Did the CDC just admit that the PCR test cannot differentiate between COVID-19 and influenza?
Find out what’s going on, and what the FACTS really are!
PCR Test Cannot Differentiate COVID-19 vs. Influenza?
COVID-19 deniers and antivaxxers are claiming that the CDC has admitted that the current PCR test cannot differentiate between COVID-19 and influenza.
Their evidence? A screenshot of a CDC laboratory alert issued on 21 July 2021, stating that the CDC will withdraw the EUA (Emergency Use Authorisation) for the COVID-19 RT-PCR test.
What is fuelling their claim is the part where the CDC asked laboratories to switch to other COVID-19 tests that can “facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses“.
COVID-19 deniers and antivaxxers are calling this a CDC admission that the current RT-PCR test cannot differentiate between the two viruses, and COVID-19 could really just be influenza.
It also doesn’t help that some mainstream media misunderstood what the CDC is saying.
Yahoo! News, for example, claimed “CDC urges labs to use COVID tests that can differentiate from flu“, which unfortunately suggests that the current RT-PCR test cannot different between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.
Truth : PCR Test Can Differentiate COVID-19 vs. Influenza
The truth is using PCR to test for a single pathogen like the SARS-CoV-2 virus is incredibly wasteful.
In normal times, a patient’s sample would be tested against a panel of multiple respiratory illnesses, allowing a single PCR test to detect and differentiate for multiple viruses.
To speed things up during an emergency, the CDC applied for the Emergency Use Authorisation for their RT-PCR test that only detects SARS-CoV-2, which was introduced in February 2020.
The Emergency Use Authorisation is necessary to allow patients to be tested for a single infectious agent (the SARS-CoV-2 virus) in a given emergency (the COVID-19 pandemic).
To test for other pathogens, another PCR test would have to be performed, which wastes time and laboratory resources.
The FDA has since authorisedmulti-analyte panels for RT-PCR tests, which can test for multiple viruses at the same time. So it only makes sense for laboratories to start using them.
The CDC issued that laboratory alert to encourage laboratories to start using these multi-analyte panels, which would be useful in :
conserving resources and laboratory time : instead of requiring multiple tests, the sample can be tested once for multiple pathogens
helping doctors determine if the patient has COVID-19, or a similar respiratory viral illness, or both.
In particular, this would help doctors during the influenza season to quickly determine if the patient has COVID-19, or just influenza, or in rare cases – both of them at the same time!
COVID-19 deniers and antivaxxers will continue to push this lie, but the truth is – the PCR test can differentiate between COVID-19 and influenza virus.
Please Support My Work!
Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card!
Find out why the CDC is withdrawing their authorisation for the COVID-19 RT-PCR test, and what it means for testing COVID-19!
CDC To Withdraw EUA For COVID-19 Only RT-PCR Test
On 21 July 2021, the US CDC (Centers for Disease Control) announced that they would be withdrawing the Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) for their COVID-19 only diagnostic panel after 31 December 2021.
From 1 January 2022 onwards, laboratories in the United States will no longer be allowed to use the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, which was first introduced in February 2020.
This CDC announcement is meant to spur laboratories and testing sites to transition to “a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses“.
This would allow laboratories to test for both viruses at the same time, saving time and resources, especially when the influenza season begins.
Can Current RT-PCR Test Differentiate Between COVID-19 + Influenza?
At this point, I should take the opportunity to clarify this US CDC move, as it appears that even major news media do not quite understand what they meant.
Yahoo! News, for example, claimed “CDC urges labs to use COVID tests that can differentiate from flu“, which unfortunately suggests that the current RT-PCR test cannot different between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.
That’s why some people are claiming that the current PCR test is “fake” and “cannot differentiate” between COVID-19 and influenza, or that they are both the same virus.
The individual drugs may be US FDA approved, but the Ziverdo treatment protocol is NOT approved by the FDA.
The FDA certainly does not advocate using Zinc, Ivermectin and Doxycycline against COVID-19 as the Ziverdo Kit website suggests.
Fact #6 : Ziverdo Kit Only Sold By Prescription!
The Ziverdo Kit is manufactured by Windlas Biotech in India, and is a Schedule H prescription drug.
It can only be sold with a prescription, and its use must be directed by a physician.
It was reportedly distributed in the Indian state of Goa, as part of a COVID-19 Home Isolation Monitoring Kit in October 2020, together with a pulse oximeter, thermometer, paracetamol, vitamins, face masks, hand sanitiser and alcohol wipes.
But otherwise, you need a physician’s prescription to purchase it.
Fact #7 : Ziverdo Kit Online Prices Are Ridiculously Expensive!
Despite their advertisement claiming that it only costs US$10 per treatment, the Ziverdo Kit is really very expensive :
Your doctor may have told you that the COVID-19 vaccine cannot be given with other vaccinations, but that’s NO LONGER TRUE!
Here is what’s new with COVID-19 vaccines, and why it is safe to take one with your other vaccinations!
Earlier : Avoid COVID-19 Vaccine Within 2 Weeks Of Other Vaccines
The US FDA approved the Pfizer mRNA vaccine for 12- to 15-year old children (with 100% efficacy!) on 10 May 2021, and scheduled a meeting on 10 June 2021 to discuss making it available to younger children.
At that time, the US CDC recommended avoiding taking the COVID-19 vaccine within two weeks of other vaccinations.
Dr. Lisa Costello – a pediatrician at West Virginia University Medicine Children’s Hospital and a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics’ Committee on State Government Affairs, said,
“We do not yet know whether we will be able to co-administer vaccines — meaning you may have to get the Covid-19 vaccine solo, not with other vaccines.”
So parents were urged to catch up on their children’s missed vaccinations, in order to receive their COVID-19 vaccination at the earliest opportunity.
Now : COVID-19 Vaccine Can Be Administered With Other Vaccines!
On 12 May 2021, Dr. Kate Woodworth of the CDC’s birth defects division, said that the CDC is changing their earlier advice, and that the COVID-19 vaccine can be administered with other vaccines, even on the same day!
At a meeting of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunisation Practices (ACIP), she said,
“Extensive experience with non-Covid-19 vaccines has demonstrated that immunogenicity,” or the ability of a vaccine to provoke an immune response, “and adverse event profiles are generally similar when vaccines are administered simultaneously as when they are administered alone,”
On 14 May 2021, the US CDC updated their clinical considerations to say that COVID-19 vaccine and other vaccines can be administered “without regard to timing“, including on the same day.
The American Academic of Paediatrics also said on the same day that it supports giving childhood vaccines together with the COVID-19 vaccines.
COVID-19 Vaccine + Other Vaccines On The Same Day?
On 2 July 2021, the US CDC updated their clinical considerations to recommend that if a patient is receiving multiple vaccines on the same day, each shot should be administered “in a different injection site“.
They also pointed out that the deltoid muscle in adolescents and adults “can be used for more than one intramuscular injection“.
Their best practice for multiple vaccinations in a day include :
Label each syringe with the name and the dosage (amount) of the vaccine, lot number, the initials of the preparer, and the exact beyond-use time, if applicable.
Separate injection sites by 1 inch or more, if possible.
Administer the COVID-19 vaccines and vaccines that may be more likely to cause a local reaction (e.g., tetanus-toxoid-containing and adjuvanted vaccines) in different limbs, if possible.
US CDC On Administering COVID-19 Vaccine With Other Vaccines
COVID-19 vaccines were previously recommended to be administered alone, with a minimum interval of 14 days before or after administration of any other vaccines. This was out of an abundance of caution and not due to any known safety or immunogenicity concerns. However, substantial data have now been collected regarding the safety of COVID-19 vaccines currently authorized by FDA for use under EUA. Although data are not available for COVID-19 vaccines administered simultaneously with other vaccines, extensive experience with non-COVID-19 vaccines has demonstrated that immunogenicity and adverse event profiles are generally similar when vaccines are administered simultaneously as when they are administered alone.
COVID-19 vaccines and other vaccines may now be administered without regard to timing. This includes simultaneous administration of COVID-19 vaccines and other vaccines on the same day, as well as coadministration within 14 days. It is unknown whether reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccine is increased with coadministration, including with other vaccines known to be more reactogenic, such as adjuvanted vaccines or live vaccines. When deciding whether to coadminister another vaccine(s) with COVID-19 vaccines, providers should consider whether the patient is behind or at risk of becoming behind on recommended vaccines, their risk of vaccine-preventable disease (e.g., during an outbreak or occupational exposures), and the reactogenicity profile of the vaccines.
If multiple vaccines are administered at a single visit, administer each injection in a different injection site. For adolescents and adults, the deltoid muscle can be used for more than one intramuscular injection.
Please Support My Work!
If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer / PayPal / credit card.
Is it true that the WHO published revised guidelines stating that children should NOT receive the COVID-19 vaccine?
Take a look at these new viral claims, and find out what the FACTS really are!
Claim : WHO Now Says Children Should NOT Get COVID-19 Vaccine!
Websites like Precision Vaccinations, and antivaxxers on social media, the World Health Organisation (WHO) just published revised guidelines, stating that children should NOT receive the COVID-19 vaccine.
The World Health Organization (WHO) published revised advice on June 21, 2021, clarifying which populations should receive COVID-19 vaccines. The WHO’s website now states, ‘Children should not be vaccinated for the moment.’
Furthermore, the WHO says ‘There is not yet enough evidence on the use of vaccines against COVID-19 in children to make recommendations for children to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults.’
W.H.O recommends AGAINST cv19 jabs for children and adolescents! Praise the Lord
World Health Organisation (WHO) makes its stand against Covid vaccination for kids and adolescents. #fact
Truth : This Is Old COVID-19 Vaccine Advice By WHO!
However, they have all misrepresented what WHO said. Here are the FACTS…
Fact #1 : WHO Did Not Change COVID-19 Vaccine Advice For Children
Precision Vaccinations and anti-vaccination activists on social media call it “Breaking News” or claim that it was just revised on 21 June 2021 to warn against vaccinating children against COVID-19.
The truth is WHO did not change their COVID-19 vaccine advice for children. Their recommendation on not vaccinating children at the moment had always been in this page, from the very beginning!
But how do I prove this to you?
Using the Wayback Machine, we can see that the earliest archive of this page was 8 April 2021.
Here is a comparison of the WHO SHOULD GET VACCINATED section of the page, as it existed on 8 April and 22 June (today).
As you can see, this section NEVER CHANGED, between 8 April and 22 June 2021. Not a single word was changed!
So all those claims that this is new advice by the WHO is nonsense.
Fact #2 : That Was Outdated Advice By WHO
I can also tell you that even the 8 April 2021 version of this page is outdated advice by the WHO.
The team who posted this page probably forgot to update this section to reflect the changes over time.
Again, how do I prove this to you?
If you use the Wayback Machine to go to the first archive (8 January 2021) of the WHO page on the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, you will see that it had been updated to say that :
The vaccine has only been tested in children above 16 years of age.
Therefore, at this time, WHO does not recommend vaccination of children below 16 years of age, even if they belong to a high-risk group.
In other words, based on the existing trial results back in January 2021, WHO had already recommended vaccinating teenagers who are 16 years or older!
Fact #3 : WHO Guidelines Based On Science
The WHO has always based their vaccine guidelines on what the trial data says.
They only recommended that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine be given only to those who are 16 years and older, because the existing trial data at that time proved that it was safe for those who are 16 years and older.
Obviously, the WHO isn’t saying that vaccines are dangerous and children should not be vaccinated. That’s why their original recommendation was “children should not be vaccinated for the moment“.
When new clinical trial conducted on younger children prove that the vaccine is safe for them, the WHO will naturally update its guidance to reflect the new data.
Fact #4 : Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine Proven Safe For Adolescents
On 10 May 2021, the US FDA expanded the Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents 12 through 15 years of age.
This expanded EUA was issued based on a randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial involving 2,260 adolescents in the United States, 12 through 15 years old.
The side effects reported by these trial participants were consistent with those reported in the earlier clinical trial.
pain at the injection site
muscle and/or joint pain
In other words, they were mild and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was proven safe in adolescents.
Help Support My Work!
If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer / PayPal / credit card.
Recently, CIVDAC went viral with their claims on social media that Ivermectin can prevent or cure COVID-19.
Find out why it has gone viral, and what the FACTS currently are!
CIVDAC : Ivermectin Can Prevent / Cure COVID-19!
CIVDAC – COALITION on INTEGRITY of VACCINES & DRUGS AGAINST COVID-19 – recently went viral when they shared a statement on social media claiming that Ivermectin can prevent or cure COVID-19.
Take a look at what people have been sharing on WhatsApp and Facebook, or scroll down to a fact check of their claims.
11 May 2021
Media Statement on Life-Saving IVERMECTIN against Covid-19
By COALITION on INTEGRITY of VACCINES & DRUGS AGAINST COVID-19 (CIVDAC)
– Dato’ Nadzim Johan, Chairman of CIVDAC
– Brigadier General (Rtd) Dato’ Mohd Arshad Raji, Persatuan Patriot Kebangsaan (PATRIOT)
– Dr Abd Kadir Warsi Mohamed, Persatuan Pengguna Islam Malaysia (PPIM)
– Retired Commissioner of Police Dato’ Shabudin Abdul Wahab, Covid Research Centre (Asian Heritage Museum Group)
– Tunku Azwil Tunku Abd Razak, Gabungan NGO Islam (GNI)
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to Tan Sri Dr Rais Yatim, President of the Senate, for his full support, based on SCIENCE & DATA, on the use of well-proven Asian Wonder Drug called IVERMECTIN, both as a treatment for all Covid-19 patients and for the public to use it for prophylaxis against Covid-19, as outlined in the Open Letter dated 9 May 2021, to the Director General of Health, Malaysia, by Captain (Rtd) Dr Wong Ang Peng of PATRIOT.
IVERMECTIN was discovered in 1975 by Japanese scientist Satoshi Omura who won a Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2015. It has been used Safely and Successful for over 40 years with 4 billion people, mostly in the Third World, for all kinds of tropical diseases. It has been proven, based on SCIENCE & DATA, to be Super-Effective, Super-Safe, Super-Cheap & Super Easy-to-Administer (oral tablet) against all mutated variants of Covid-19.
There is No need for anyone to die from Covid-19, if only he/she is given IVERMECTIN. All the deaths from Covid-19 in Malaysia and around the world could have been avoided if all Covid-19 patients were given IVERMECTIN from the onset of their illness.
This is the clear message, based on SCIENCE & DATA, from independent and renowned world-class Covid-19 experts such as Dr Pierre Kory & Dr Paul Marik from US-based Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance, Dr Tess Lawrie and Dr Andrew Hill,. They have no vested interest whatsoever and are only concerned about saving lives and ending the pandemic in a sustainable manner.
Doctors in general are Not considered vaccine or drug experts. Malaysia does not have a human vaccine industry, we missed the chance during the Bio Valley Project (2003-2009). Hence, there are no real vaccine or pharmaceutical drug experts in Malaysia. The closest we can get to a vaccine or drug expert in Malaysia is someone like Senior Pharmacologist Professor Dr Mustafa Ali Mohd, former Deputy Dean of Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya and former member of World Health Organisation (WHO) Safety Panel for certain food chemicals.
Professor Dr Mustafa is the Senior Technical Consultant for our Covid Research Centre (Asian Heritage Museum Group). He has vetted through the science, studies and data about IVERMECTIN presented by the world-class Covid-19 experts mentioned above and he is completely satisfied that they are accurate and true.
We fully support proven safe vaccines against Covid-19. Safety is far more important than efficacy as there is no point for the vaccine concerned to work on you now but you die or become paralysed or crippled later on.
The experimental chemical gene therapy vaccine, which has been given to about 1.8 million people so far in Malaysia during Phase 1 of the Vaccination Programme, which according to the US Government National Institutes of Health’s website (https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/therapy/safety/), “can have very serious health risks, such as toxicity, inflammation, and cancer”, cannot prevent Covid-19 infection and it cannot stop the spread of the disease. Yes, this vaccine can reduce the severity of symptoms of Covid-19 but IVERMECTIN can do it much better, with a much lower cost and without the health risks of any side effects now or later on.
There have been numerous cases in the US and other countries, where the loved ones of the critically ill Covid-19 patients have to resort to court action to compel the doctors and hospitals concerned to given life-saving IVERMECTIN to these patients. In all these cases, the patients recovered fully when they were given IVERMECTIN.
The powerful, evil, selfish, hypocritical (with double standard) and imperialist forces overseas who are behind a dirty smear campaign, using their mass media, to dis-inform, discredit (directly or indirectly) and demonise IVERMECTIN, in order to DELIBERATELY deny LIFE-SAVING IVERMECTIN to critically ill Covid-19 patients and to let them die so unnecessarily, should be charged for mass murder and war crimes.
As ASIANS, we must Support and be Proud of our own Asian Wonder Drug, as proven by SCIENCE & DATA, against Covid-19. The government must immediately approved the use of IVERMECTIN, both as an essential treatment for all Covid-19 patients and for the general public for prophylaxis or prevention against Covid-19.
Fact #3 : No Evidence Ivermectin Works Against COVID-19
It is also false to claim that Ivermectin works against COVID-19, much less that it works better than mRNA vaccines.
While mRNA vaccines have been proven in clinical trials involving tens of thousands of people, ivermectin has not been proven in the same way.
In fact, the evidence (as you will see below) is mixed. And the dosage required for a therapeutic effect may be so high, it could be toxic to humans.
Fact #4 : No Court Order Case Recovered From COVID-19 Using Ivermectin
CIVDAC claimed that there are numerous cases where families of critically-ill COVID-19 patients got court orders to administer ivermectin and “in all these cases, the patients recovered fully“.
The most notable case in the US involved Nurije Fype whose daughter Desareta sued Elmhurst Hospital to administer ivermectin. She finally received a court order to have a doctor administer ivermectin every day from 3 May 2021 onwards.
After 13 days of ivermectin treatment, her daughter reported on 17 May 2021 that she is still “recovering”. That certainly does not sound like she has fully recovered from COVID-19 using ivermectin.
A South African court order also forced the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) to allow the use of Ivermectin against COVID-19.
However, there is no evidence that the use of ivermectin in South Africa through this court order resulted in a full recovery from COVID-19.
What Do Health Authorities Say About Ivermectin Against COVID-19?
WHO On Using Ivermectin Against COVID-19
On 31 March 2021, the WHO posted an advisory on Ivermectin, recommending that it be only used in clinical trials.
An independent, international panel of experts reviewed pooled data from 16 randomised controlled trials, and determined that the evidence on whether ivermectin reduced death and hospitalisation is of “very low certainty“.
Therefore, the panel cannot recommend the use of Ivermectin outside of clinical trials.
NIH On Using Ivermectin Against COVID-19
The US NIH looked at using Ivermectin against COVID-19, noting that it was shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures.
However, they also pointed out that the plasma concentrations needed to inhibit the virus would require doses up to 100X higher than those approved for use in humans!
Therefore, the NIH says that there is insufficient data to recommend for the use of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.
FDA On Using Ivermectin Against COVID-19
On 5 March 2021, the US FDA warned against taking Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, after receiving “multiple reports of patients who… had been hospitalised after self-medicating with ivermectin intended for horses“.
They pointed out that ivermectin can interfere with other medications like blood thinners, and an overdose can cause medical problems, even coma and death.
They also warned people that ivermectin meant for animals are highly concentrated and have vastly different doses than those meant for humans. Taking them can put your lives at risk.
EMA On Using Ivermectin Against COVID-19
On 22 March 2021, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) advised against the use of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 outside of randomised clinical trials.
They pointed out that the clinical studies of ivermectin so far were varied, with “some studies showing no benefit and others reporting a potential benefit”.
They also pointed out that for concentrations of ivermectin to be effective in the lungs, much higher doses than authorised would be needed. Hence, toxicity at such doses cannot be excluded.
KKM On Using Ivermectin Against COVID-19
On 16 May 2021, the Malaysia Ministry of Health (KKM) issued a response to claims that Ivermectin can prevent COVID-19 deaths.
They pointed out that a January 2021 placebo-controlled randomised trial involving 24 non-severe COVID-19 patients did not show any reduction in the proportion of PCR positivity after 7 days of taking 400 mcg/kg of Ivermectin per day.
They also shared that in March 2021, the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) published a randomised-controlled trial involving 476 adults with mild COVID-19 who were given a 5-day course of Ivermectin. There was no significant improvement in symptom resolution time.
They have initiated a randomised clinical trial (NMRR-21-155-58433) of their own to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Ivermectin in high-risk COVID-19 patients.
But until then, KKM is “not yet able to endorse Ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19 illness”.
Help Support My Work!
If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer / PayPal / credit card.
Can coffee compounds like Methylxanthine, Theobromine and Theophylline prevent or cure COVID-19?
Take a look at this viral COVID-19 claim, and find out what the FACTS really are!
Claim : The Chinese Used Coffee Compounds To Cure COVID-19!
After hydroxychloroquine and tea, COFFEE is another miracle cure for COVID-19 circulating on the Internet.
Here is the claim that has been circulating on social media since at least June 2020 :
Breaking News from CNN :-
Dr. Li Wenliang, China’s hero doctor who was punished for telling the truth about Corona Virus and later died due to the same disease, had documented casefiles for research purposes and had in the casefiles proposed a cure that would significantly decrease the impact of the COVID – 19 Virus on the human body.
The chemical Methylxanthine, Theobromine and Theophylline stimulate compounds that can ward off these virus in a human with at least an average immune system.
Whats more shocking is that these complex words that were so difficult for people in China to understand is actually called COFFEE * in India, YES, our regular COFFEE has all these chemicals already in it.
The main Methylxanthine in COFFEE is the stimulant caffeine. Other Methylxanthines found in COFFEE are two chemically similar compounds, Theobromine and Theophylline. The COFFEE plant creates these chemicals as a way to ward off insects and other animals.
Who would have known that all the solution to these virus would be a simple cup of COFFEE and that is the reason so many patients in China are being cured.
The hospital staff in china has started serving COFFEE to the patients 3 times a day, And the effect is finally in *Wuhan ” The centre of this Pandemic” has been contained and community transmission has almost stopped.
Please Share this message to your friends and family to make them aware about this blessing in the form of COFFEE in your kitchen.
So please all start taking coffee and get rid of carona virus.
Forwarded as received.
காபிதானே குடிச்சு வைப்போம்.
Can Coffee Compounds Cure Or Prevent COVID-19? Nope!
This is yet another Internet hoax, a modified version of the earlier tea cure hoax.
Dr. Li Wenliang did not document any case files for research purposes, or proposed any cure for COVID-19.
Neither are the Chinese using coffee to cure or prevent COVID-19 infections in Wuhan. Here’s how we know that…
Fact #1 : There Is No Such CNN News Report
A quick check of the CNN website and Google reveals that there is no such CNN news report, claiming that Dr. Li Wenliang proposed coffee as a cure.
There is certainly no CNN report on the Chinese using coffee to cure or prevent COVID-19 infections.
Fact #2 : Dr Li Wenliang Was An Ophthalmologist!
Dr. Li Wenliang, who was one of several whistleblowing doctors raising alarm about the new virus, was an ophthalmologist.
As such, he only treats eye conditions like cataracts, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy and the like. Not viruses like COVID-19.
His role in this COVID-19 tragedy was raising the alarm that was first set off by ER doctor, Dr. Ai Fen, who shared a patient’s report with her former classmates and colleagues.
Fact #3 : Methylxanthines Are Found In Chocolate, Coffee & Tea
Methylxanthines (or methylated xanthines) are a group of chemicals which include caffeine, theophylline, and theobromine. They are found not only in tea, but also chocolate and coffee.
Theophylline is predominant in tea, while theobromine is abundant in chocolate, and caffeine is the main methylxanthine in coffee.
If methylxanthines can really prevent COVID-19, why didn’t the writer suggest eating chocolate and drinking both coffee and tea for maximum effect?
Fact #4 : China Consumes More Coffee Than India
The Chinese may not drink as much coffee as they do tea, but it is really racist to say that unlike Indians, the Chinese do not know that coffee contains those compounds.
In 2019, the 1.43 billion Chinese population consumed US$8.2 BILLION worth of coffee, while the 1.37 billion Indian population consumed only US$903 MILLION worth of coffee.
In other words, the Chinese consume 8.7X more coffee per capita than the Indians. Could that suggest they are probably more aware of its health benefits?
Fact #5 : Coffee Cannot Cure Or Prevent COVID-19
If coffee can prevent COVID-19, countries with high coffee consumption would see far fewer cases.
Yet the top 5 consumers of coffee in the world – Iceland, Denmark, Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland – have over 2.17 million infections as of 22 February 2021, while China only has just over 90,000 infections.
Those 5 countries have a population of only 42 million, while China has 34X more people – 1.43 billion of them!
In other words, drinking coffee appears to make people 821X more likely to get infected by COVID-19!
Of course, we are not so silly as to make that claim, because correlation does NOT mean causation!
But what we can say is that statistically, drinking coffee won’t cure or prevent COVID-19.
Fact #6 : There Is Currently No Cure For COVID-19
As of 12 March 2021, there is no known cure or treatment for COVID-19.
But this is important – it only worked in the laboratory, when applied to Vero-hSLAM (African green monkey kidney) cells. That’s what it means when scientists say “in vitro” (in glass).
Fact #4 : Efficacy In Vitro Does Not Mean It’s Effective Or Safe In Vivo
Many things can inhibit or destroy viruses in vitro, including disinfectants and UV light that Donald Trump favoured.
But that does not mean they will work in the human body (in vivo), or be safe to consume, or inject into our bodies.
Some compounds work in vitro (in the lab), but fail to show any effect in vivo (in the body). Other compounds may work, but only at such high dosages that they may be toxic.
Further research, followed by animal and human trials are required to determine actual safety and efficacy.
In fact, the in vitro study showed that Ivermectin had a IC50 of 2.2~2.8 µM against SARS-CoV-2, which would mean therapeutic doses would likely be much higher than currently approved as safe for use in humans.
Fact #5 : A New 2021 Study Showed Potential For Further Research
A small randomised double-blind, placebo controlled trial of Ivermectin was conducted between 31 July and 11 September 2020, and the study was just published in The Lancet on 19 January 2021.
Half of the participants received 400 micrograms per kg weight of Ivermectin, while the other half received a placebo. All 24 participants had non-severe COVID-19.
Their SARS-CoV-2 RNA viral loads were then tested 7 days after taking Ivermectin or the placebo.
At the end of the trial, the study noted that there was :
no difference in the infectivity of both groups
a marked reduction in symptoms like anosmia / hyposmia (loss or reduction of ability to smell) and cough.
a tendency for lower viral loads and IgG titres
What the small study suggests is that Ivermectin does not appear to reduce infectivity, but could possibly reduce the severity of the illness.
This is a positive sign for further research into Ivermectin, not evidence that it is a cure or prophylaxis for COVID-19.
Fact #6 : US FDA Warns Against Using Ivermectin To Treat Or Prevent COVID-19
Interestingly, as FLCCC ramped up their campaign for Ivermectin in December 2020, the US FDA issued a warning against using Ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19.
It noted that the in vitro study only “described the effect of ivermectin on SARS-CoV-2 in a laboratory setting” and that “additional testing is needed to determine whether ivermectin might be appropriate to prevent or treat coronavirus or COVID-19“.
Any use of ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 should be avoided as its benefits and safety for these purposes have not been established.
Data from clinical trials are necessary for us to determine whether ivermectin is safe and effective in treating or preventing COVID-19.
Global Times from China, and RT from Russia have been particularly strident in their headlines :
GTCN : Recipients testing positive in Israel sparks concern over Pfizer vaccine efficacy
RT : Thousands of Israelis test POSITIVE for Covid-19 despite receiving Pfizer/BioNTech jab
While their actual report were tempered with facts and expert opinion, most people who share their news did not appear to have read them.
Instead, they were sharing the HEADLINES as evidence that the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine does not work.
Why Thousands Of Vaccinated Israelis Got COVID-19 Anyway
Let us share with you WHY it was no surprise that thousands of Israelis to get COVID-19, even after they received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
Fact #1 : There Was No Concern About Pfizer Vaccine Efficacy
There wasn’t actually any concern about the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine’s efficacy, when administered as it was meant to be.
Dr. Gili Regev-Yochay, director of the Infectious Disease Epidemiology Unit at the Sheba Medical Center outside Tel Aviv, said that, “the vaccine works wonderfully“.
A serological study by his hospital showed that 98% of vaccinated hospital workers developed a high level of antibodies after receiving their second dose of the vaccine.
A week after receiving the second dose, their antibodies jumped 6X to 20X higher than after their first shot.
Fact #2 : 99.44% Of Those Infected Received Only 1 Dose
While the headlines scream that over 12,400 Israelis were infected with COVID-19 after being vaccinated, the truth is 99.44% of them only received a single dose.
Fact #3 : Only 69 People Who Received Second Dose Were Infected
The Israelis tested 189,000 people after they were vaccinated, but did not mention how many received their second dose.
Only 69 who received their second dose developed COVID-19, and notably they were tested in the fourth week, which means they only just received their second dose.
Fact #4 : The Numbers Actually Show Immunity Building Up
If you tabulate the numbers provided by the Israelis, they actually show how immunity against COVID-19 builds up over time.
They show that immunity from the vaccine is low in the first two weeks, but builds up substantially in the third and fourth week.
12,358 cases 99.44%
69 cases 0.56%
Fact #5 : It Takes Time To Build Immunity
The mRNA vaccine doesn’t work immediately. It takes time for your body to react to the proteins it creates, and build up some immunity.
As the table above shows, it takes about two weeks after the first dose before you get some protection. This matches Pfizer’s warning that their vaccine will only offer some protection 12 days after the first dose.
It is therefore not surprising if some people continue to get infected after receiving their first dose.
Fact #7 : Pfizer Never Said Single Dose Would Deliver 89% Efficacy
You may have seen claims that according to Pfizer, a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine will deliver 89% efficacy between Day 15 and Day 21.
Neither Pfizer nor BioNTech ever made such a claim.
That was actually a controversial estimate by the UK Vaccine Committee (JCVI), which decided to calculate the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine differently – ignoring the number of infections in the first 2 weeks.
Fact #8 : US FDA + Pfizer Insist On Two Doses
Pfizer has consistently insisted that their BNT162b2 vaccine be administered as a two-dose regimen.
On 4 January 2021, the US FDA even issued a statement that there is not enough data to support administering a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine.
It would therefore be highly irresponsible for any health authority to only administer a single dose, without sufficient data showing that it would be efficacious.
Fact #9 : Israeli Results Show 93.4% Effectiveness
While some of the media suggest doubt over the Pfizer vaccine’s efficacy, the Israeli results actually show that it is as effective as the Phase 3 trial results show.
The Israelis vaccinated two million of their citizens, and tested 189,000 of them – a mix of people with one dose, and two doses.
It was from that 189,000 cases that they detected 12,427 people with COVID-19. That makes the Pfizer vaccine about 93.4% effective, even though many of those tested did not receive their second dose!
Other regulatory bodies may have their own minimum efficacy rates to licence COVID-19 vaccines. But not WHO.
Claim #5 : The Coronavirus Hides In The Paranasal Sinus For The First Two Days
FALSE. Coronaviruses of any kind, SARS-CoV-2 other otherwise, do NOT go for a 2-day holiday in your paranasal sinuses before infecting you.
That’s pseudoscience bullshit.
Claim #6 : It Takes A Few Days For SARS-CoV-2 To Reach Your Throat And Lungs
FALSE. She is probably confused by the incubation period, which is the time between exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and when symptoms start appearing.
After exposure to SARS-CoV-2, the virus will IMMEDIATELY hijack your cells to replicate. It takes a few days before it infects enough cells, and your body recognises and reacts to the threat, for symptoms to show.
But that doesn’t mean they are on a holiday in your paranasal sinuses, or taking their own sweet time trekking their way to your lungs.
A higher power magnification image shows the structure and density of SARS-CoV-2 virions (red) produced by human airway epithelia. Credit : EHRE LAB, UNC SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Claim #7 : Steam Weakens / Kills The Virus In The Nose
FALSE. Inhaling steam will NOT weaken or kill any virus in your nose. Inhaling hot steam at 60°C to 70°C can cause burn damage to your nose.
In fact, Dr. Satyanarayana Mysore, the HOD of Pulmonology at Manipal Hospitals reported seeing many cases of scalded airways and worsening asthma due to steam inhalation in March, April and May 2020.
Claim #8 : Steaming Was Promoted In China, Japan, Taiwan To Control COVID-19
FALSE. These countries have NEVER used steaming to control COVID-19. They simply used a mixture of :
physical distancing or lockdowns
mandatory requirement to wear face masks in public
stringent hand hygiene practices
She also FALSELY made the claim that those countries promoted steaming as a way to control COVID-19.
Claim #9 : Using Eucalyptus Oil While Inhaling Steam Works Against COVID-19
FALSE. No medical expert has ever recommended inhaling steam with eucalyptus oil. In fact, they are warning about the dangers of Essential Oil-Induced Seizures (EOIS)!
Dr. Thomas Mathew, Professor and HOD of Neurology at St. John’s Medical College Hospital, said that, “People must avoid adding essential oils, eucalyptus oil and pain balm to water while inhaling steam. These stimulate the brain and cause seizures. We see at least two such cases every month“.
Claim #10 : All The Doctors Are Inhaling Steam + Saying It Really Works Against COVID-19
There are tons of photos of doctors and nurses working in ICU wards, and they all have one thing in common – they are all wearing PPE including face masks and face shields.
There are NO DOCTORS inhaling steam to prevent COVID-19, because IT DOES NOT WORK!!!
And let me remind you again – doctors are WARNING against inhaling steam because it can scald and damage your airways!!!
Claim #11 : Supplements Help Against COVID-19
FALSE. There is no evidence that any supplement can help prevent or cure COVID-19.
Taking multi-vitamin supplements will not help boost your immune system, unless you have a very poor diet.
There’s a reason why they are called supplements – because they are meant to supplement a bad diet.
A good, wholesome diet, will provide your body all the necessary macro- and micro-nutrients it needs.
Did a nurse really faint after getting the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine? A viral video seems to show just that!
Find out what happened, and what the facts really are!
Did This Nurse Faint After Getting COVID-19 Vaccine?
A viral video is being shared on social media and YouTube, showing a nurse faint after getting injected with the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.
The video is usually accompanied by comments or warnings like these :
17 minutes after receiving the shot GATES VACCINE, NURSE PASSES OUT on LIVE TV
3 cameramen, witnesses were live, but stopped filming
Watch this nurse pass out after receiving the COVID vaccine. It’s so safe though, right? This will become a mass genocide if people continue to follow these rabid dictators.
This is an experimental vaccine that has not received official approval from government regulators. The Pfizer vaccine has only received EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) and the trials are still ongoing. So that makes this an experimental vaccine in my book and the public appears to be the guinea pigs.
After delivering an efficacy rate of 95% (p<0.0001) in its Phase 3 trials, the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine received its Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) from the US FDA.
Once it receives that EUA, it is no longer considered an experimental vaccine, even though it has yet to receive a full US FDA licence.
Fact #6 : Not All EUAs Are The Same
While it is true that the EUA is a shortcut, it is necessary in an urgent public health crisis like this COVID-19 pandemic.
A typical US FDA approval requires two separate, well-controlled studies to prove that a drug / vaccine / tool is safe and substantially efficacious – typically taking 5-10 years (if not longer). During that time, millions of people would have died from COVID-19.
Its EUA may be withdrawn if further data suggests that it doesn’t work. For example, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine received EUAs for use with COVID-19 even though NEITHER were tested for their efficacy against SARS-CoV-2.
But in June 15, 2020, their EUAs for use in COVID-19 were revoked after studies showed that they were completely useless against SARS-CoV-2, even killing people.
In that document, they stated very clearly that yes, there were six deaths in the trial, but only two of them were from the group that received the vaccine. The other four deaths were from the group that received a placebo.
That document included this statement about four volunteers developing Bell’s palsy after receiving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. It also noted that no one in the placebo group developed Bell’s palsy.
The media picked up on this, and ran stories on how four Pfizer vaccine volunteers developed Bell’s palsy.
And antivaxxers and Google University doctors quickly leaped on this news as a reason to be wary about the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
Does The Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Cause Bell’s Palsy?
With the frenzied coverage of these four Bell’s palsy cases in the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine trial, people are wondering :
does the vaccine cause Bell’s palsy?
is the vaccine really safe to take?
Let’s break down the facts for you, so you can better weigh the risks and benefits for yourself.
Fact #1 : Correlation Is Not Causation
First of all, it is important to understand that just because something happened during the vaccine trial, it doesn’t mean that the vaccine caused it.
For example, if you get infected with the flu virus after getting the COVID-19 vaccine, does it mean that the vaccine infected you with the flu virus? Of course, not.
There are many, many examples of how correlation does not mean causation, like this one which shows how ice cream sales correlate eerily with the number of shark attacks. Needless to say, selling ice-cream does not cause shark attacks!
Now, we cannot definitively say that the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine cannot cause Bell’s palsy. We simply do not have enough information to make that conclusion.
However, it is also wrong to jump to the conclusion that those four cases of Bell’s palsy were caused by the vaccine, because that is simply no evidence of that either.
Fact #2 : The Cases Were Within Normal Incidence
What many people forget is that Bell’s palsy occurs naturally in the human population, at a rate of 1~4 per 10,000 people.
In the vaccine trial, a total of 21,823 people were given the BNT162b2 vaccine.
We would expect anywhere between 2 to 9 people in that cohort to develop Bell’s palsy naturally in a year, or 1 to 4 people during the roughly 6 month trial period.
So the four reported cases would fall within the normal incidence range for Bell’s palsy – 0.01% to 0.04%. This was actually noted in the document THREE separate times :
The observed frequency of reported Bell’s palsy in the vaccine group is consistent with the expected background rate in the general population, and there is no clear basis upon which to conclude a causal relationship at this time.
This observed frequency of reported Bell’s palsy is consistent with the expected background rate in the general population.
The four cases in the vaccine group do not represent a frequency above that expected in the general population
In other words, even if you do NOT take the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, you have a 0.01% to 0.04% risk of developing Bell’s palsy anyway… every year.
Fact #3 : All Four Cases Recovered / Are Recovering
The document also noted that one case recovered within 3 days, while the other three were recovering after 10, 15 and 21 days.
As we pointed out earlier, Bell’s palsy patients commonly recover within weeks or months, even without medical intervention.
In other words, Bell’s palsy is NOT life-threatening, and generally resolves by itself. Quite unlike an actual COVID-19 infection…
Fact #4 : COVID-19 Mortality Rate Is Roughly 2.3%
Based on the 10 December 2020 global statistics, the COVID-19 mortality rate is approximately 2.3% – 69.9 million people were infected, and 1.59 million of them died.
Fact : Chloroquine Was NOT Approved By FDA To Treat COVID-19!
The fact of the matter is the US FDA approved chloroquine in 1944, and hydroxychloroquine in 1955, but neither have been approved for use against COVID-19.
On 19 March 2020, the US FDA issued a statement, with this section addressing chloroquine (with our emphasis) :
The FDA has been working closely with other government agencies and academic centers that are investigating the use of the drug chloroquine, which is already approved for treating malaria, lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, to determine whether it can be used to treat patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 to potentially reduce the duration of symptoms, as well as viral shedding, which can help prevent the spread of disease. Studies are underway to determine the efficacy in using chloroquine to treat COVID-19.
In the same statement, the US FDA also points out that :
[T]here are no FDA-approved therapeutics or drugs to treat, cure or prevent COVID-19.
Take our advice, please do NOT believe anything Donald Trump tells you. Listen to your Dr. Fauci and qualified scientists and doctors.
Stay safe, wherever you are!
COVID-19 : How To Keep Safe!
Here are a few simple steps to stay safe from COVID-19 :
Avoid suspected cases or disease hotpots, like hospitals, if possible!