Quackery

[Freeforester]

3 hours ago, mrelwood said:

I don't think the covid itself was a part of a conspiracy, but the trafficing of money related to it definitely does not reach my personal requirements of good practices. A good tip was shared in some movie or TV-series, saying: "Whenever in doubt, follow the money."

US buys hundreds of millions of Covid vaccines from Pfizer, an US company, to be donated around the world. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-buy-millions-pfizer-vaccine-doses-donate-world-washington-post-2021-09-17/

One dose has been calculated to cost $1.18 to manufacture, and Pfizer has sold the vaccines to various countries at $6.75 - $28 per dose, averaging in at $16.25. https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/vaccine-monopolies-make-cost-vaccinating-world-against-covid-least-5-times-more

Last year US government paid Pfizer $19.50 for a single dose, so this donation stunt might score Pfizer yet another $3 664 000 000 ($3.664 billion) in profits alone. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/18/upshot/coronavirus-vaccines-prices-europe-united-states.html

Pfizer estimates to sell the vaccine for a total of $33.5 billion in 2021 alone, of which about 3.5 billion goes to manufacturing costs. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/pfizer-raises-estimates-2021-sales-covid-19-vaccine-335-bln-2021-07-28/

$30 billion in profit, per year. That's a lot of money to be shared with a select few. Easily enough to make even the straightest of persons a little greedy. How convenient that they're now pushing for every person to have a third shot. And probably yearly ones after that. Soon there'll be a yearly vaccine subscription for $100, which the FDA recommends to all citizens of all countries. By 2023 public events will not be accessible without said subscription. By 2027 Pfizer buys the US government. By 2035 Pfizer reclaims ownership of The Earth ®.

Not so much money changing hands in India. The home medication pack may cost  US $ 2.65, each ivermectin tablet costs less than one-third of one US cent to produce…. BTW EU are paying up US $20 per Pfizer shot..

 

Edited September 22, 2021 by Freeforester
Additional information

[Paul A]

https://m.youtube.com/c/Campbellteaching/about

Dr. John Campbell

About

Hello Everyone, My name is John Campbell and I am a retired Nurse Teacher and A and E nurse based in England. I also do some teaching in Asia and Africa when time permits. These videos are to help students to learn the background to all forms of health care. My PhD focused on the development of open learning resources for nurses nationally and internationally.

 

Disclaimer; These media including videos, book, e book, articles, podcasts are not peer-reviewed. They should never replace individual clinical judgement from your own health care provider. No media-based material on this channel is suitable for using as professional medical advice. All comments are also for educational purposed only and must never replace advice from your own health care provider.

 

Joined May 11, 2007

 

____________________

 

He is not qualified or an expert in the subject matter.

His disclaimer clearly states that.

 

[Paul A]

EU $40 for two Pfizer shots.

Seems like a very good price to prevent death, and/or serious injury.

 

[mrelwood]

3 hours ago, Paul A said:

EU $40 for two Pfizer shots.

Seems like a very good price to prevent death, and/or serious injury.

Sure, but completely misses the point.

Wouldn’t $20 then be even better price for the same end results, preventing death and serious injury? If so, Paypal me $20 for using the seatbelt in your car.

[Paul A]

https://learn.g2.com/how-much-do-youtubers-make

How much do youtubers make?

Per view, advertisers on average pay $.18. If your channel receives 1,000 views, it’s worth $18. Google keeps 45 percent of what is made, so a YouTuber would make (on average) $9.90 per 1,000 views.

 

The following Dr John Campbell video, was posted on May 6, 2021.

To date, September 23, 2021, it has received 754,384 views.

754,384/1000 x $9.90 = $7468

Dr John Campbell has received $7468 from this one video.

The most popular videos (hundreds of thousands/millions of views) have themes of Covid and Vitamin D, Zinc, Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin...

It is possible that telling an audience what they want to hear is very profitable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 22, 2021 by Paul A
video link

[Paul A]

@mrelwood

 

New York Times, September 22, 2021

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/22/us/politics/covid-vaccine-moderna-global.html

Pressure Grows on U.S. Companies to Share Covid Vaccine Technology

Moderna accepted $2.5 billion in taxpayer money to develop its Covid-19 vaccine. But officials in the U.S. and overseas are having trouble persuading the company to license its technology.

_____________________________

 

Discussions on drug pricing might be too lengthy, but I do share your concerns as well.

 

[RockyTop]

Disclaimer- As I have said for years, my job takes behind many security doors in many buildings in several states. I am not an important person. I can't say more or back up my information. 

So they won't tell you how to make the vaccine even though it will save the world. Do they want more money or are they hiding  something other than trade secrets?

YouTubers make lots of money yet he is saying the same thing as our local doctors. Several hospitals in my area said get the vaccine or you are fired.  Nurses and doctors are quitting. (10-30%) 

Several companies locally have said, get the vaccine or you are fired. About 55% were already vaccinated yet about 80% walked out/quit. The companies said never mind. ...... For now

I already had COVID. I am 13-16 time less likely to get COVID than someone that has been fully vaccinated. And I don't need a booster shot every two months. (I got this from my doctor)

 

[Paul A]

Google search:  "How vaccines are made".

Explanation of traditional vaccines and the new technology of mRNA vaccines.

Text based and videos available.

Credible sources include the WHO and CDC.

[mrelwood]

3 hours ago, Paul A said:

How much do youtubers make?

“your channel must have reached 4,000 watch hours in the past 12 months and 1,000 subscribers. That’s only to be eligible for the program. YouTube will then let you know if you’ve been approved after a review process.”

Dr John Campbell doesn’t come out to me as a person who would have monetized his YT account, and I didn’t see any ads when clicking on his video. So my guess is that he has gotten no money at all from any of his  videos.

But if your point was to bring up other instances that earn or receive a lot of money, there would’ve been numerous other instances that would be more in the nature of what I suspect in the vaccine money issue. For example instances that move money through unfair or unethical deals made usually behind closed doors, or instances that are simply greedy at an inhumane level. A kid earning millions from showing his toys in YT is not.

2 hours ago, Paul A said:

Credible sources include the WHO and CDC.

Hmm. Maybe we should continue in the “No topic” thread… 

[RockyTop]

1 hour ago, Paul A said:

Google search:  "How vaccines are made".

Explanation of traditional vaccines and the new technology of mRNA vaccines.

Text based and videos available.

Credible sources include the WHO and CDC.

That is the thing. We have been lied to about everything from the beginning of time until 20 years ago. They lied about everything and they admit it. they tested terrible drugs and weapons on black people, poor people. military people and prisoners. But now everyone is completely honest about everything. We just stopped lying because we are better people now. You can absolute trust the WHO and CDC now. The people in charge of the government are trust worthy. Companies no longer hide information that looks bad. News papers will print stories that go against their agenda. And I can quote people in back rooms without getting in trouble.

People that believe what they read from the official news baffle me. I have been involved in so many events that make the news and the truth has never been told. Not even if fluff stories. They lie to protect (good reasons and bad) They get it wrong, make a better story or they don't care.  Seeing how bad it is in my lifetime I wonder if it has always been this way and now everyone has a voice to report with. 

Has the WHO been right or honest about ANYTHING in the last two years? People really need to go back a year and see what the truth ended up being. Every one just follows todays lie and then forgets. 

[Paul A]

 

Dr John Campbell

In the above video titled: "Ivermectin, Mexico, Peru, India".

Members themselves can conduct a Google search: "Are covid death reports from (insert city/country) reliable"

The video mentions Uttar Pradesh (city in India), Mexico City, Peru.

Google results will contain results of credible sources that can corroborate that covid death reports from these cities/countries are not reliable.

______________

 

A previous post from a member was citing evidence that use of Ivermectin in Tanzania, with population of 58 million, 99.4% unvaccinated population, had to date only 1367 Covid cases, and only 50 deaths.

It seemed that Ivermectin was a miracle cure, and that a great conspiracy was keeping that information secret from the world.

It was actually incorrect data because: 

Authorities stopped reporting case numbers in May 2020 after President John Magufuli alleged that the national laboratory was returning false positives on papaya samples.^[2] Since then, Tanzania has become one of the few countries in the world that does not release COVID-19 infection data.

 

_____________

 

See previous post about Dr John Campbell, that he is not qualified or an expert on the subject matter.

See previous post regarding Dr John Campbell's disclaimer that clearly states that.

 

______________

 

Am not going to continue fact checking, checking veracity of claims, checking credibility of evidence, other theories, cures, treatments etc put forward by members.

It is too time consuming.

Members can conduct their own due diligence.

 

 

 

 

[Paul A]

Drug development is not exclusively the domain of large pharmaceutical companies.

There are many small companies around the world carrying out R&D on a very large array of medical research and drug development.

The AstraZeneca vaccine was developed by Oxford University, UK.

Drugs need to undergo the three phase clinical trials.

Stringent/rigorous testing, peer review.

Vaccines technology and manufacture have tremendous, proven historical success.

 

 

 

[Paul A]

Credibility

 

Publications like the Washington Post, New York Times, other prestigious news sources are credible because of reasons including but not limited to:

They are long established.

There is accountability.

They are peer reviewed.

 

Journalism is a highly skilled profession.

Investigative journalism is especially highly skilled.  It entails accurate, exhaustive research, exposing corruption of powerful people, death threats, actual death.

 

A journalist needs to have been intelligent enough to graduate from a prestigious university, competed against many other applicants from around the country, serve many years as a cadet to learn the profession, acquire skills, build contacts, build a reputation of trust/integrity/competency, before being entrusted by the editor with the big important investigations/story.

A huge investment in the career.

If a journalist lies, misrepresents, corrupt, grossly factually incorrect, etc, they and/or the newspaper can be sued for defamation, damages, compensation, possible jail.

A public apology, public retraction/correction, public humiliation, loss of career, loss of credibility, loss of reputation.

Credibility, trustworthiness is paramount.

There is accountability.

 

Rupert Murdoch's UK publication "News of the World" was shut down 2011 because of unethical behaviour regarding Milly Dowler.

 

Little known websites, non reputable newspapers, youtubers, non peer reviewed medical information, podcasters, radio hosts, anecdotal evidence etc, regarding medical information is probably not credible.

 

[mrelwood]

1 hour ago, Paul A said:

Publications like the Washington Post, New York Times, other prestigious news sources are credible because of reasons including but not limited to:

They are long established.

There is accountability.

They are peer reviewed.

They are businesses. Companies that need to get the ends meet. Companies that have huge investors and owner companies from completely different areas of business, including sales.

 To say that they could be blindly trusted would be naive and even downright wrong.

 There are too many articles on News Media controversies and distrust for me to share the links here. But boy do they exist.

 

[Paul A]

Scientific/academic journals are not businesses with the purpose of making profits.

Integrity, trust, reputation, credibility is critical to the existence of reputable papers like The Washington Post, The New York Times.

Independent journalism.  Their peers are other newspapers, other journalists, membership of news organizations like Reuters, AP, individual and collective accountability.

Sources are vetted, corroborated, checked, verified, evidence cited, authorship identified.

If and when they are wrong, there are serious consequences, including reputational damage.

 

Murdoch cable tv network Fox news is not independent or credible.

Revenue highly dependent on ratings.

If and when they featured any criticisms of former Potus, their ratings plummeted.

If and when they are not factual, but are inline with what their audience wants, their ratings are great, revenue is great.

 

Is Dr John Campbell a quack? 

Are conspiracy theories credible?

Is the article published without the name of the author, but a pseudonym, no accountability, in the little known 'The Desert Review' credible?

If the author of that conspiracy theory, or Dr John Campbell believes:

that Ivermectin is a miracle medicine with astounding results,

but big Government, big Pharma, etc are hiding the truth

if his/her motivation is to warn people

to promote Ivermectin as the miracle prophylactic

then they would be better served to submit their evidence, research, findings, information etc to a credible scientific/academic journal for rigorous analysis, peer review.

or submit the information to the vetting/analysis/scrutiny of a large prestigious, credible, large readership, influential, major city newspaper such as The Washington Post, The New York Times.

 

If it passes the scrutiny of expert peer review, vetting process of a major newspaper, then it will have credibility.

The readership of The Washington Post is much larger than a little unknown website like 'The Desert Review'.

 

 

 

 

[Paul A]

The AstraZeneca covid vaccine was developed by a team at Oxford University, led by Professor Sarah Gilbert.

The Pfizer mRNA covid vaccine was developed by the German biotechnology company BioNTech.

The Moderna mRNA covid vaccine was developed by Moderna.

 

As of December 2020, there were over 200 vaccine candidates for COVID-19 being developed.

A lot of drugs do not pass the rigorous testing of phase 1, phase 2 stage.

 

The large pharmaceutical companies do not necessarily produce drugs that they have developed themselves.

 

In the global efforts to develop a covid vaccine, many companies were developing vaccines to be candidates.

If and when a drug passes the initial phase 1 and phase 2 tests, and looks promising, the much larger/expensive phase 3 clinical trials is undertaken.

A lot of drugs do not pass the phase 1 or phase 2 tests.

Only around 1 in 5 vaccines are successful in the phase 3 clinical trials.

The big pharmaceutical companies have the manufacturing and distribution capabilities. 

The drugs they produce might have been developed by other companies.

The approval of a drug in the USA is by the FDA, not the pharmaceutical companies.

___________________________________

 

Or televise POTUS receiving the vaccines.

Or Dolly Parton.

 

 

 

[mrelwood]

1 hour ago, Paul A said:

Scientific/academic journals are not businesses with the purpose of making profits.

Sure. But news media are.

Quote

Revenue highly dependent on ratings.

If and when they featured any criticisms of former Potus, their ratings plummeted.

If and when they are not factual, but are inline with what their audience wants, their ratings are great, revenue is great.

Exactly. The news companies are dependent of content that pleases the public. Criticism toward POTUS, even rightful one, makes them lose revenue.

 There’s no way a news company with this basis of income can ever be non-biased and hence perfectly credible.

 

Quote

or submit the information to the vetting/analysis/scrutiny of a large prestigious, credible, large readership, influential, major city newspaper such as The Washington Post, The New York Times.

Do you think that Pfizer would be cool with paying hundreds of millions in ads to the mentioned channels if they started pushing for Ivermectin, making Pfizer immediately lose billions in vaccine sales?

 Or do you think that the CDC, WHO, or FDA would be interested in paying for costly Ivermectin trials and piss off one the largest companies they work with?

The laundry would be devastating. There already is a system in place for the vaccine, and the money is flowing great, this is definitely a ride that is not to be poked with.

Quote

The readership of The Washington Post is much larger than a little unknown website like 'The Desert Review'.

That alone doesn’t make the information false though. But I’m not interested in Ivermectin enough to look into the matter, but in my understanding it has been cited in various different sources.

 Just as a reminder, placebo works just as well or better than many peer reviewed, clinically trialed anti-depressants. Makes you sad, doesn’t it? 

Edited September 23, 2021 by mrelwood

[Paul A]

This is yet another conspiracy theory being proposed.

That The Washington Post, The New York Times, is conspiring to not push Ivermectin because it will cost them millions in advertisement revenue.

That the CDC, WHO or FDA are conspiring not to pay for Ivermectin trials because it will piss off the largest companies that they work with.

That the CDC, WHO or FDA are conspiring  to benefit from the system is in place for the vaccine, and that the money is flowing great.

 

The cost of Ivermectin trials would be insignificant in comparison to the benefits if it is a successful prophylactic to covid.

The US government would be very interested in saving taxpayer funds and lives.

_________________

 

The Washington Post are critical.  It was Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post that exposed Watergate.

It is the freedom of the press, exposing corruption, scandals that is safe guarding democracy.  Not so much an armed citizenry.

CNN are critical of former POTUS.

 

 

[Paul A]

Collecting data on covid deaths where the deceased had been taking Ivermectin would give a good indication.

Deaths of the prominent anti vaxxer, Ivermectin taking radio hosts is some indication, not conclusive, not statistically significant though.

 

Please also consider previous posts of all members differing viewpoints, reasonings.

[mrelwood]

2 hours ago, Paul A said:

This is yet another conspiracy theory being proposed.

It is not. It’s more a theory of human behaviour. I don’t have any knowledge or a theory about how things go around. To me it simply sounds plausible that there could be motives that are not shared in earnest.

Think about it from Pfizer’s point of view. They are scoring 30 billion in profits on Covid vaccines in this year alone. Then Pfizer’s friend says that he’s thinking about examining an alternative cure that would be really cheap. Mr Pfizer would do a quick calculation of losing about 50 billion in profits over just a few years. What would Pfizer do?

A.) Tell his friend that it’s a really good idea, and that they’ll have his full support despite losing a huge sum of money. It’s just money after all, and he’s a people person anyway.

B.) Tell his friend that it’s probably not a good idea, since the probability of it working very well is so poor, that he’d only be losing money. At the back of his mind Pfizer hopes that the friend will give up, because he already has a few nice boats planned for purchase for his mansions in Greece, that would not come to fruition if the money flow is lost.

C.) Get a bit angry at the friend because he’s not thinking of Pfizer’s livelihood. The new med couldn’t work  much better than the vaccine anyway, so what’s the point of competing with a friend? Pfizer would rather buy the friend in with a little of the vaccine money so he’d be less inclined to investigate on his own.

D.) Start yelling at the friend that if he’s really selfish enough to do so, their friendship is done.

E.) Threaten the friend that if he goes through with his plan, Pfizer would ruin the friends career. Pfizer knows all the important guys that make the industry after all.

Any other than A.) would already be giving in for a little greed. And I really can’t see how a person who’d go with A.) would’ve ended up as the head of a hugely successful commercial company.

2 hours ago, Paul A said:

The cost of Ivermectin trials would be insignificant in comparison to the benefits if it is a successful prophylactic to covid.

From the citizen perspective, sure. But that’s never the only goal of any large company, news channel, or government. It can’t be, because the risk of losing the part that keeps them running is too big.

2 hours ago, Paul A said:

The US government would be very interested in saving taxpayer funds and lives.

Damn how I wish you were an elected government officer! Because I believe that you are being earnest in your optimistic views of other human beings. I’m not. Seen it too many times.

 

2 hours ago, Paul A said:

It is the freedom of the press, exposing corruption, scandals that is safe guarding democracy.

Simply because of the existence of journalistic ethics? That’s a really beautiful view of the world, but there are way too many pointers of humans being humans, no matter what they do for living, and no matter how ethical they intend to be. When any organized group of people gets large enough, be it a company or something else, I guess the scale of the operation gets too distant for the workers to take personally. And I don’t believe there to be a single human being that is completely free of greed. It’s just not… human.

[RockyTop]

4 hours ago, Paul A said:

It is the freedom of the press, exposing corruption, scandals that is safe guarding democracy

That would be great!!! But they are only criticizing the left when they absolutely have to. They make up stories about the right then retract them a month later in small print. Then they go on with the assumptions of the original story neglecting all of the retractions. 
 

not credible:

CNN - agenda

WHO-  agenda 

CDC -  agenda 

Others not worth listening 
 

 

[RockyTop]

Conspiracy: 
This is me. 
You could tell me that I have two arms and two legs. I would say that you are probably right. Everything tells me that you are correct and that is what I will go with for now. I will always reserve the possibility that there is more to it. … Probably and very likely are the best that I have to give. I don’t see anything as absolute. … I don’t think absolutes exist…… but they might. 
 

I see most truths as very likely with missing or misleading information. ( I have stood behind the curtain too long)  I see some conspiracies as having some truth in them somewhere. ( some =more than 0). 

For example, Big foot does exist. I have know idea in what form. Man, beast, alien predator or pray, left over cave man,  imagination, drug induced hallucination. 
 

One of the best answers from one of my favorite people is “hmmmm?,… could be”  I think he was saying, I disagree but I am not all knowing. Some part of what you said  could be correct. 

[Freeforester]

9 hours ago, Paul A said:

Collecting data on covid deaths where the deceased had been taking Ivermectin would give a good indication.

Deaths of the prominent anti vaxxer, Ivermectin taking radio hosts is some indication, not conclusive, not statistically significant though.

 

Please also consider previous posts of all members differing viewpoints, reasonings.

Perhaps on vaccine deaths too..🤔

[OldFartRides]

From the horse’s mouth….

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html

 

Public safety is their job, their mission, and it’s backed by science.

They’re the best we got. It’s good enough for me.

Best,

Edited September 27, 2021 by OldFartRides

[Paul A]

Conspiracies can happen.  It is easier when the number of conspirators is small.

 

Profits.

The developer(s) holds the intellectual property, patents, rights.

Manufacturer(s) needs to enter into a licensing agreement with the developer(s).

A lot of drugs do not pass the phase 1, 2, or 3 stages.

Success rate of drugs gaining approval is very low.

The large projected profits will also be in part due to the extraordinary numbers of vaccines to be produced. 

Ideally enough for the entire World population 7.9 billion, twice over.

Probably would be better and more productive to focus on the incredibly simple, easy and totally legal use of offshore tax havens that corporations and wealthy individuals are able to use to avoid taxation. 

Tax avoidance is legal.  Tax evasion is illegal.

 

There is no conspiracy to suppress Ivermectin testing.

There are currently ongoing clinical trials of Ivermectin as a possible prophylactic to Covid. 

Oxford University, developer of the AstraZeneca vaccine, is one of the research organizations testing Ivermectin.  Currently 6000 volunteer participants.

Further information on Ivermectin trials in the following link.

The Atlanta Voice. September 20, 2021.

https://www.theatlantavoice.com/articles/ongoing-clinical-trials-will-decide-whether-or-not-ivermectin-is-safe-effective-for-covid-19/

 

 

 

Truth matters and is important. 

Accountability matters and is important.

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/26/981515184/dominion-voting-systems-files-1-6-billion-defamation-lawsuit-against-fox-news

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/04/business/media/smartmatic-fox-news-lawsuit.html

 

 

Yes Freeforester, it is very important to collect data on covid deaths of vaccinated people.

Science needs to be unbiased, impartial, objective.

 

Yes OFR, all adverse events must be recorded and information freely available to all.

 

 

In the face of a common enemy that to date has killed 680k American lives, it is strange to not see unity in the USA.

Bitter, violent, sometimes even deadly confrontations on mask wearing?

 

It is very sad and distressing to see the very deep, bitter, toxic divisions in US politics and society.

It is very sad and distressing to see so many of our American friends, and peoples of all races and creed, around the World, dying needlessly from Covid.