Unlike their simple counterparts in artificial intelligence (AI) applications, neurons in the brain use dendrites - their intricate tree-like branches - to find relevant chunks of information. Now, neuroscientists have discovered a new computational method to make complex dendrite models much simpler. These faithful reductions may lead AI applications to process information much like the brain does.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3r7TyYz
Genetic variations associated with both increases and reductions in risk of the neurodegenerative disease alter the action of ion channels within cellular organelles called lysosomes, a new study finds.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3t86gIF
Researchers have created the first platform to understand the mechanisms underlying blood pressure instability after spinal cord injury. The discovery has led to a new cutting-edge solution. Spinal cord stimulators can bridge the body's autonomous regulation system, controlling blood pressure without medication.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3pAjw6P
In 2016, a team reported that a 25-year-old man recovering from a coma had made remarkable progress following a treatment to jump-start his brain using ultrasound. Now, researchers report that two more patients with severe brain injuries have also made impressive progress thanks to the same technique.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2KZWs2f
A new study shows, for the first time, how an abnormal number of chromosomes (aneuploidy) -- a unique characteristic of cancer cells that researchers have known about for decades -- could become a weak point for these cells. The study could lead to the development of future drugs that will use this vulnerability to eliminate the cancer cells.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3tc8wiq
Some languages require less neural activity than others. But these are not necessarily the ones we would imagine. Researchers have shown that languages that are often considered 'easy' actually require an enormous amount of work from our brains.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3r8VDUp
Some languages require less neural activity than others. But these are not necessarily the ones we would imagine. Researchers have shown that languages that are often considered 'easy' actually require an enormous amount of work from our brains.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3r8VDUp
As surgeons balance the need to control their patients' post-surgery pain with the risk that a routine operation could become the gateway to long-term opioid use or addiction, a new study shows the power of an approach that takes a middle way.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3pva7O1
In a new and first of its kind study, researchers study fermented beverages to find the one with the most umami flavor. Which one wins -- champagne, beer, wine or sake?
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3pv9kwh
Researchers have discovered a novel and druggable insulin inhibitory receptor, named inceptor. The blocking of inceptor function leads to an increased sensitisation of the insulin signaling pathway in pancreatic beta cells. This might allow protection and regeneration of beta cells for diabetes remission.
from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/39uFYbP
People have asked why I was not blogging about the Covid vaccines. To be honest, I felt there was not enough information for me to be decisive, and I was waiting for more information to become available. However, someone called me and told me about a lot of allergic reactions, including one anaphylactic reaction, at a local hospital after 30 doses were given. Staff were instructed to keep this quiet.
Then I watched a nine-minute Ben Swann video1 about the vaccines, in which he read the "declination form" that must be signed by EMTs in Maine who refuse the vaccine. It contained false and misleading statements, and I realized I should no longer delay discussing what I know about the vaccines.
1. Both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are made from messenger RNA and lipid nanoparticles containing polyethylene glycol (PEG).
a. Messenger RNA (or any RNA) can potentially be converted to DNA in the presence of reverse transcriptase. That DNA potentially, or bits of it, could become linked to your native DNA.
While I have no idea how likely this is, I began to take the possibility seriously only after two members of FDA's advisory committee (the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, or VRBPAC) asked about it during their meeting to approve the Pfizer vaccine on December 10.2
I watched the entire meeting and took copious notes. Virologists tell us that much of our DNA is, in fact, originally viral DNA that found its way into ours.3 I now consider the potential for vaccine RNA to be converted to DNA and permanently inserted in my DNA a remote possibility — but one that I would like proven wrong before being vaccinated.
b. 70% of Americans have pre-existing antibodies to PEG. FDA suspects that these PEG antibodies may be the cause of anaphylaxis post vaccination. The U.K. recommends against people with severe allergic conditions receiving the mRNA vaccines.
The CDC, however, recommends people receive it regardless of their allergy history, only asking that those with severe allergies wait an additional 15 minutes (total of 30 minutes) in the clinic in case they need to be resuscitated.
Anaphylaxis is occurring at about 1 in 45,000 doses,4 or 17 times the rate CDC has determined it occurs after other vaccines (1.3 episodes per million vaccinations5). Therefore, getting the shot in a drugstore or anywhere that trained physicians are not close by to perform a resuscitation seems like a bad idea.
According to the American College of Allergy, "The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine should be administered in a health care setting where anaphylaxis can be treated."6 California has temporarily halted use of a lot of Moderna's vaccine due to a high rate of anaphylaxis.7
2. No vaccines made from messenger RNA nor this type of lipid nanoparticles have ever been used in humans. We have no idea about their long-term side effects. The clinical trials followed subjects for only two months after two doses of vaccine at the time the vaccines were authorized for use.
3. Neither the Moderna nor the Pfizer trial enrolled many frail elderly subjects. Since both vaccines entered general use less than one month ago, we have heard tales of nursing home residents catching Covid or dying in higher numbers after receiving the vaccines.
But we do not know if this is a random event or a reaction to vaccination, since reliable data are not yet available. The elderly often fail to mount an immune response to a vaccine; if this is the case, they should not receive the vaccine, because they will be subject to the side effects without the benefit.
UPDATE: Norway has recorded 23 deaths after the vaccinations. Thirteen have been investigated, autopsied and occurred in the frail elderly. Norway has now decided to recommend the obvious: “‘If you are very frail, you should probably not be vaccinated,’ Steinar Madsen at the Norwegian Medicines Agency said at a webinar on corona vaccine for journalists …"8
On January 15 from Bloomberg, "Norway said Covid-19 vaccines may be too risky for the very old and terminally ill, the most cautious statement yet from a European health authority as countries assess the real-world side effects of the first shots to gain approval."9
4. Public health officials have said over and over that they do not know if the vaccines prevent spread. Pfizer's lead representative to the VRBPAC meeting, Kathrin Jansen, Ph.D., said that Pfizer did not test human subjects to see if those vaccinated could get and spread the infection.
But Jansen admitted that Pfizer did test primates — and found that vaccinated monkeys did get Covid infections despite being vaccinated. Their duration of infection was shorter than in the unvaccinated monkeys.10
You can watch Jansen first claim that primates did not get infection in the lung but then admit they did get infections, of shorter duration than unvaccinated primates — at 7 hours 30 minutes into the meeting.11 By the way, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin do exactly the same thing — reduce duration of viral carriage — as shown in a new review article by Didier Raoult.12
5. Are the data from the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials reliable, especially the claim that both yield 95% efficacy?
a. Members of the VRBPAC advisory committee wanted more information. Two of them asked to be given the results between November 14 (the date the data collection ended) and December 10 (the date of the meeting). Separately, at two different times, both FDA and Pfizer refused to provide this to the committee.
b. There were relatively few Covid-19 cases in Pfizer's trial (under 200) despite 40,000 enrollees. Peter Doshi, blogging for the British Medical journal,13 noted that 20 times as many subjects had Covid-like symptoms as those who were diagnosed positive using PCR tests, but the much larger group had negative PCR tests.
We now know there are large numbers of false positives and negatives with PCR tests. Cycle threshold information was not supplied. No sequencing was done to assure that PCR positive individuals actually had Covid. I don't trust these data.
c. Both Moderna and Pfizer provided rudimentary information to the FDA to apply for Emergency Use Authorizations14 — much less than is required to issue a vaccine license, according to US law15 — despite what Drs. Stephen Hahn and Peter Marks at FDA may have claimed to sooth the public.
d. FDA made the incomprehensible decision to NOT perform inspections of the manufacturing facilities of the Covid vaccine manufacturers.16 What did FDA not want to find? FDA misled its advisory committee by claiming to have reviewed all the manufacturing paperwork supplied to it. That is a far cry from inspecting the facility.
6. No one knows how long immunity lasts, if in fact the vaccines do provide some degree of immunity. (Should it be called immunity if you can still catch and spread the virus?)
For every known vaccine, the immunity it provides is less robust and long-lasting than the immunity obtained from having had the infection. People who have had Covid really have no business getting vaccinated — they get all the risk and none of the benefit. It is said that Israelis who had Covid are not being vaccinated.17
The Maine EMT Declination Document
This is a document designed to force EMTs to take the vaccine by using false information and veiled threats. For example, the document claims with certainty that one can asymptomatically spread Covid, even up to 10 days. That has not been shown to be true.
Even Dr. Anthony Fauci was recorded18 as saying that asymptomatic spread has never driven an epidemic, although it might occur rarely. We still don't know with certainty how much asymptomatic spread contributes to cases, but probably very little. CDC made a claim that asymptomatic spread could contribute to 59% of cases.19
CDC, however, made this claim based on its own researchers using modelling and estimates alone. CDC loves to publish its models of illness, cases and spread, instead of providing real data. Models can be easily manipulated to support whatever narrative is desired, as we have seen with the Neil Ferguson and University of Washington/BMGF models of the pandemic.
The declination document20 claims that the clinical trials were rigorous. I doubt few who read the trial documents would agree with that. The trials are still in progress. And FDA explicitly said these two vaccines have not been approved. They have instead been "authorized."
But the most pernicious thing about the EMT document was that it was intended to make the decliner feel awful for letting down the team and the community. In fact, based on the monkey data, the only data we have, you can probably still spread the virus even after being vaccinated.
So the declination was built on a lie. And, lying document that it is, it is not signed. You don't know who wrote it. Why are EMTs being made to sign it, and initial every paragraph? Here is just one of its passages:
"The consequences of my refusal to be vaccinated could have life-threatening consequences for my health and the health of everyone with whom I am in contact, including my co-workers, my family, and members of the community I serve."
When a product is good for you, there is no need to scare or threaten people into taking it. If you are being coerced to do something, that should be a strong clue to avoid it.
If you become injured by one of these experimental vaccines, the chance of receiving any financial benefit is tiny.21 The U.S. government has waived the liability of everyone involved, from manufacturers to vaccinators. Luckily, the drugs and vitamins/supplements that are effective for Covid are safe and have been used for many decades. See earlier blog posts for details.
UPDATE: 1/13/21 from FiercePharma:22 "Aside from J&J, coronavirus vaccines from Novavax and AstraZeneca are in late-stage trials, and a host of other companies are in various stages of research. At a Fierce JPM Week panel, experts said there will be plenty of need for a “second wave” of coronavirus vaccines."
UPDATE: 1/14/21 First, both mRNA vaccines are comprised of mRNA that codes for the spike proteins. However, the spike itself may have inherent toxicity and cause serious Covid symptoms, according to a very thoughtful review of the literature23 sent to FDA by Dr. Patrick Whelan, Ph.D. at UCLA.
Second, an article published by Kanduc and Shoenfeld in September 2020 termed "Molecular mimicry between SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoproteins and mammalian proteomes: implications for the vaccines"24 showed that "a massive heptapeptide sharing exists between SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and human proteins."
The sharing of peptides between SARS-CoV-2 and humans also occurred with mice but no other animals, and other human coronaviruses lacked this commonality of peptide sequences with humans. What does this mean?
"A massive peptide commonality is present with humans and mice, i.e, organisms that undergo pathologic consequences following SARS-CoV-2 infection." The authors suggest molecular mimicry as a reason for the massive autoimmune phenomena that occur in late-stage Covid-19. The paper concludes:
"Finally, this study once more reiterates the concept that only vaccines based on minimal immune determinants, unique to pathogens and absent in the human proteome, might offer the possibility of safe and efficacious vaccines."
In other words, vaccines need to eliminate the regions of the spike protein that mimic human proteins in order to avoid triggering autoimmunity. Whether this paper provides evidence that SARS-CoV-2 may have been grown in humanized mice, or designed to deliberately mimic human peptide sequences to induce autoimmunity in humans, I leave to the imagination.
In the video above, Dr. Ted Noel is among the latest to use common sense and reason to argue that masks don’t work to stop aerosol virus transmission. He uses a vaping device and several different types of masks — including disposable and cloth — to illustrate his point, as the vapor clearly passes around and through the masks.
“Aerosols will not be stopped by masks,” he says. “You don’t need a big study. All you need is this [holding up a vaping apparatus]. The [vape] aerosol is actually larger in molecular size than the aerosol from your breath,” yet it still passes easily through the mask.
This demonstration provides visual evidence that masks may be useless against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, but if you’re looking for further support, a growing number of studies comparing U.S. states with mask mandates to those without mandates suggest the same.1
Are Double, or Triple, Masks Needed?
If one mask isn’t enough, The New York Times suggested in January 2021 that perhaps doubling up would offer better protection. “Double-masking isn’t necessary for everyone,” the Times wrote. “But for people with thin or flimsy face coverings, ‘if you combine multiple layers, you start achieving pretty high efficiencies’ of blocking viruses from exiting and entering the airway.’”2
They cited commentary by Linsey Marr of Virginia Tech, which recommended layering two types of masks or using a three-layer mask to keep particles out.3
There’s just one pesky problem. “At some point, ‘we run the risk of making it too hard to breathe,’ she said.” If you can get past that trade-off, the rationale seems to be that if you add enough layers of material, infectious droplets must travel through an obstacle course of sorts, and eventually you’ll stop something from getting through.
Marr and co-author Monica Gandhi from the University of California said that in studies of dozens of mask materials, filtration effectiveness ranged from less than 10% (for polyurethane foam) to nearly 100% for a vacuum cleaner bag. But in tests on humans wearing homemade masks, they were only 50% to 60% effective at protecting the wearer from pollution particles.4
Based on their own studies, Marr and Gandhi said they recommend “a high-quality surgical mask or a fabric mask of at least two layers with high thread count for basic protection,” but for “maximal protection,” doubling up on masks or using a triple-layer variety is necessary:5
“For maximal protection, members of the public can either (1) wear a cloth mask tightly on top of a surgical mask where the surgical mask acts as a filter and the cloth mask provides an additional layer of filtration while improving the fit; or (2) wear a three-layer mask with outer layers consisting of a flexible, tightly woven fabric that can conform well to the face and a middle layer consisting of a non- woven high-efficiency filter material (e.g., vacuum bag material).
If the masks fit well, these combinations should produce an overall efficiency of >90% for particles 1 µm and larger, which corresponds to the size of respiratory aerosols that we think are most important in mediating transmission of COVID-19.”
But layering up on masks that provide good filtration, or wearing more than two masks at once, may have diminishing returns, the Times noted, again highlighting the obvious that covering your mouth and nose with multiple layers of fabric and filtration material could “make it much harder to breathe normally.”6
COVID-19 Spreads Via Aerosolized Particles
There’s growing evidence that aerosol transmission is involved in the spread of SARS-CoV-2,7 which are 0.125 μm in size. September 18, 2020, the CDC posted updated COVID-19 guidance on its "How COVID-19 Spreads" page that, for the first time, mentioned aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, saying "this is thought to be the main way the virus spreads."8
The CDC then deleted the mention of aerosols and the possibility of spread beyond 6 feet the following Monday, September 21, saying a draft version of proposed changes had been posted "in error."9
It’s a noteworthy difference, because if SARS-CoV-2 is spread via aerosolized droplets, which research suggests,10 such droplets remain in the air for at least three hours and can travel over long distances of up to 27 feet.11 This adds to the likelihood that cloth masks do little to stop you from getting COVID-19. AAPS explained:12
“The preponderance of scientific evidence supports that aerosols play a critical role in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Years of dose response studies indicate that if anything gets through, you will become infected. Thus, any respiratory protection respirator or mask must provide a high level of filtration and fit to be highly effective in preventing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.”
Face Masks Don’t Reduce COVID-19 Infection Rate
The first randomized controlled trial of more than 6,000 individuals to assess the effectiveness of surgical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection found masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence of infection.13 Among mask wearers, 1.8% ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% among controls.
When they removed the people who did not adhere to proper mask use, the results remained the same — 1.8%, which suggests adherence makes no significant difference. Among those who reported wearing their face mask “exactly as instructed,” 2% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared to 2.1% of the controls.
A case-control investigation of people with COVID-19 who visited 11 U.S. health care facilities also showed little benefit of mask usage. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report revealed factors associated with getting the disease,14 including the use of cloth face coverings or masks in the 14 days before becoming ill.
The majority of them — 70.6% — reported that they “always” wore a mask, but they still got sick. Among the interview respondents who became ill, 108, or 70.6%, said they always wore a mask, compared to six, or 3.9%, who said they “never” did, and six more, or 3.9%, who said they “rarely” did.
In other words, of the symptomatic adults with COVID-19, 70.6% always wore a mask and still got sick, compared to 7.8% for those who rarely or never did.15 Further, the cloth masks most of the public are wearing may have a pore size of 80 to 500 μm,16 which is far larger than viruses or even respiratory droplets, which range from 5 to 10 μm.17
Researchers writing in PeerJ said such masks have “poor filtering efficiency” that “may have arisen from larger and open pores present in the masks.” This got even worse after washing, with filtering efficiency dropping by 20% after the mask was washed and dried four times.18
Policy Review: Face Masks Don’t Affect Flu Transmission
In May 2020, researchers reviewed the evidence of nonpharmaceutical personal protective measures against pandemic influenza, including 10 studies that analyzed the effectiveness of face masks in reducing flu virus infections in the community. “We found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks,” they wrote,19 citing the following research:
During the Hajj pilgrimage in Australia, no significant difference in influenza infection was found among those who wore a mask and those who did not20
Two studies of university students living in residence halls found no significant reduction of influenza cases among the face mask groups21,22
In a study of flu transmission among households, face mask usage did not lead to a significant reduction in secondary flu virus infection23
While the researchers suggested there could be some benefit from wearing tight-fitting respirators that are properly fit-tested, loose-fitting face masks, such as disposable masks, are much less likely to offer protection and could even increase the risk of transmission with improper use:24
“There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
COVID-19 Cases Higher in Areas With Mask Mandates
Widespread mask mandates were rolled out despite a lack of solid evidence to support their use among the general population. In an attempt to add some science into the equation, computer scientists, actuaries and data analysts from Rational Ground25 looked at COVID-19 cases from May 1, 2020, to December 15, 2020, in all 50 U.S. states.
They calculated how many cases per day occurred by population with and without mask mandates.26 Among states without a mask mandate, 5,781,716 cases were counted over 5,772 days. This works out to:27
No mask mandates: 17 cases per 100,000 people per day
Mask mandates: 27 cases per 100,000 people per day
In short, COVID-19 cases were higher with mask mandates than without. As noted by Daniel Horowitz, a senior editor of The Blaze:28
“We can turn the numbers upside down and inside out, but no matter how we examine them, there is no evidence of masks correlating with reduced spread. If anything, the opposite is true … It's self-evident that the virus does what it does naturally and follows a very mechanical pattern regardless of state policies …”
A working paper released by the National Bureau of Economic Research29 concurred, finding that for all the countries and U.S. states studied, once the region experienced 25 cumulative COVID-19 deaths, the growth rates of daily COVID-19 deaths fell from initially high levels to close to zero within 20 to 30 days.
This occurred regardless of what type of nonpharmaceutical interventions, including mask mandates, travel restrictions, stay-at-home orders, quarantines and lockdowns, were put in place. “[T]hose policies have varied in their timing and implementation across countries and states, but the trends in outcomes do not,” the American Institute for Economic Research reported.30
Do You Have to Wear a Mask?
Many people believe that wearing a mask should be an individual choice, but a majority of U.S. states and cities have made mask-wearing mandatory. Some private businesses have done so as well. This isn’t necessarily a case of “wearing something is better than nothing,” as some research suggests mask usage could lead to physical and psychological harm.31
The U.S. nonprofit Stand for Health Freedom is among those calling for peaceful civil disobedience against mandatory masks, and has a widget you can use to contact your government representatives to let them know wearing a mask must be a personal choice.
While you may be forced to wear a mask in order to enter certain places of business, if you live in an area with a mask mandate there is usually a caveat that states “unless you can maintain a 6-foot distance.” If you can maintain this distance, you can forgo a mask and still comply with the mandate.
