INDIA: "AIIMS director and member of the country’s Covid task force, Dr Randeep Guleria, said Saturday that several parts of the country are reporting a surge in a supplementary fungal infection known as Covid-Associated Mucormycosis (CAM), which is linked to the “irrational use of steroids” in treatment."

https://indianexpress.com/article/india/guleria-flags-rise-in-fungal-cases-steroid-misuse-7316765/

https://science.thewire.in/health/under-pressure-to-treat-doctors-prescribe-drugs-even-when-they-dont-need-to/ This is also happening in India [6 May 2021]

"Post Vaccination Deaths Raise Concerns in India, Government And Vaccine Makers Silent

No Comment From Vaccine Makers

The Dialogue sent a detailed questionnaire to SII and Bharat Biotech both via email on Wednesday seeking to know the statistics regarding AEFI [adverse events following immunization] and the possible reasons behind such deaths. A reminder was sent to them on Thursday. 

A Public Relation Agent agent of the SII responded, “We have no comments regarding the same.” Bharat Biotech and their PR didn’t even bother to respond."

https://thedialogue.co.in/article/kxmSPNKRrW2UjCjY6Lqk/post-vaccination-deaths-raise-concerns-in-india-government-and-vaccine-makers-silent-

‘It is not clear why Jameel, who is currently director of the Trivedi School of Biosciences at Ashoka University, stepped down as the chief advisor to the forum but sources pointed out that he had been critical of Covid policies by government.

Most recently, he had written a piece in the New York Times, in which he had said that scientists in India are facing "stubborn response to evidence-based policy making."

Jameel, formerly the CEO of the Wellcome Trust DBT India Alliance, is known for his research in hepatitis E virus, confirmed to this newspaper, his decision to step down from the role but refused to comment further.’

https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2021/may/16/senior-virologist-shahid-jameel-quits-as-chief-advisor-to-centres-covid-genome-surveillance-project-2303348.html

Mr Vanden Bossche has thrown the gauntlet in Mike Yeadon's direction. I have informed Mike of this new yet perhaps inevitable development. Here is the said paragraph, yet Mike was also expressly mentioned in the accompanying tweet. As knowledge often is arrived to through thesis, antithesis and synthesis, for the purpose of fostering dialogue I am reporting Vanden Bossche's words here without a value judgement as to their scientific basis, I am not endorsing simply reporting them as the fact he expressly mentions Mike is noteworthy:

"..Even if M. Yeadon’s theory were to relate to natural infection, MHC class I-restricted cytolytic T cells would only be capable to control viral infection (i.e., by killing virus-infected target cells) at a later stage of infection (as it takes time to prime these T cells). In none of these cases, therefore, will cytolytic T cells be capable of preventing S-directed immune escape variants from being selected and enjoying a competitive advantage under the conditions described above. These cells play, however, an important role in controlling the infection in people who got the disease and thereby contribute to their recovery. Because adaptive cell-mediated immune responses do not appear before the infected person has been able to eventually transmit the virus, selective pressure on T cell-based immunity also has much less impact on the evolution of the virus."

https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/faq

Vanden Bossche: "As mass vaccination campaigns are first targeting vulnerable subjects (e.g., elderly, subjects with underlying or immunocompromising conditions or at high risk of viral exposure), viral transmission will increasingly occur among vaccinees and non-vaccinated, asymptomatically infected persons. Suboptimal S-directed immune pressure provides a competitive advantage to spontaneously emerging variants of which the S protein carries one or more mutations that enable stronger binding to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of susceptible epithelial cells. Stronger binding of S to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) translates into higher viral infectiousness. Consequently, when there is an opportunity for the virus to regularly encounter suboptimal S-directed immune pressure, as is typically the case when people are mass-vaccinated in the heat of a pandemic, immune escape variants with enhanced infectiousness will be selected and reproduce more effectively."

However I personally do not see why enhanced infectiousness is a problem if it comes with less virulence or a lower mortality rate:

"We must not conflate transmissibility with virulence, which is the actual level of danger.
The two are often confused, and lead to hysterical headlines regarding mutation. Generally, they have an inversely proportional relationship; viral mutations to higher transmissibility tend to become less virulent. A virus can change to spread more easily; however, this does not mean that it becomes more lethal. This simple fact can help to deflate the fear from much of the variant discussion.
Looking at the table, (fig 1), there are multiple mutations of SARS-CoV-2; however, all of the chatter about them causing harm is just that—noise. Evidence shows that our own T-cell recognition from previous viral infections is enough to combat these “scariants”. The most important metric to consider with variants is the daily mortality rate (fig 2). While the media typically focuses on cases which induces fear, the mortality rate is what determines virulence. It is true that case numbers spike as the virus becomes more transmissible, but if the lethality drops, it is clear that the neutralizing effect of T-cells within the population, as well as the lessening lethality of the virus, is causing the overall danger to shrink, not to increase. For instance, the common cold is very transmissible but not at all lethal." @LynnFynn

.https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.org/blog/variants-or-scariants

Here comes the "apology":

"SAGE-SPI-B scientists on a committee that encouraged the use of fear to control people’s behaviour during the Covid pandemic have admitted its work was “unethical” and “totalitarian”....

One SAGE scientist told Ms Dodsworth:
"There were discussions about fear being needed to encourage compliance, and decisions were made about how to ramp up the fear. The way we have used fear is dystopian."

Another SAGE member said: "You could call psychology ‘mind control’..."

The Telegraph reports:

“One SAGE member warned that 'people use the pandemic to grab power and drive through things that wouldn’t happen otherwise…

We have to be very careful about the authoritarianism that is creeping in'.”

Telegraph:

“Another member of SAGE said they were 'stunned by the weaponisation of behavioural psychology' during the pandemic... 'psychologists didn’t seem to notice when it stopped being altruistic and became manipulative.

They have too much power and it intoxicates them'.”

As SAGE SPI-B know very well, fear is our most powerful emotion. It is rooted deep within the inner reaches of our minds. When we're afraid, we do dangerous and irrational things.

Manipulating our most primitive instincts to change behaviour is taken from the textbook of tyrants

Over the past year, we have seen the biggest Campaign of Fear the world has ever seen.

And it has been at its worst in the UK, where SAGE + the Govt took a conscious decision to use fear to ensure compliance.

We now face an unprecedented mental health crisis..."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/14/scientists-admit-totalitarian-use-fear-control-behaviour-covid/

Ian Brown on the protest outside the BBC which some of us were at on Saturday. The crowd actually shouted "Shame on you! Shame on you!"

And the prophet's name was Ian Brown... 😉

https://youtu.be/7wK9on_AL-k

Still applies after all these years, probably always will. Perpetual motion..

The vaccine deaths are now equivalent to the casualties of a small war. I am using as reference the estimated casualties of the ongoing war in Ukraine (ongoing since 2014) and the combined US, EU & UK Covid19 vaccine deaths in 4 months. The numbers are now over 10,000 deaths but below 15,000 deaths in both cases. Crickets from the BBC on both. Just a statistic, the Covid19 vaccine show must go on. The silence of the media must continue unperturbed.

Code of ethics of the British Psychological Society. All SAGE-SPI-B psychologists should be struck off:

"Discussion

In this study of immunogenicity of the first dose of the mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among solid organ transplant recipients, the majority of participants did not mount appreciable antispike antibody responses. However, younger participants, those not receiving anti–metabolite maintenance immunosuppression, and those who received the mRNA-1273 vaccine were more likely to develop antibody responses. These results contrast with the robust early immunogenicity observed in mRNA vaccine trials, including 100% antispike seroconversion by day 15 following vaccination with mRNA-12735 and by day 21 following vaccination with BNT162b2.6
Limitations include a convenience sample that may lack generalizability, lack of serial measurements after vaccination, and lack of a concurrent control group without immunosuppression. In addition, these data represent the humoral response to the first dose of a 2-dose series.
These findings of poor antispike antibody responses in organ transplant recipients after the first dose of mRNA vaccines suggest that such patients may remain at higher early risk for COVID-19 despite vaccination. "

Immunogenicity of a Single Dose of SARS-CoV-2 Messenger RNA Vaccine in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients | Surgery | JAMA | JAMA Network
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777685

Guess what? The gene modifying injections are not even required, even if they did work and were safe, for 90% of people:

"A majority of uninfected adults show preexisting antibody reactivity against SARS-CoV-2

"Using a highly sensitive multiplex assay and positive/negative thresholds established in infants in whom maternal antibodies have waned, we determined that more than 90% of uninfected adults showed antibody reactivity against the spike protein, receptor-binding domain (RBD), N-terminal domain (NTD), or the nucleocapsid (N) protein from SARS-CoV-2. This seroreactivity was evenly distributed across age and sex, correlated with circulating coronaviruses’ reactivity, and was partially outcompeted by soluble circulating coronaviruses’ spike. Using a custom SARS-CoV-2 peptide mapping array, we found that this antibody reactivity broadly mapped to spike and to conserved nonstructural viral proteins. We conclude that most adults display preexisting antibody cross-reactivity against SARS-CoV-2, which further supports investigation of how this may impact the clinical severity of COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 vaccine responses."

https://insight.jci.org/articles/view/146316

Science is amazing. The above research says only 10% of people don't already have pre-existing antibody reactivity to many SARSCoV2 proteins. Working backwards from first principles on my pinned post I figured out only 5% of people are at risk of severe Covid19 (OK in a cruise ship situation they are exposed to sunlight, without it in the middle of winter the figure is probably closer to 10%). Does this reflect the picture presented by the media and government psychologists? Does this justify the indiscriminate mass vaccination campaign?