Coronavirus Covid-19 Is it Affecting You and How?

[Simpleterrier]

So what I'm talking about why should we shut down for one person. Is if I want to have 50 people over and one of the people I invited doesn't like it and comes and complains what gives them the right to complain why should I honor their wish why don't they just leave. Or better yet they knew full well that it was not to their liking why would they go.

 

[frustratedearthmother]

?

 

[Beekissed]

https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/08/rip-big-pharma-study-shows-covid-immunity-is-long-las ting/

RIP Big Pharma: Study Shows COVID Immunity Is Long-Lasting

JANUARY 8, 2021 By Jordan Davidson

People who recovered from COVID-19 are likely to have “robust” and “long-lasting” immunity that lasts for years, a new study suggests.

According to research published in “Science,” people who recovered from COVID-19 have a very low risk of reinfection for at least five to eight months following contraction of the virus due to extremely high levels of immunity memory — but now it appears immunity lasts longer.

“There was a lot of concern originally that this virus might not induce much memory,” Shane Crotty, a researcher and a co-author of the paper, noted. “Instead, the immune memory looks quite good.”

After studying the blood samples from approximately 185 people who had previously contracted and recovered from COVID-19, researchers found that contrary to popular belief, 95 percent of participants’ antibodies and T-cell numbers only declined moderately after eight months following the original infection, resulting in longer-lasting immunity. Researchers also found that B-cell numbers, another component of maintaining immunity, remained fairly unchanged or sometimes even grew months after the patient’s recovery from the virus.

According to the study, the immunity memory created by these higher-than-anticipated antibody, T-cell, and B-cell numbers can help the body “restart antibody production and coordinate an attack against the coronavirus” quickly to prevent reinfection and potentially provide immunity for years, as it does with influenza, smallpox, and other diseases. Researchers were also quick to note that the same effect most likely applies to immunity that results from a dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.

One of the limitations of the study is that most people only offered one blood sample, providing only a glimpse into their current immunity. Another limitation is that there remains a small portion of people “with weak immune memory” who might not benefit long-term.

“Immunity varies from person to person, and uncommon individuals with weak immune memory still may be susceptible to reinfection,” Crotty said.

Despite these potential setbacks, researchers expressed hope that between the rollout of the vaccine and growing herd immunity, “durable immunity against secondary COVID-19 disease is a possibility in most individuals.”

 

[rachels.haven]

Heads up: That article was not left up (at all, or not at that address).

 

[Bunnylady]

anything that doesn't "prove" the current narrative will be suppressed.

Come again?? The "current narrative" is that this is an evolving situation, and there's a lot that we don't know yet.

And it is evolving. It's an established fact that viruses are gonna virus, and new variants are bound to show up. The question has come up as to whether the current vaccines will be effective against the newer variants. Truth is, when the testing was done, it was done against something other than the newest variants (because, duh, the newest ones hadn't evolved yet), so until someone ascertains that the part that the vaccine uses to trigger the immune response is exactly the same in the older versions and the new one, they can't be sure. But what reporter is going to be happy reporting, "I'm going to have to check into that, and get back to you. That may take a while?" Not one that wants to keep their job! So they report something, which may or may not later prove accurate, but that's not a conspiracy, it's a person saying, "I don't know" and someone else filling in the blank for them.

I recently saw an article (in the mainstream media!) that said that it now looks like immunity may be longer lasting than at first feared, and those apparent cases of rapidly recurring infection are extremely rare. That's science, folks - you look at a situation, come up with a theory, gather information, and if your data doesn't support your theory, you trash it and come up with a new one.

The problem is, the general public is desperate for information, and the media are trying desperately to provide that information. Nobody wants to wait for science to go "let's see what happens if we do this . . . oops, that's not good. Let's try this . . . . Nope. OK guys, we need a different theory, this just isn't working out. Anybody got any ideas?" They want answers NOW! So, in the interest of transparency, "what we think may be happening" gets handed over to someone in the press, who hands it on to someone else, and by the time it gets to Joe Public it's become like a game of Chinese Whispers (oops, is that racist? maybe I should have said a game of Telephone), and it can get very muddled. A bit back, I saw something that said that getting sick with Covid was only going to give you very brief immunity, while getting the vaccine was going to be much longer lasting, and I was like, "are you freakin' kidding me? How's that supposed to work?" Obviously, something got lost in translation, and at some point, something that makes a lot more sense will come out.

Heads up: That article was not left up (at all, or not at that address).

Probably because of the clearly conspiracy-theory nature of the title. The content of the article itself is so bland and common-sense it's almost boring, so apparently, some editor decided to jazz it up with that inflammatory click-bait title to get more people to read it. The author of the article even pointed out that the study is pretty shaky, due to the very limited and incomplete data set; it's obviously something that needs to be looked at more before one goes shouting from the housetops that getting sick is a great way to avoid ever getting sick again. That's not suppression, it's caution.

But mentioning games of Telephone, I suspect that is what happened with promiseacres and her friend the nurse. Have you ever seen one of those information/data sheets? They are, like, 95% mouse print. Most of it is written in legalese and geek speak and I sometimes wonder if the person who wrote it even understood what they meant. But there's a big difference between "don't do this, because we don't know that this won't happen," and "don't do this, because this will happen." I say it again - she can't know about any connection between the vaccine and birth defects, because nobody knows it. No link has been established, because the testing hasn't been done yet. They very much want to do the testing, because pregnant women are considered an "at risk" group and they would like to be able to offer them the option of the vaccine, but they have preferred to err on the side of caution for the moment. Ever since the Thalidomide catastrophe of the 60's, the medical community has been leery of giving anything to pregnant women. So if the information sheet does mention birth defects, it's probably legal CYA - "if you do this in spite of our telling you not to, it's on your head."

 

[Baymule]

So I go to Tractor Supply for horse wormer and it is all locked up. Why? I was told because people are taking it for Covid 19. What? That's crazy.

But y'all know me, and I had to check it out. Turns out that there is ivermectin pills for people! I never knew..... I thought it was just worming treatment for animals! The articles I read were adamant to NOT take the horse wormer, reminding people that it is for a 1200 pound horse. Well DUH! I give it to sheep and pigs. There is measured markers on it for determining weight. Don't worry, I'm not taking horse wormer, apple flavored or not. LOL

This is very interesting, a lot of vitamins and boosting immune systems.

What To Take If You Have Covid-19​

Many persons with Covid-19 find themselves at home, with relatively mild symptoms, and the doctor has not given them any medications. What should you do? What can you take? What To Do * If you thin…

covid.us.org

Ivermectin for COVID-19: Worth a Shot?​

Evidence base limited, including one withdrawn study with Surgisphere data

www.medpagetoday.com

On the Treatment of Covid-19​

A Covid-19 early treatment protocol.

swprs.org

Australian Professor: Ivermectin 'Amazingly Successful' in Killing Coronavirus​

An Australian drug known as Ivermectin, which is already in use throughout the world to treat parasitic conditions, is showing great results in killing coronavirus in studies involving patients, according to Sky News."Because I'm involved in developing these in the U.S....

www.newsmax.com

Cheap hair lice drug may cut risk of COVID-19 death by 80 percent: study​

Earlier studies have found similarly promising results.

nypost.com

Schemes or Protocols – Ivermectin for COVID-19​

covid19ivermectin.info

And just because I found this:

Home | Get Busy Living​

www.mycancerstory.rocks

 

[Grizzlyhackle]

I always told people if I got sick take me to the vet for a distemper shot.

 

[Bunnylady]

Turns out that there is ivermectin pills for people! I never knew..... I thought it was just worming treatment for animals!

Ironic, but true - most therapies started out with humans in mind, and got tested on animals; only later did they get back to being used in animals, too. A while back, my daughter was given an antibiotic for something, and when I saw the label, I burst out laughing. It said sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim. "Do you know what that is?" I asked her. "SMZ's - that's what the vet gives the horses!"

The reason they say not to take the horse wormer is because you can't be sure that the little dab you put on your finger contains exactly the dose you may have calculated by weight or volume. The paste may not be blended to a completely homogenous mixture, and the quantity of active ingredient in a tiny amount may be higher or lower than what's on the label. The content of the tube averages out to, say, 12%, but, since it is expected that most or all of the contents are going to be given at the same time, getting the drug perfectly, uniformly distributed throughout the entire tube isn't considered important.

 

[rachels.haven]

...so a lot of people are no longer going to have worms or lice...
Gee, I hope they don't poison themselves in the process. Getting sick from too much ivermectin isn't fun, I tell you (stupid pour on).
I wouldn't mind if ivermectin actually works for it. I don't trust people to self medicate properly though. If there is a way to mess something up, put it in front of a crowd and they will find it and a bunch of other ways. They kind of need those doses per various product concentrations and then they need to be able to READ and follow directions properly and measure.

 

[farmerjan]

There are signs here at the horse wormers that it is not for human consumption. I have no problem with some ivermectin on the skin such as the pour-ons that we use for the cattle. How many times have we spilled it on us in the course of worming the cattle.
Yes it is used in many countries with parasitic problems. Also for head lice.
Look at the impassioned plea that Dr Pierre Kory made in front of the senate committee to consider ivermectin as a front line defense against the covid virus.....he has reams of studies that prove his point and list after list of other doctors and immunity researchers to back him up.
DISGRACEFUL that the medical community will not look at all these "ALTERNATIVE" drugs that could be useful....