. Mutagen is used for agents increasing the occurrence of mutations. Many mutagenic substances are also carcinogenic, but not all."
https://oshwiki.eu/wiki/Carcinogenic,_mutagenic,_reprotoxic_(CMR)_substances#What_are_carcinogenic.2C_mutagenic_and_reprotoxic_substances.3F
Now that name is making me think of Paul Revere....knda sounds like his name and is sending us a warning of sorts...."Mutations are coming, mutations are coming,...."
Setting the stage for one of the next fixes to come along, CRISPR.
Ethics never enter into discussions with these people. We've learned that by now, I think.
FDA and CDC are captured agencies and do not work for the public.
It's up to the "deplorables" to avoid their harmaceuticals.
Love the term "harmaceuticals"! Mind it if I use it occasionally?
Please do.
There are NO trademarks for my posts. I expect everything that I post to be re-posted by anybody anywhere free speech is TOLERATED!!!
I think it is one of mine and sure of course and please no need to give me credit for
Big Harmaceuticals
Big Harma
Hacksxxxxxine
Viruganda
IsoLa
Vaxxxport
They are all yours for the taking
Steal my grasshopperisms, please!
Harmacine, harmacide.
And stay away from the harmacy....
Yes? was that you? Recently, I stole/plagiarized your "Big Harma". Killer. Love it.
I'll pay you what you demanded of me in a week. 1/2 of my 4th yacht? Correct? On it's way as I type.
Who do I pay off for the term: fuxxine? Well, on close inspection it looks like I'll be paying off myself.....yet again. Soooo, I'm taking back the 1/2 of my 4th yacht from you and giving it to myself. Again.
It's an oldie but goodie.
I've been using the spelling vaxxine, but I think I like vaXXXine better.
I find “vaccidents” to be an accurate descriptor way too frequently.
I always write pHarma or pHarmaceutical
I call the creep in charge Fauxchi
I call him Fraudci. I like your name for him too!
Thanks & back at ya
I call him Fausti, younger brother of Faust.
Excellent
Harmaceuticals 😂😂😂
Forgive me as I have not been following these new antiviral therapies as close as some other fields like the mRNA tech. But it seems like all the safety protocols have gone regardless of what substance or medicine you are getting now. The newer the drug is. The more likely to actually be hazardous. Scary times.
Dr Sidney Wolfe, the co-founder and director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group, says you should never take a new drug until it's been on the market for 7 years unless your life depends on it! in that time, he feels, a drug will either have a well established safety profile or the body count will be too high to ignore. my personal mission is to stay out of the pile of bodies
99.74. 99.8 is misinformation.
Absolutely, bad math as well. 4 significant figures compared to 3 significant figures? I wonder how they rounded. I can hear my thesis advisor now.
I genuinely believe that.
We’ve all but run out of good, druggable targets.
Older meds against commonplace conditions, mostly fine.
New & highly unusual treatment types & for many rare conditions, I’m inclined to accept my fate drug free. It’s my life & my death.
I sort of wondered that. If we might just oneday run out of drugs to make where an older drug already exists to suits the same purpose as newer ones.
If society was to collapse and you had to choose some medicines to keep or stash away. Which types of drugs would be most worthwhile or essential?
If say you only could save ten drugs, which ten?
And could you rate those ten into which would be the most essential to the least? Are some more likely to be needed than another?
Antibiotics
Painkillers
Steroids
Emergency drugs
Anti histamines etc
In my case, Oral opiates.
Either injected opiates or a pistol.
Topical anesthetics & sutures for cuts & moderate injuries.
Dental extraction kit. Can’t save teeth but can get people out of pain.
I’d leave NSAIDS out.
A few antibiotics.
Possibly benzodiazepines. Low dose. People might have panic attacks & be rescued.
Steroids (glucocorticoids) though what for in practise?
I’m thinking “field & first aid medicine”.
I’m not a medic!
The thought exercise is really just to get thinking about the following.
If you could only choose 10 drugs. You would probably be able to do a lot with just those 10 assuming a good level of thought went into which 10 you chose. But there would always be an 11th you don't have that would be useful in a few situations.
But if we had to only have 10. Those ten would probably cover 95% of most peoples needs and situations that arise. Which is far better than having none at all.
And with those 10 drugs. These are probably all tried and trusted medicines not new novel ones.
As you say we are now at a point where the last 5% is getting split into thousands of competing new drugs from the production, manufacturing and sale perspective of big pharma. This isn't good if you work in big pharma because the market is so saturated and the customer base is so tiny. But research and development is so expensive.
The second part to the thought exercise is one of possible necessity. If society collapses. Distribution collapses. Scarcity of medicines will folllw. I'm a pretty good herbalist. But I cannot manufacture my own antibiotics for example. I could make aspirin or willow bark tea which is similiar. I could make curcumin based anti inflammatories. But I cannot make homemade antibiotics. Or adrenaline. Or any corticosteroids.
So some drugs may need to be stock piled and saved.
But which ones?
I know you aren't a medic. But I was a combat medic and this type of thinking had to occur in my mind before or during planning of every activity. What do I take when I cannot carry much? It has to fit in a backpack. I can't take everything. So careful selection was necessary.
However. Being an army medic is very different again than trying to consider this same topic for a much broader and larger population base. There are kids. And old people in real life. Soldiers are all 18-50 and usually do not have preexisting conditions. All medicine in the army is acute medicine.
I’d be picking the old drugs where long term stability was known & reliable. We wouldn’t have a fridge.
You’re right, we’ll run out of absolutely everything within weeks & supplies may never resume from old suppliers.
Manufacturing wouldn’t restart potentially for years.
So very large supplies of a small number of basics.
Probably already too late to stock up.
You’d be bulk buying in hope that there’d be barter opportunities & that someone with a gun didn’t steal it all (quite possible).
Yeah. Good point. But who knows, better to try and fail than never try and never succeed is my thinking. We may have years left yet or perhaps only months. Who can say with certainty.
And yes. Security. That would put a big target on your back for sure. People are animals at the end of the day. They won't just lay down to die because rules say so. If their loved one is dying or ill then the end justify the means always. Robbery, cheating and all the worst characteristics of humanity will bare teeth.
But still. I think better to try and fail than never try.
I am just not sure how I am going to do this yet.
I've posted about this before. I know someone who managed some of the c0vid trials for Pfizer, and kind of talked to her about the vaxx. It is not typically a good conversation, and she gets... well, let's just say unpleasantly wound up.
As a person in Big Harma, this is her take on all of it: if you get c0vid and are not vaxxed, you will die. End of story. There are no other treatments outside of those offered in Big Harma. If you say anything about the vaxx (and I'm guessing the pills) she gets really, really hostile and accuses you of being NOT HELPFUL and wanting people to die. In her mind it has been proven that NOTHING else works but Big Harma solutions. We must give people these untested solutions, or they will die of c0vid. End of story.
Yes, I know. This is someone I've known since I've been a teen. As this goes on, I don't know how long I will be able to keep her as a friend. Thankfully, she lives on the other side of the country, and we rarely see each other. Also... just so everyone knows, she is now managing trials for mRNA flu, pneumonia and shingles vaxxes.
this is so amazing! has she not come across any people who had covid BEFORE the vaccines were even developed who lived and were just fine? who later said "it was just like a regular flu, no big deal"?
i listened to a podcast This Week in Virology throughout the pandemic. at the end of every episode, they read and answer e-mail questions from listeners. this woman wrote in asking how she could convince her grandmother in Ireland to take the vaccine.
Rich Condit, an emeritus professor from the university of florida, said (and this is a verbatim quote) "Tell your grandmother she either takes the vaccine or she gets covid and dies!"
i found that answer very NOT HELPFUL at all. i knew at that point several people who had had covid and got over it just fine, other people who had a very hard time but recovered, people who had completely asymptomatic cases and wouldn't have ever known they had it if they hadn't been tested. i also knew people who died from it.
so when Rich Condit presented this dire either/or choice, i thought "these people are nuts."
months later as the vaccines proved to be not so great, Dr Condit changed his tune some and, in answering another email from a listener, conceded that eventually everyone would either get vaccinated OR have natural immunity from a recovered infection. i suspect he's wrong even about that. i'm sure there are some people out there with such robust immune systems that they can walk into a room of covid and never get it at all but i'm not a PhD virologist so what could i possibly know?
BTW, i also happen to know the one person in the USA (NJ) who's doctor got a compassionate use waiver from the FDA to try a placental stem cell preparation from Israel on him when he'd been 40 days on a ventilator and had little hope of recovering. his distraught wife signed the consent forms and he received 15 injections into his abdomen of the stuff. a few days later, they wheeled him out of the hospital to thunderous applause and took him to rehab where he did so well, he was sent home in 2 weeks. at the time, there were local newspaper and television stories about him, interviews with his doctor, etc and then suddenly- poof- it seemed to vanish. i have been dying to know why.
in fact when another friend's brother- a NASA documentary film producer- was in Johns Hopkins on a vent with covid and very near the end, my friend asked his brother's doctor about the stem cell treatment. the doctor was shocked and said "you know that guy?" he had heard of this patient- the ONLY one in the entire country- and what were the odds that his current patient's brother knew him? but the possibility of using it was never seriously discussed and my friend's brother died. i would love to see this investigated. i had read a small study on it from Israel on maybe 7 or 8 really ill covid patients and i believe all but one recovered fully. i guess the push to make vaccination the one and only viable option killed this promising treatment and by extension, all the patients who didn't get it
Oh, she knows people who recovered from C0VID without vaxxination. She did. She knows I did. My husband got it from me, we ran out of quercetin/zinc, and he ended up in the hospital with pneumonia. And was home in two days after treatment with antibody plasma/ steroids. BTW... this was all before the vaxx rollout.
That is why I tend to say "the mass formation psychosis is strong." Also... when you make your living hammering, everything is a nail.
sadly (or happily), we are all going to have different, better friends by the time this is over
Can you push her off a bridge?
In the 90’s& early 2000’s, I tried many new antidepressants and Chantix. They were monitoring side effects heavily . Eventually I stuck with older medicine only, after a mold reaction with Enbrel for psoriasis, the doctor avoided me, putting off the appointment months on end. I was too ill to sue him for the carelessness .
I had suicidal thoughts on Chantix, when it was brand new. Was on the market for years before pulled for a cancer causing agent
After dr offered an addictive medicine to replace neurontin ( I’m an alcoholic who got sober) I weaned off 8 Rx , slowly & eventually found an integrative medicine doctor
Sadly true
I wouldn't even name a dog after this medication
I would name a cockroach though
Or a leach.
Or a rock band
Cockroaches are the ultimate survivors !!
They are!
They were going to name it Pavlovid, but...uh, there's a joke there somewhere.
I call it poxlovid.
Haha! Brilliantly funny
Crazy amusing thought.
I certainly wouldn't drool for it every time I heard its name...more like shriek and run!
So funny
Pfizer head Albert Bourla should be named Albert Ghoula. How does this guy sleep at night? Very psychopathic (sociopathic?) behavior. And he says vax deniers are criminals. Takes one to know one!
He is a criminal for sure.
Narcissists sleep very well unless they are trying to figure out how to fix the rest of us.
Paxlovoid means, literally, the absence of peace. Peace void. Wonder where they got the idea for the scary name?¿
Or maybe a quick or dyslexic reader would see it as "poxlivid"...ponder and think....pox is livid! Angry pox! It's gonna cause monkey pox! Maybe it's in it! I know, it's a stretch. Couldn't resist. Who knows! Wouldn't put it past them. Oh, just stay away from all of their products. They've proven they're not to be trusted.
I just got an image from Jumanji with all the crazed monkeys running through town ...
A personal thank you to Igor. My mother recently tested positive for covid about 7 weeks after her second booster. She had a very rough week last week.
After she was already on the mend, the doctors recommended paxlovid. Armed with your posts, we know that the risk wasn't worth the reward.
She expects to finally test negative tomorrow.
Wishing the best to your mother! Speedy recovery!
After a week, paxlovid is definitely useless
Thank you. It was not fun for her.
I wish she could get off the booster train and wont be hit by more variants, but unfortunately I am not so optimistic.
I am not even allowed to set foot in the building she is living in.
Hopefully that changes.
Antibody Dependent Enhancement is real Martin I. I wish your mom well .
Same here
Hey Igor, one of things missing from many of our analyses of these data are the explanations of such terms as 'Hazard Ratio' and 'Risk Reduction', etc... most people (I dare say including the idiots who pen these studies) have no idea how to calculate these. Maybe include an explanation in layman's terms of what the headers mean. For example, if Table 3 shows that you are 1.18 times more likely end up in hospital of you are 40-64 with prior exposure/clearance if you take this crap, how was this number reached, bla bla... Anyway, good article. https://jessicar.substack.com/p/what-is-paxlovid?s=w
Jessica, I agree and I will add some explanations. Thanks. Loved your article also.
...and keep calculating absolute risk versus relative risk (spam, used to influence the numerically challenged.) We occasionally see NNT (number needed to treat) used to define clinical usefulness. NNH (number needed to harm) is usually concealed as is evident with the ClotShots.
if Dr. Seuss tries to give it to your kid, their prepped response:
i will not take it in a house, with a mouse, in a box, with a fox, i will not take it anywhere. Period.
the FDA approves everything these days. if you really wanted to reassure people, you would get rid of the liability waiver!
when my BF had covid last week, his doctor could/would only offer up paxlovid. he stayed home with his IVM and hourly nebulizing sessions of a 1% hydrogen peroxide saline solution. worked like a charm and cost pennies
“ Would you give Paxlovid to your children?”
In California, Dr. Gavin Newsom and Dr. Pan would give to your children. Bless their souls, they’re always looking out for (or at) other’s kids.
To rend r as child sacrifice
If an exact same study was done using the same methodology Pfizer used but with Ivermectin...would the study be considered valid? If the results were at least as good would Ivermectin be authorized for FDA EUA or approval? I think we all know the answer.
What’s study results got to do with what fda approves? I am surprised the drug cartels haven’t jumped into this by labeling themselves as pharma.
Pfizer IS a drug cartel
Modeling for all other drug cartels saying "No no no, step aside, let me show you how it's done.". ( On a grand scale). While revealing their true insanity to the observant.
The actual drug cartels make more money human trafficking. Somebody's got to be a drug cartel.
We need hugs not drugs more than ever with zero pfuxx for Pfizer.
I have been mulling that thought over as well. Yes it works using drug A; no drug B. Drug A makes more money on all fronts, drug B is a generic. No money there
I would never give Paxlovid to my children or any single member of my family. Ever. We trust science, not $cienceTM and especially not Pfizer flavoured $cienceTM.
No, I would not.
No , I would NOT give a child that drug , nor any Covid vaccines as is it not still in ‘ trial stages ‘ ? We are the trial and that is disgraceful , immoral medicine at its most corrupt , doctors silenced ! When will the madness end . Mandates ? Are they that stupid to think mandatory a vaccine not protecting is something bright people will not debate . Thank you for the news !
Not just debate, fight against
Don’t forget the ACOG recommendation…. All pregnant women are safe to get vaccinated!! Such fools.
If Pfizer branches out into toast I would no longer give it to my children.