Brilliant Video - very thought provoking

[Quest4NSR]

youtu.be/D_UJaEZe9gg(Not working as expected?)

Regards

[sassy59]

Very interesting xxx

[Tomred]

Have known about all this for a long time , but its good to brush up on the subject , thanks for posting and would recommend it is watched by all. happy new year.

[Ppiman]

Thanks for the link. I look forward to seeing this later. I have read there was a lot of hope built up for vitamin K2, but it has proven to be without foundation. Here is a quotation from a recent review:

"[T]his randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial – considered the gold standard of epidemiological studies – found vitamin K2 and vitamin D supplements did not slow the progression of calcium deposits on the aortic valves of older men once the process had begun."

heart.org/en/news/2022/04/2...

Steve

[Auriculaire in reply to Ppiman]

Here you go again . This is one study done on only 365 MEN of average age 71. There is no proof whatsover that taking vit D and K2 does not work as a preventative in younger people . There is no data on women - why were they not included in the study? The amounts of D3 and K2 seem odd too - a very high dose of K2 for a low dose of D3. And the authors themselves point out that more investigation needs to be done because there was a suggestion that the treatment might slow down progression in calcification of coronary arteries. So your conclusion is unwarranted.

[Ppiman in reply to Auriculaire]

I really didn't "go again" you know. I think you are being quite unkind and not for the first time. You really do not like people disagreeing with your deeply sceptical and sometimes cynical viewpoints. The study I quoted seemed well executed and scientifically valid within the parameters the doctors examined.

For many years, my son was a strong advocate of K2 and D and, on his recommendation, I took them for a long time, too, but he no longer takes either as he, too, said the hope for them seems to have been without foundation. We can only form our judgements based on the work of experts in their field, people who know far more than we do. You see a controversy in so many things that I do not. That doesn't make me - nor those experts - fools.

It didn't occur to me to check that this study was gender biased or to consider whether that would have altered the outcomes in this particular case. Regarding the preventative use of the vitamins in younger people, then that work will take a lot of doing since the plaques that eventually become atherosclerosis are formed very early on in some people (indeed, I read that they've been found in African populations without vitamin D depletion, and even in wild primates there). The postulation is that there seems to be a genetic as well as a lifestyle cause of atherosclerosis. I doubt that increasing oral D and K2 will prevent it - but it might. I did read once that the mass intake of hydrogenated fats might be related, but I never did follow that up.

Happy new year! Let's hope for a better one than last year although here in the UK, it's starting badly.

Steve

[ozziebob in reply to Ppiman]

Steve,

From your answer above, I'm genuinely very keen to learn what you thought of the report I posted a short time ago about Vitamin D and mortality rates, thus ...

medscape.com/viewarticle/98...

[Ppiman in reply to ozziebob]

Hi Bob - I’d missed the link before and can only say that I’m glad you reposted it. Thank you. I’m lost with the statistics the writers used but I suspect we could put our trust in their findings given the level of discussion in the paper. I’ll resume my daily dose!

One part that was interesting was the (seeming) advice not to take large doses of the vitamin, something that is often recommended:

“Sometimes doctors want to fix the deficiency quickly with a large 'bolus' dose, then continue with a maintenance dose. Increasing evidence suggests that's not beneficial and might disturb the body's metabolism so that it can't get the amount it needs."

Steve

[Auriculaire in reply to Ppiman]

I am sorry if you think I am being unkind . "It didn't occur to me to check that this study might be gender biased.........this particular case" Exactly- you were prepared to accept the review on the news website of the AHA an organisation that receives large sums of money from guess who . Did you click on their link to the actual study ? How can a study design that leaves out 50% of humans be taken seriously these days ? Maybe a benefit might have been shown for women. But given the study authors themselves said more investigation was needed I stick by my claim that the verdict is out at the moment. I agree it is unlikely that large scale RCTs are going to be done in younger people to see if there is a preventative role for vit K 2 . Personally I only take it because I take a small calcium supplement but I do not give it to my husband because he doesn't take a calcium supplement though we both take the same amount of Calcifediol. As for my being sceptical or even cynical yes I am - with good reason. I would say you are too trusting given the corrupted state of scientific research these days. Pharma run demonising campaigns on vitamins and supplements just like the sugar industry did on fat. They both use the playbook the tobacco industry used to get people to ignore health warnings about smoking.

Yesterday an article appeared in the Wall Street Journal asking if the mass vaccination campaign against covid could be responsible for the "rapid and simultaneous emergence of mutiple variants with enormous growth advantages" which are according to a study in Nature that came out on Dec 19th " unprecedented" . The "cynical" "conspiracy theorists" have been saying for more than a year that these vaccines would cause " immune imprinting" that would make people produce antibodies to the original Wuhan spike proteins but would work considerably less well when the virus mutated as it is the spike that mutates the most. And indeed studies are now showing that this is happening. Studies published recently in both the NEJM and Cell are showing that neutralising antibodies against the Wuhan spike are many many times higher in those who have had 4 jabs ( including the bivalent) than those against BA 5 or the XBB that is the new variant kid on the block. All of a sudden this is filtering out into the MSM and the " disinformation" that sceptics -sorry conspiracy theorists - were accused of spreading turns out to be not disinformation at all. Like the other conspiracy theories that turned out to be true ie the vaccines weren't stopping transmission. Even worse is a very recent study showing a change in proportion of antibody type among the boosted to IgG 4 which is very bad news not just for covid infection but for the work of the immune system in general. It might take a bit longer for that to get into the MSM.

Bonne Année to you too and as we say here in this nation of the " health anxious" "surtout bonne santé ".

[mary70]

Either way, the video provided by Dr Pradip Jamnadas explanation - must still be an important finding - and worth looking more deeply into the depth of debate.

[Singwell]

Having been a researcher in my time I can see both sides. On the one hand the sample size is quite good (though by no means classable as big data) and the limitation of gender and age makes the outcomes more robust. On the other hand we have to be wary of applying those outcomes to other sectors of the population. (I know you're not suggesting this btw). But a study that is robust in itself is still of value - what's needed now are more studies that refer to these outcomes but ask similar questions in other populations - for example older females, and then perhaps in younger sectors of the population.

[Ppiman in reply to Singwell]

Thanks for that. I found it an interesting study as it was a fair sized sample and a well researched outcome. Long term studies on something as complex as plaque formation are never going to be easy to do.

I used to work in what those who mock it call “Big Pharma” and spent a lot of my life in those days with doctors and reading clinical studies. I developed a great respect for the profession and, indeed, for the research side of the industry, if only because it is the best we have and we need it so badly. It has the same failings as all human institutions under a capitalist system but that’s still the best we’re ever likely to get. What it needs is proper monitoring and legal controls that work to rein in its excesses.

It would be lovely to think our universities could do the job of drug R&D but that’s not going to happen, sadly, so the profit-driven system we have is what we must put up with.

Steve

[Auriculaire]

I did not say that the study was not done in good faith or using high quality scientific methods. I did say that the gender bias and the qualification by the authors means that your statement that the hope for vit K2 is " proven to be without foundation" was wrong. It might be without foundation but this one small ,limited study does not definitively prove it. This is my beef with your post.Nor did I use the phrase "vaccine imprinting" . I said "immune imprinting" . This is sometimes called by the odd name of "original antigenic sin" or OAS and is not a new concept that has come along with covid but has been known about for decades. It is not a conspiracy theory and anybody who tries to dismiss it as such might be "highly qualified" but they are dishonest . The two are not mutually exclusive- Fauci has been shown through the disclosure of emails ordered by the courts in America to have lied over and over again about his actions and statements during the pandemic. It is the phenomenon by which the immune system always makes the strongest response against the first antigen encountered despite encountering others later on. It is why during the 2009 swine flu pandemic (that never was) older people who had been infected as children in the pandemics of 1957/8 ,1968 and 1976/7 were deemed to be less susceptible having encountered the H1N1 virus before . I have not been able to read the FT study as it is behind a paywall The first study you quote would have been more useful if a group of workers who had not been vaccinated at all could have been compared to look at their patterns of infection. However it is nearly one year old , Wuhan, Alpha and Delta have disappeared from the scene long ago and we now have to contend with Omicron and it's never ending variants. And the more recent studies that have been published in the last couple of months are showing that vaccinated and boosted individuals are producing neutralising antibodies against the Wuhan spike proteins in massive amounts but not against the variants that are now in circulation even if they have had a bivalent booster. Which would account for why some vaccinated people are getting covid 2 or 3 times in a short period. On an anecdotal level nearly all our friends and family who live here or in the UK have had covid despite their triple boosted status - some more than once . It was shown last year that individuals vaccinated before any infection who were subsequently infected did not produce as many antibodies to the nucleocapsid of the virus as unvaccinated individuals who had been previously infected. It is an unscientific habit for the vaccine enthusiasts to dismiss any studies that point to harm to the immune system as " fake news " or "conspiracy theory" . The findings of the studies remain and should be seriously debated not dismissed out of hand. Much of what was put forward as "fact " when the mode of action of the vaccines was first explained to the public now has been shown to be little more than wishful thinking, or just plain lies. The syringe contents did not stay at the site of injection or in the nearest lymph glands. Pfizer's own pre clinical biodistribution studies showed that within a few hours they had travelled to various sites in the body accumulating in the liver, heart, spleen and sexual organs . The mRNA was not destroyed after a few days but according to Pfizer's own submission for authorisation to the EMA was lasting up to 2 months in some individuals. They did not have any data beyond 2 months at the time but subsequently it has been found in some individuals for as long as 15 months! None of this was revealed nor the fact that transmission was never an endpoint in the clinical trials. Nobody who rolled up their sleeve did so with "informed consent ".

Whether you get mild, moderate ,severe or fatal covid disease from the virus is contingent on you catching it in the first place. The statistics from highly vaccinated counties are showing far more covid infection ( wave after wave of different variants) than those from poorly vaccinated countries. The people who are ill and dying are the vaccinated and boosted. What is more the statistics clearly show that you are more likely to catch it the more jabs you have had .The comparison of figures between counties that are highly vaccinated in America and those with much lower levels of vaccination have shown this for some time. Dr John Campbell has just come out and called for a halt to the vaccine program until a thorough and independent cost / benefit evaluation can be done. Like Aseem Malhotra he was a vaccine enthusiast but has since revised his views. This was after a reanalysis of the original clinical trial data of the mRNA vaccines showed that the rate of serious adverse events was 1/800. As he points out this is way higher than that for other vaccines that were withdrawn in the past. I have never been a fan of Campbell 's as I consider his presentation to be long winded but I have never doubted his honesty and integrity.

[Auriculaire]

The cardiac issues have not resolved without harm. That is a myth. A study done recently on young men who had diagnoses of myocarditis showed unfavourable cardiac markers months later. Worse unfavourable cardiac markers were found in young men who had not shown overt signs of myocarditis shortly after vaccination. There have been several studies showing that for young men the risk of developing myocarditis is greater than that of being hospitalised with covid and Israeli studies have shown clearly that there was no rise in myocarditis in young people due to covid infection before their vaccination program st started - the rise came after vaccination. It does not look as if vaccinating the bulk of young people was a good idea - especially as this was done on the wholly spurious assertion that vaccines would stop spread. You know- the get vaccinated to make sure you don't kill your granny nonsense. As for what was stated by who I have seen videos of both Bourla ( the CEO of Pfizer ) and Walensky ( head of CDC in USA ) stating that the vaccines stopped transmission. Both these individuals started off their careers as scientists before occupying their present positions and I would expect most people would have confidence in their pronouncements. The signal of severe adverse effects after the covid vaccines to all the western pharmacovigilance bodies has been enormous - more than for any other vaccines in the past. In the past such signals even though at a far lower level have elicited a withdrawal of the vaccines till a proper risk / benefit assessment could be made. Instead these vaccines are being authorised for children and now even for toddlers! This is extreme recklessness. Fortunately very few parents are inflicting is on their children. As I pointed out above the spike proteins and LNPs are finding their way to the major organs anyway. This was shown in Pfizers own biodistribution studies. Do you really think the lab technicians deliberately injected all the animals intravenously?

Covid is a nasty virus but the Omicron strains are much milder . It could be argued that this is the reason for less severe illness and death - not that the vaccines have worked well. Given the total failure to bring a successful coronavirus vaccine to market since the first SARS outbreak in 2003 no I do not think it was obvious that vaccination was the way forward and certainly not at the speed at which it was done. We have no idea of the long or even medium term effects of tampering with the immune system that this new genetic platform will entail.

[Auriculaire]

I suspect that the myocarditis in young men is not unique to the male sex but is hard to refute - ie it stands out more.How much of the lesser rates of the condition in young women is due to the normal gaslighting the female sex endures especially when it comes to heart conditions? It is all too frequent that women's symptoms are dismissed as anxiety or due to hormonal fluctuations. I also suspect that it is happening in older age groups as well but is lost amongst health expectations for that age group. My views are held as a result of reading those of dissenting doctors and scientists who have been mocked, ridiculed and in some cases cast out of their professions for refusing to go along with the official narrative . In the past such mavericks have often been shown to have been right all along . Only time will tell. As for what could have been done instead other paths have been suggested but they would not have been profitable. Pfizer's own trial data show significant harm from their vaccine and even their own initial analysis showed that there were more deaths in the vaccine arm than in the placebo arm. I am quite prepared to believe they would inflict harm on people for profit. Their past criminal history shows clearly that their primary purpose is making money .

[Auriculaire]

The narrative was that covid was a deadly disease that could kill anybody. This was fed by the media in most countries relaying the Chinese propaganda of people dropping down dead in the street ,hazmat suited goons spraying the streets , and people being shut up in their appartments. Followed by tv reports night after night peppered with tales of young and supposedly healthy people ( who often actually appeared obese in the photos shown of them) dying .Subsequent serological random population tests have shown that the overall IFR is less than 1%. It is higher of course for old people with comorbidities but old people with comorbities have always died of flu and other respiratory viruses. The average age of people who died of covid turned out to be nearer to the life expectancy age and deaths of younger people actually very rare. The narrative was that vaccination was the ONLY way out of this ,there were no treatments or preventatives other than lockdown ( always dismissed by the WHO up till then as an effective tool of preventing spread in a pandemic) and that vaccination would end the pandemic. Well vaccination has not put an end to covid in the most highly vaccinated countries and the example of Sweden and several American states showed that covid could be managed without compulsory lockdowns either. Indeed Sweden did far better in terms of deaths per million than we did here where the lockdown and masking mandates were among the most draconian . Those who refused to fall into step with this like Sweden were disparaged no end in the media . Tegnell was treated as if he were mad. The use of repurposed drugs was discouraged. There were several trials going on here in France of HCL which showed initial favourable results. They were stopped by the health minister when the Lancetgate study was published and were not restarted when that study was shown to be based on totally fabricated data. Why? Many of the trials that showed HCL to be of no use were wrongly conducted. The proponents always said that the treatment had to be started early as soon as possible after symptoms appeared. The trials were done on hospitalised patients ie ones who were already very sick -you could not get into a hospital otherwise. Also toxic doses were given - much higher than those recommended by the practitioners using HCL in an outpatient setting. Ivermectin was blackened by the media as dangerous " horsepaste" , totally ignoring the fact that this drug is taken safely as a prophylactic by millions of people in sub Saharan Africa to protect them from parasites (countries which have had far lower death rates from covid despite serological testing showing widespresad infection). Ignoring the fact that the discoverer of the drug always maintained it had anti viral properties and that there have been large scale studies done on tens of thousands of people in Brazil that have shown it is an effective prophylactic. Ignoring that the widespread use in Indian states that distributed Ivermectin to their population ( like Uttar Pradesh) had better outcomes than those who banned its use , Same in Mexico where some states used it and others didn't. Ignoring the fact that the safety profile of Ivermectin is actually much better than that of Paracetamol which was recommended wholesale. The narrative was dangerous horsepaste.

Early on in the pandemic several studies came out showing that people who were deficient in vit D were more likely to have poor covid outcomes. On an anecdotal level nursing homes here that routinely gave a bolus dose of vit D to their residents in autumn had much less incidence of covid than those who did not . Given the cheapness of vit D why did governments not institute serious population wide efforts to raise vit D levels? How many lives could have been saved whilst waiting for the vaccines to be ready? Subsequent large scale studies showed that at a level of 55ng/mL deaths were virtually zero and severe disease rare . Still nothing was done .But if vit D worked on this large scale there would have been no EUA s for the vaccines. It would not have put paid to them altogether but stopped them being authorised with so little safety data. The companies would have had to wait at least till the end dates of their clinical trials ( I think Pfizer's does not officially end till May this year ) and would not have been able to trash the medium and long term safety aspects of the trials by offering the vaccine to the placebo arm as they did. Yes I am cynical but I do not think my cynicism is unjustified or pervese at all.

[Auriculaire]

You have not addressed my point that correction of vit D deficiency is a zero harm prophylactic measure. If this had been carried out promptly as soon as the first studies came out in the first half of 2020 it would have prepared people for the autumn and winter wave of 2020/2021 - you might recall that covid incidence was extremely low in the summer of 2020, indeed far lower than it has been in the two summers since the vaccine rollout. I did not mention or advocate for HCL as a prophylactic and nor I am aware has anybody else - it was used as an early treatment for those who had covid. I consider your entire 3rd paragraph to be straw manning. The fact remains that very little of any use was done to save lives in the period while we were waiting for the vaccine that would make it all go away. But useless ,toxic and very expensive drugs like Remdesivir and Molnupiravir were promoted. Remdesivir was finally pronounced as of little use for covid by the WHO but only 3 days before their report came out a massive contract was signed by the EU for the drug. Now this is what I call perverse and indicative of the power of Pharma. Have you any idea of how many millions are spent on lobbying by Pharma in Washington and Brussels? Do you think they spend this money because they are big hearted? Are you aware of the ongoing scandal here in Europe over the clandestine negotiations between Ursula von der Leyen and Bourla ? As for Sweden they have benefited no more than any other country from the advent of Omicron . It was pre Omicron that they diverged in their approach. As a result their economy has not been anywhere near as devastated as those of other European nations who locked down in a draconian fashion like here and Italy.

[Auriculaire]

Your views are sadly confined to your knowledge of what is happening in the UK or perhaps the anglophone world. I assume that what you mean by serious covid is covid bad enough to get you a hospital bed. There was a large multicentre trial of high dose vit D here in France and our own region's teaching hospital took part. It reported recently and found that high dose vit D was beneficial in hospitalised covid patients, reducing their length of stay and more importantly progression to ICU. In 2020 there were reports of RCTs showing the usefulness of Calcifediol in hospitalised patients in Cordoba and Barcelona. Either NICE has not bothered to inform themselves about what goes on in the non English speaking world ( sarcasm as most stuff gets published in English these days ) or they studiously ignore it. There are many studies on the effect of vit D on respiratory infection prior to covid. You do not seem to understand what a straw man is. It is countering an assertion that in fact your opponent has not made. Just as I pointed out to you in my previous post that I had never advocated for HCL as a prophylactic I will point to your straw man in your latest post - I never mentioned in any of our present correspondence till the above the use of vit D or analogues such as Calcifediol for treatment. I am aware of the Brazilian study that found no benefit once infected with covid and which NICE are probably using but the study conducted here is more recent. I did look up NICE's take on vit D some time ago and thought it was garbage. My opinion was confirmed when I read that of Dr David Grimes who I thought attacked it nicely in his blog. There is no doubt in the studies done in many countries (and now on hundreds of thousands of people )that vit D deficiency leads to worse covid outcomes. There is also evidence in some of these studies that a high level of vit D stops you catching covid in the first place ,which is a damn sight better than the vaccines as a recent study on Cleveland clinic heath workers that was trying to ascertain the effectiveness of the latest bivalent booster actually showed that the boosted were more likely to be infected! There was plenty of time as I pointed out in my last post to use vit D supplementation as PROPHYLAXIS . If you are inferring in any way that I am a lazy minded conspiracy theorist then that is the end of this exchange . I spend quite a long time each day reading about papers that have just come out and about which you seem to be totally unaware. Whether or not these studies will be confirmed or refuted only the future will tell. But their findings are there and need to be addressed.

[Auriculaire]

NICE ( and every other regulatory body for that matter) did not cavil about use of a vaccine developed on a platform that had never been used in humans before, with data from clinical trials of average length just over 2 months, with no carcinogenicity studies , no genotoxicity studies and tetragenicity studies that showed malformations in rat fetuses ( but hey lets recommend it for pregnant women anyway despite them being excluded from the trial). Nor did it bother them that the people who were going to get it first ( very old and those with comorbidities) had been largely excluded from the trials. So forgive me if I think there might be just a bit of double standards going on here. The real nub of the matter is the undisputable evidence that vit D deficiency is a factor in susceptibility to bad covid outcomes, that correcting it is cheap and a no harm step and will likely have other health benefits population wise and therefore ought to be considered before novel treatments that might turn out to be far more risky. As indeed they have. Nobody gets myocarditis from having their vit D level corrected.I have in the past said that I thought HCL had been deliberately blackened so as to clear the path for Remdesivir. Interestingly the doctor who gave me my one Janssen jab at the pharmacy agreed. He believed Raoult 's protocol worked and said plainly that it was being pooh poohed because there was no money in it. Personally I would not take it as I believe the core pharmacological ring is too close to that of quinolones so I would not want to take the risk. I would take Ivermectin and have some I bought online in America in case we ever get covid. I am pretty sure my husband had it in Dec 2019 but if I got it I had no symptoms. But my accusation of straw manning was in relation to what I have said in our present exchange . I am a pedant. Do you dispute my definition of "straw man"?

As for taking the vit D you really need to have your levels tested- particularly your wife. Because of our higher fat levels women often need to take more vit D than men to achieve the same level. We have UK friends who have a holiday home in the next village who both got covid this summer despite being boosted. They take the same amount of vit D 1000iu a day but have never had their levels tested. He is thin as a rake and despite being diabetic had very few symptoms - would not have even tested if his wife had not got it first. She is a bit plump but not obese and was quite poorly. When we were taking cholecalciferol I could not make it into normal range ( I am definitely overweight! ) on 3000iu a day whereas my thin husband had a very good level. Old people need to take vit D year round. Our skin is too thin to make sufficient during the summer months with the minimum exposure most people get. Unless you are sunbathing in shorts only round solar noon every day that it is warm enough you will make hardly any.

As for conspiracy theorists the fact that I use some of the same arguments as your brother does not mean that the arguments have no validity. I seem to remember that those who said the vaccinations did not prevent transmission were accused of being conspiracy theorists . Turns out that they were right. I do not regard what I accuse Pharma of ( ie blackening anything that will reduce their profits) as a conspiracy at all. It is a business model. As is not producing cures. A recent Goldman Sachs advisor to the pharmaceutical industry has recently come out with a cracker - it is not good business for them to produce cures as there is no money in healthy cured people only sick ones who need ongoing preferably lifelong treatment. One of the companies has been silly enough to produce a cure for Hep C infection and as a result Hep C infection is diminishing so demand for this phenomenally expensive drug is going down and eating into their profits. Any cures produced need to cost millions to make up for this pesky sort of result. Pharma is above all else a business and the bottom line is profit not benefiting mankind . That is incidental.

[Auriculaire]

Given that neither Moderna nor BioNTech were able to bring a product to market before covid no I do not think it can be assumed that it was generally safe especially to inject en masse into healthy people. It was being developed as a cancer treatment which is an entirely different matter and even so they had not come up with anything safe enough to market. I have read that this was due to the cumulative toxicity of the LNPs if several treatments were needed. No doubt for a vaccine that did not figure as strongly as one or two jabs was all that was envisaged to start off with. No doubt it was a nasty shock how quickly the protection declined . As far as I know there are fairly standardised levels for vit D sufficiency, insufficiency, deficiency and toxicity. The UK's are different than a lot of other countries. Of course there is no definite way to ascertain how a level of insufficiency or deficiency will affect a given individual. It is much quicker and easier to correct a vit D deficiency than an obesity problem. Here it can be done within 10 days max with a loading dose of 200,000iu followed by maintenance doses. I do not overeat or eat rubbish . I have problems with exercising due to my tendons being so fragile ( thank you FQ toxicity). I have more or less given up trying to do anything about my weight but I can maintain a good level of vit D. The NICE recommendation to take 400iu during the winter months is totally inadequate. A tiny amount like that will make virtually no difference to a deficiency.

After the roll out of the vaccine there was an increase in stillbirths in some places - Scotland being one of them. The Scottish health authorities are refusing to investigate this on the basis of vaccination status. They say there is no point as their advice to women to get vaccinated would not change !!!

Having my health compromised over a thirty year period by several exposures to a drug which is still touted as being "safe and effective" by the manufacturers has made me less trusting . And I am one of the lucky ones . The criminal trials that Pharma companies have had leading to conviction and massive fines do nothing to reassure me that I have just been unlucky .I think the covid vaccines that we ended up with will turn out to be a double edged sword. Forcing people to get them by threatening their jobs and livelihoods is an attack on their human rights and is directly in contravention of the Nuremberg convention. I regret having my one Janssen jab even though up to now I don't seem to have had any adverse effects - not even a sore arm! However I do worry about my daughter who has had 4 mRNA jabs despite having had covid twice and other members of my family.

[Auriculaire]

The BioNTech and Moderna vaccines were the first mRNA pharmaceutical products ever to be licensed for humans . Up till their licensing ( on an emergency use authorisation only) there had been no actual use of this technology other than in clinical trials . Not only had Moderna and BioNTech not brought any products to market, as far as I can find out nor had any other company either. Perhaps you can point specifically to an example of this platform being used successfully before 2020. You talk of " great hope " and "enormous potential" . But there was not actually anything concrete that could be pointed to. The mRNA vaccines were an experimental treatment and I would maintain they still are given that their RCTs are still ongoing. You have a very peculiar idea of what long term is if you think we have any long term data. Normally it takes 10 years to bring a vaccine to market . The clinical trials for these products have still not finished and their use in mass vaccination started 2 years ago. That is not long term. I'm not sure if it could even be considered medium term. You seem determined to ignore the fact that the reports for adverse events for these vaccines far outweigh those for all other vaccines especially flu vaccines and that in the past flu vaccines have been withdrawn at a far lower level level of adverse event signaling . You compare covid infection to flu infection and say covid is far worse. Now after 3 years of covid the actual infection mortality rate has been found by epidemiological methods such as random serological testing of populations to be about 0.5% . This is higher than flu but is nowhere near the rates for SARS or MERS. What is more it is mainly old people who die and is far less deadly than flu for children and young people. Your ideas of what covid is now seem fixated on the original strains and not the presently circulating Omicron strains . If covid is so serious how come lots of people who think they just have a cold need a test to tell them they have it? Sadly I have to point out another straw man that you have introduced. I said there were standardised levels for sufficiency, insufficiency, deficiency and toxicity for vit D . I did not use the word normal. It might well be "normal" for the bulk of a given population to be insufficient or deficient. As for the diminution of levels with illness the Israeli research showed that for covid it was people who had low vit D levels BEFORE they were infected that had poor outcomes.

No I have not said in the past " much of ....... bone density" What I have actually said is that the likes of NICE seem determined to stick solely to this aspect of vit D metabolism in their recommendations for levels of supplementation and totally ignore the large amount of research that has been done on it's role in immune modulation. As I am now pretty fed up with you misrepresenting what I have actually said to suit what you wish I'd said I no longer wish to continue this exchange and will ignore any further post you send.

[Auriculaire in reply to Auriculaire]

For anybody reading this - this appears to be a long series of posts I have made but actually they are replies to posts made by another forum member who has since deleted nearly all his replies to me. Perhaps because of the last sentence I wrote in the exchange.