We both know there's no number. As long as it's serving their purpose collateral damage is irrelevant. Hence epidemic illegal immigration around the globe, etc, etc.
Collateral damage is always a predictable outcome of any infection until the body recognizes the infection. Look, we all know that scaffolds collapse from time to time. Yet, we still utilize them because they are useful. Since someone died from a scaffold fall yesterday, we should not ban using all scaffolds. That’s your logic? Look, Epstein-Barr Virus was deadly when it was first contracted. Over time, it adapted so the outcome of infection was more favorable to the virus to survive. Today, more than 90% of the world has EBV. It adapted over time so that it didn’t kill its host, therefore killing itself. This phenomenon is played out through many different viral infections, although not all. Even Herpes Simplex D has become much safer over time. That shows a pattern. In this case, SARS-cov-2 has proved to follow that pattern, so far. Taking the shot isn’t going to save you from death. Death comes for us all, regardless of if we’re ready for him. Death will be the last Angel defeated before we find Paradise in our eternal sleep.
Best part about the covid-19 vaccine is, that you have a much lower chance of getting myocarditis or getting hospitalized, compared to getting infected without the vaccine!
That was so odd to me. My wife, an ICU nurse, would come home and cry about every day during the heat of it. It was such a contrast to what my wife was experiencing. I will never understand those dancing videos.
@charlag569 yeah man I remember I would dance the night away while having to preform cpr at minimum 5 to 6 times a shift for countless people during the height of if, crazy how I had that much time when there was so much suffering and pestilence. Oh wait we didn't have time for that silly shit because a vast majority of our community was dying all the while having people like this fool telling people not to get vaccinated and it wasn't that serious.
Literally got the two shots myself, my neighbor had a heart attack right after her second dose as 35 year old healthy woman, you can’t pretend these were completely safe unless you literally just lie.
I don't doubt his intentions, but he doesn't have the necessary expertise to appraise evidence, hence some of his views are wrong. Prof. Vinay Prasad (promoted to full professor) does a much better job, though he is very fiery and draws hate from both pro-vax and anti-vax communities.
My favourite little quotes/headlines from the pandemic that I just can't forget. "Vaccinated people do not carry the virus, do not get sick." (A blatent lie from the CDC director.) - Rochdale Walensky live on NBC. "Toxic masks in canadian schools and daycares recalled." (Made in China.) - CBC News, 26th of march 2021 by Thomas Gerbet. "People not wearing masks are sociopathic." (Said by a sociopath no doubt.) - CNBC, 2nd of September 2020 by Cory Steig. "SARS survivors have high levels of Anti-RBD antibodies 17 years after infection." (An older study I can't find anymore but definitely read pre/early pandemic.) "Chinese experts anally swab entire bejing school after 9 year old tests positive." 😮 - 26th of January 2021 by Gabriel Keane. "Cautious fully vaccinated man dies, docters say it could have been worse if he was not vaccinated at all." (How?) - The Hill, 11th of August 2021 by Christian Spencer. "New CDC director expects annual covid shots for the most vulnerable groups." _I have to laugh._
It was Mike Yeadon ex-Pfizer chief scientist whistleblower who pointed out something important. Selectively protecting vulnerable groups would seem like an important strategy in the light of the failure of vaccinating everybody, e.g just vaccinate the elderly. But, as he points out, the elderly are PRECISELY the sector of society that does not respond to the vaccines. Their immune systems cannot properly respond. Yeadon mentions that this has been shown time and time again for the flu vaccine. So there.
Such a weird notion, that simply because someone misspoke, that the entire vaccine should be discredited because of that. Anyone that has a loved one that was in a nursing home can see the vaccines were effective though.
@@jackeagleeye3453 my father in a nursing home bc of a stroke....yeah...I can see the benefits .... another patient came living there after a stroke and surgery to safe him when on holiday in Spain. Churgin to him : you were vaxxed?? I mainly operate vaxxed who got shortly after vax a stroke.... You are right...look in the nursing homes seeing the safe and very effective
I had repressed any memory of this ‘expert’. If I had remembered him - I’d have hoped never to see him again. These people constantly make accusations of cherry picking and such like, well I’ve never witnessed so much cherry picking. I’ve no interest in his qualifications but I’d bet money his pay relies on him having a rather narrow field of view in line with the pharmaceutical industry.
@@deadreckoning6288 - Peter McCullough sells useless supplement pills to you loons at $75 a bottle. Is that the money you were talking about? Simone Gold made millions of dollars and bought herself a mansion from pushing worthless treatments at gullible anti-vaxxer loons. That money?
@@teresakarr8328 Or the opposite. Anti vax is not pseudo science at all. By all means there SHOULD be a way to let people in the industry KNOW about your vaccine injury and that for the most part vaccines do hurt some people.
@@FFGG22E I feel genuinely sad for you. People like you are beyond the pale. You live in a completely different epistemic reality and, unfortunately, there's absolutely nothing that would change your mind.
You ask about the Korean study's comorbiditys and he dodges the question, just saying "well most of them were unvaccinated" He literally did not answer the question. How many of them had comorbidities? His answer was pure sophistry.
You were not considered vaccinated until two weeks after the second shot, so anyone who died within that time frame were considered unvaccinated, that's how they fiddled the numbers.
Are you serious ? He answered it completely. He even explained what comorbidities mean. Did you not listen or are you simply stupid ? Let's assume stupid.
Here's the thing: the average number of years lost by someone who dies of COVID-19 is 13-15 years. Comorbidities do no mean you are going to be dead by Christmas.
They constantly claim that the polio vaccine ended the polio epidemic in the 1950's. Now they claim vaccines aren't suposed to prevent infection and transmission.
It does though, less effective than what was maybe shown in tge trials doesn't mean it's not effective at all. Any reasonable logical person would take the option that would improve they're health outcome versus not.
Why even bring this up. This was like a pipe dream that no scientist stuck with. Maybe a better aspect to focus on is the fact that in every demographic the vaccinated did significantly better than the unvaccinated. Just to be clear we are talking about deaths and hospitalizations. So you are focusing on something that was a non-issue whereas people dying is cool. I suggest you need to reassess your beliefs.
He did a good job of explaining why he came to the scientific conclusions he did, but you can tell he hadn't put much thought into the ethics and human rights of the situation. Several times Zuby would ask about the moral aspects of things like censorship and forced vaccination, and Wilson would walk right up to the edge of taking away people's rights and then realize it wasn't going to sound good. So then he'd just back off and say "something should be done" but he was unwilling to say what. If there's anything this episode convinced me of, it's that it's not just about the science.
Great observation. He constantly hedges his position saying things along the lines of, "of course I support free speech, but we need to understand it's irresponsible for the social media companies to just allow misinformation run rampant.."
I havent seen the whole interview yet, but did Zuby bring up the 5X mortality rate amongst young people post covid? -Young healthy people just dropping dead from heart failure at an alarming rate - which just happens to take place right after a mass vaxination with a new untested medicine....
@jackeagleeye3453 "Anti-vaxxer" used as you have invoked it is nothing more than a thought terminating cliché. Anyone following the CDC's current advice is on their 9 shot. 2 to start and in a few months they will be going on their 10th shot as they take their 8th booster. If you are not at least 7 shots in you @jackeagleeye3453 are an "Anti-vaxxer" just as much as anyone who took no shots. If you are 7+ injections deep at this point the majority of people at this point think you're an idiot and you are in the company of less than 5% of other idiots. So at this point you are either an anti-vaxxer or an idiot.
He actually stated at the beginning that he works for "Jan sen" so that is, I believe, Janssen Biotech, makers of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine.
lol you think me corrupt like your parents ? No he is not. Stop telling us about your parents . Do you think both your parents put together have the integrity as Dr Dan Wilson has in his left little toe ?
@@wzpu3283so I understand that it’s a pre requisite to be an antivaxer that one must be dumb . So it’s given you last be very dumb but do you also have to cheap ? Just because you are too dumb to point out where he is incorrect should kit mean you have to compare them with your parents
I agree with Zuby that there should not have been covid vax mandates. Overall the policies around covid were bad and had a negative effect on the population.
Zuby is right on this. A study pub. in PNAS showed mandates actually reduced uptake of boosters and flu shots. Mandates would've been much less controversial if applied only to older ppl.
Antivax, antivax, antivax, this guy is like a cracked record and he thinks that we are all dumb, he called Dr. Peter McCullough, arguably the top man in his field, a bozo..he needs to learn some respect..
> Dr. Peter McCullough, arguably the top man in his field What is his field these days? Selling worthless supplements to you dumb-dumbs for $75 a bottle?
Hearing ppl speak is never dangerous. What’s dangerous is not allowing ppl to air their views….whatever those views are as long as they fall within pre existing law. This dude says he’s against censorship but in his next breath says social media companies should censor.
I amyet to meat an antivaxer activist who is honest or has not harmed humans even children. So fir example this clown says mRNA vaccine is dangerous, lol
when people like alex jones spread absolute filth for years and years until the families were forced to take legal action what do you suggest instead? are lies protected under freedom of speech
I've literally had him try to tell me that cases went down in Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, and Peru in Spring 2020 immediately after the implementation of faucism.
I like his style. He is non confrontational which gives the interviewee an opportunity to really speak. It's just unfortunate that Dan waffles on while not saying much of substance but I don't think pushing him on anything would have resulted in anything other than an " I will look at the paper and let you know" as he's not even clear on the studies he's quoting from.
@@clairewheeler2937 I would have loved Zuby to ask him more pressing questions about these studies. Just because something is in a study, that doesn't automatically translate to the same outcome in the real world.
@@reallyshel personally that's exactly what I would have done too. I would have wanted to go through each study point by point but that's what comments sections are for. We can go through them. I did and saw the holes in his argument. The way he conducted this interview meant there was more time to get into the mandates and lack of efficacy whereas one or 2 studies from south Korea don't really tell us much at all. Especially not in the timescale of the study whereby it was only for 6 months and the first month there was no rollout of childhood vaccines while the rest were in those most at risk with no mandates with an extremely low uptake amongst the children even up to 2023 from what I'm saw and the study he mentioned was from 28 Feb 2021 to august 2021 and the first 5 to 11 yr old vaccines were not in use until the 30th march 2021. Then the one with 46 deaths in kids 22 had comorbidities and 24 didn't but the conditions they died from are not only caused by viruses. For instance myocarditis and encephalitis, strokes that sort of thing. He avoided letting that be known by saying something which was true which is that only 4 of those deaths were vaccinated but he failed to mention that the first study was only for six months and the second study that he mentioned about the 46 deaths was 13 months after the end of the first. So no was the answer he should have given. Neither study was for the 3 year period.
@@reallyshel yes there is. you can compare vaccinated population to un-vaccinated. you can compare hospitalisation, duration of stay and mortality. all this and more was done and vaccinated people get less sick and die less than non-vaccinated. hth
Guy is wrong with many things, but overall he sounds and formulates his thought patterns in wokeism. His uppity prissy tone. His talkdown talking style. He's an activist doosh imo🤷
Dan's take on Vitamin D is pretty whack. 90% of Canadians are considered vitamin D deficient. The fact that he says "but you can't give someone vitamin D in the hospital to cure COVID" sounds like a pretty disingeuous version of the argument. I like how Zuby countered with "but giving someone a vaccine once hospitalized wouldn't either."
Remember old black and white photos of hospital patients outside in the sun in their beds. That generation figured it out but then the information died with them. Forgotten public knowledge.
I don't agree with what most of this guy is pushing, but I do respect him being willing to participate in a dialogue with opposing views. He is one of the few that will.
IFR is a much better indicator than CFR, contrary to what the guest says. He then argues that CFR is a better indicator and that we should not only look at people that have died, showing he does not understand the meaning of the word “fatality” in case FATALITY rate. Citing from John Ioannidis’s study Age-stratified infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in the non-elderly population: “The current analysis suggests a much lower pre-vaccination IFR in non-elderly populations than previously suggested.”
“The CFR is not the same as the risk of death for an infected person - even though, unfortunately, journalists sometimes suggest that it is. It is relevant and important, but far from the whole story.” “The key question for understanding the mortality risk of a disease is the following: if someone is infected with the disease how likely is it that they will die from it? The answer to that question is captured by the infection fatality rate, or IFR.” (Our World in Data)
Young guy Dr. Dan Wilson has a lot to learn. He reminds me of myself back in the day when I worked at Pfizer. Reminds me of myself when I was his age interms of making the good decision to go to industry instead of staying in academia, but also being naive about politics, policy, industry influence and propaganda. Hopefully he figures things out.
I also got some flashbacks. Unfortunately I don't think he'll figure it out having invested to heavily in the present position. Interesting to note him saying that he used to be a conspiracy theorist, but science made him wake up.
I don’t think he has fallen prey that why he fights lies from antivaxers . Eg Zulu is clearly harmful but does not understand it . There is not a single reason save allergy to not get primary civ vaccine . The science abd facts are so crystal clear about it . Yet in this comments side thin under his video I find one dumb comment after another and no body cares about facts.
One important point I would like to make, re: v*ccines and other interventions: *Public Healthcare,* as a concept, is something that should be avoided. It lumps everyone into one overly simplistic category ("the public") and applies one-size-fits-all healthcare solutions. Healthcare should always be based upon the individual, because we all interact differently with different diets, supplements, medications, and more.
This guest says he works for Jannsen (J&J) and keeps bringing up studies that support his position. There are no doubt studies that don't support his position, which he wont mention. The problem is that with censorship, lots of non narrative studies don't get published, and this guy knows that. I would not waste my time debating this individual because all he's doing is taking notes when his argument points are weak, and he's simply going to find big pharma funded or narrative studies to try and support his position. The host had lots of excellent points that the guest really could not counter - the best point was on Risk/Benefit for this vaccine. The guest simply took notes, so my guess is he is going after Podcasters because they are effective at countering the BS narrative of big pharma and the media. Again, this individual stated that he works for J&J, so he is on a mission to discredit Podcaster that don't share his/ big pharma's narrative.
My scientific papers are real science, because they agree with my opinion, your scientific papers are fringe science, or pseudoscience, because they don't agree with my opinion.
I've been to many dozens of meetings hosted by pharmaceutical "drug reps." They virtually always make the case that their drug's benefits outweigh it's risks, not only for people who are sick, but also for people who are in a group they consider "at risk." In almost all cases, they also say that even given to a healthy population, more undiagnosed people would be saved that would die from prescribing the drug. So, the implication is that everyone walking in the office should be given the drug statistically speaking. Does Dr. Wilson feel that any time a drug company makes this claim, and can produce papers that support this statistic, a healthy person should be started on a drug? I think it's further complicated in the case of a vaccine that is relatively new in large human trials. It's simply not possible to know yet what results will be in the following decades. I've watched other well researched recommendations change radically just in the 30 years I've worked around the field. Would his policy actually be as simplistic as medicating everyone when drug company studies claimed their drug would likely be more beneficial than harmful?
Who made Dr. Wilson the arbiter of what is bad science? I think he should have direct debate with authors of the papers he calls "bad science" so he can be directly confronted about his conclusions. He is not all knowing of all things.
@@motiOn732 he also has a t-shirt that bears the legend ‘tHis iS wHaT a $ciENtiST LoOks LiKe’. at least crazy old dOc hOoTERz wears his lab coat !!! 😂🤣😂🤦🏽♂️🥴🤡
@@motiOn732 With apparently little regard for other scientists who write scientific papers to be published. Just my personal opinion after watching many of his videos.
I'd love to see him debate Steve Kirsch, the data guy on the "vaccines" that aren't and "vaccine" injury stats. Steve would wipe the floor with him, but that's not going to happen. Nobody will debate Steve Kirsch, despite the big money he always puts on the table for those he invites to throw down.
Calling people that reject only mRNA "anti-vax" is intellectual dishonesty. That's like calling someone teetotal, because they don't drink one brand of beer.
The label 'anti-vaxxer' is used to slander those who are considered dissidents for questioning their government's collusion with the corrupt companies of the pharmaceutical industrial complex.
I'm not confident that Wilson's definition of gene therapy is actually on the level. Whether a therapy treats genetic disease is arguably superfluous ...gene therapy defined as a medical intervention which functions at the level of gene expression (as mRNA lipid nanoparticles clearly do) would seem to be the most straightforward definition. I suspect Wilson has selected a narrower definition because this functions as a workaround, enabling exclusion of mRNA lipid nanoparticle injections. Therefore this would represent a rhetorical attemp to make a public relations equivalence between an entirely novel experimental treatment and traditional vaccines such as polio which the public is broadly more familiar and comfortable with.
And the pharmaceutical heads admitted just that in videos expressing their excitement about this entirely new delivery mechanism. Not to mention Dr Dan glosses over the entirely new MRNA delivery. I have yet to hear him address the actual warnings of those who developed the technology!! Conveniently discusses RFK Jr in Rogan but ignores Dr. Malone and company.
“And for us therefore, we are really taking that leap -- us as a company Bayer -- in cell and gene therapy, which to me is one of these examples, where we are really going to make a difference, hopefully, moving forward. Ultimately the mRNA vaccines are an example for that cell and gene therapy. I always like to say, if we had surveyed two years ago in the public, ‘would you be willing to take gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body?,’ we would have probably had a 95% refusal rate. I think this pandemic has also opened many people’s eyes to innovation in the way that was maybe not possible before.” Stefan Oelrich, Bayer AG’s Board of Management and head of their Pharmaceuticals Division, 2021
He seems like a company man through and through. Does he not understand that what he considers as ‘anti-vaxxers’ were mostly pro-vax until they got injured. 🤷🏽♂️ Most of those folk stopped at 3, but now will be classed as anti-vaxxers because they’ve not kept up to date. 🤷🏽♂️
Most of the supposed vaccine injuries you loons claim are nothing of the sort. Anti-vaxxers are hugely dishonest narcissists with no sense of responsibility.
@@FrostekFerenczy oh dear, oh dear fRoStY. bit late in the game for you to continue down that path. at this stage your just embarrassing yourself even further 😂
He also doesn’t mention how his fellow covidian propagandists changed the definition of “anti-vax”. Prior to 2021, anti-vax meant someone who is opposed to all vaccines and/or never received any vaccines. But in 2021, the covidians changes the definition to anyone who opposes the covid-1984 “vaccine”, anyone who opposes the C19 vax mandates, and anyone who even questions the C19 vax. Regardless if we got the C19 shot or not, and regardless if we got past shots and just opposed the C19 shot. This is completely Orwellian!
@@lw1zfogsays the most dishonest and dumb clown . You always confide him with your dad . I have told you he is not third class like your dad . Don’t feel ashamed just stop acting like your dad .
Sounds like someone's suffering from a nasty case of buyer's remorse. Maybe try engaging your 14 brain cells before falling for such an obvious scam, next time. You're welcome.
@emmajones8590 Obviously the one who's at odds with reality. The one who works for a huge drug company. The one who doesn't understand basic statistics. The one who's lying though his teeth. So, Dan.
I'm sure that Dr Wilson is a nice person but he is truly one dimensional. He reminds me of a musician who can only play if they have sheet music in front of them. If you say "let's jam" , he doesn't know what to do. He'd need to see the studies to prove that the sky is blue. I've known people like him and, for all their academic brilliance and degrees, they are incapable of operating outside of the box and always lack basic common sense skills.
Yes. This is a guy who need a peer-reviewed study for everything, every little detail. Some silly (and over-exaggerated) examples: As a child he probably refused to walk because his mom never showed him a peer-reviewed study on walking. Later in his life he burned his hand time and time again because there were no peer-reviewed study that said that a wood-burning stove is hot after 5 hours of usage. PhD-students are highly theoretical and they often forget how the real world actually works ==> Politics, human behavior & incentives, policy-making and lobbying, propaganda and so on. The total disregard of what effect the ongoing cancel-culture have on doctors and other professionals is another one. Very few (brave) people will risk their livelihood (job, career, reputation) to do the right thing (speak out loudly & truthfully) which is why you get the false impression that "everyone" is onboard with the ruling narrative. It's a "either you're with us, or you're OUT". Most people will choose to follow, especially those who have a lot to risk by not following. The more "exclusive" job you have, the more bound you are to follow the narrative. Dissenting voices will quickly be frozen out and dismantled. This is a crucial point that Dan Wilson and his minions don't understand - or more likely, don't WANT to understand - because it's true and it really shakes up their (ideological) narrative. (Real) science and reality/truth are not important anymore. Following a certain ideology that leads to a narrative is.
Dan said 2000 kids died from covid over three years and that the study he's quoting said 30% DID NOT have co-morbidities.... which means 70% of these kids DID have co-morbidities. Again, showing how low the mortality rate is for kids that are healthy. That 90% were unvaccinated (many factors beyond vax status come into play) doesn't change the fact that young healthy kids, by and large, don't need this vax!!!!
16:43 wrong. He presented a false dichotomy whereby the choice was vax or not vax or mask or not mask. Those weren’t the only options, those were the only options OR ELSE! He is directly implying his complicit was as a medical professional in using government authority to enforce law or policy based on views he agrees with. He does not see morality, he sees a means to an end. The government is his means, the end is you. 16:50 in all age groups better off vax vs no vax is another false dichotomy lol this is his theory of what is best but in reality this doesn’t take into account previous infection or comorbidities. A vaccine does not give you antibodies. I repeat the vaccine does not fix you if your immune system is wrong. Your immune system the limiting factor to taking a vaccine. If you are immunocompromised the chances of being no injured from the vaccine is AT LEAST the same as being classified as an extreme severity in condition when contracting ‘covid-19’. This is simple. Something that people don’t understand that an obese person that is immunocompromsied due to his obesity may not defend well against a virus, or any foreign substance for that matter. The issue is that the issue of safety ENOUGH is already assumed to be safe for this entire argument but this entire argument is not on the degree to which it’s safe, it’s IF it’s safe or not. Zuby thinks they’re not safe. DTF thinks there are tradeoffs. This again is the exact morality on display here that we can see. He sees human suffering as a trade off. We should be saving life. Not trading it off. In an event where a virus spreads, we cannot contribute or weaken the healthy population to protect the vulnerable. This is anti science, it’s extinguishing fire with oxygen. 19:18 Zuby is agreeing with him here but let’s all make this clear, DTF cannot specify the time frame or further information and declares he’ll send it to Zuby. In this video we can only go on arguments made and DTF has already submitted on not having the evidence to exclaim or present handy to support his claim. So his evidence can be given the benefit of the doubt in this sense ONLY bc we are arguing in good faith. His argument about Korea and this study is moot unless you can answer the follow ups by your opponent. It does not follow that unvaccinated is the factor that made them sick, comorbidities included. As we have explained the vaccine can’t supersede the immunecompromised comorbidities and if this study didn’t include immunocompromised as a disntugihsing factor then it’s irrelevant. DTF is claiming that 100% of the time it’s better to be vaccinated. We’ve established that sort of his reasoning is flawed bc to him any appropriately sized negative to the positive is subjective. If only 1000 people die and it saves a million for every 1000 then it’s safe. I want everyone to know that this is NOT safe by ANY medical authority ever. Especially for not a vaccine. DTF is already hanging by a thread. 26:17 comorbidities is a touchy area and this is why none of this shit is even analysable. The government big pharma poisoned the well that NEAR ZEO real high confidence interval can be said about anything during the ‘pandemic’ for ‘covid-19’. How many people had kidney failure due to covid? How many people had pneuomonia due to covid? Ahh another loaded question presented in black and white. Michael Jackson’s would love this guy. Let’s ask how many people presented with a positive PCR for covid were treated with remdesivir or ventilators? Let’s see. Hmm. A lot. Hmm oh yeah remdesivir can cause kidney failure and ventilators can cause pneumonia in misuse. Notice how I’m not speaking in absolute. Can cause. Unless he accounts for these factors his argument is MOOT. MOOT. If your study doesn’t evaluate its conclusion with appropriate factors that could undermine its integrity then it’s, say it with me, BAD SCIENCE. 29:20 yawn, vitamins d not effective. Listen to this dumbass literally talk about how vitamins d is not an effective treatment, AS A FALSE DICHOTOMY. These vitamin supplements work in a multi drug therapy which is why Peter McCullough talks about and who DTF believes is a misinformation and even worse a disinformation super spreader. Wow. He is so ignorant to the actual other side that he doesn’t even realise he agrees with him. Vitamins D may not solve covid and you don’t need a peer reviewed study but were vitamin d deficient people worse effective? In extreme sense YES 100%. Who the hell has ever told someone to not take vitamin d bc it won’t work. There is ZERO harm for a sedated, malnourished average micronutrient American or Westerner to not take vitamin d. In fact India gave it to their covid out patients patients in Uttar Pradesh along side another SAFE DRUG ivermectin. I’m not claiming it’s effective but notice how the narrative DTF is playing is overestimating the efficacy and safety use case for his interventions and the lack of critical analysis to ivermectin, vitamin d, hydroxychloroquine, monoclonal antibodies, EXERCISE, SUNLIGHT, POSITIVITY, SOCIALISATION, NO LOCKDOWNS. This guy is brainwashed. 32:27 doctors have always said eat well and get exercise They incentivised getting French fries for vaccines, donuts, fast food. They shut down gym. They covered skate parks in sand. They locked up parks. They fined you for being outside. Domestic abuse went up. Alcohol abuse went up. Depression went up. Do we need a peer reviewed study to show that these are helpful to fighting covid? Im sure there are. Do you need to be a doctor to make that identification? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂no 42:09 covid vaccines are gene therapy. They mRNA tech is a gene therapeutic with the use case of the protein being produced being to illicit an immune response. Also note that all mRNA interventions in the past have failed and the covid reputation for it is being bolstered to usher in more vaccines as mRNA in theory is a crazy super scientific advancement. Even with how much I think DTF is wrong and how I didn’t get the vax. The application is amazing in theory but does not work in reality. It’s gene therapy. It’s in the documentation for BNT162b2 43:34 it is not anti vax misinformation to state that 17 million people have died from the covid vaccine. It’s incredulous. That is subjective to you. Argument from incredulity. This statistic comes from a projection study that estimates 17 million based on the adverse event rate. The exact same thing the pro vax people do when their final string of denial wants to last, they claim ‘it’s saved millions of lives’ well that statistic is derived the exact same way the 17 million statistic so you can’t have it both ways. Once again. This is a motivated reasoning fallacy. He over accepts his own arguments but under accepts opposing 47:11 LOL this is not an argument is it? Is DTF a podcaster? Why is his side job criticising independent podcasters? Did he do a module on that? On the topics of saying that there’s a good argument to show that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. This is something that reveals that DTF is an ignorant fool. He has not done his research. He may claim he has but clearly hasn’t. RFK said something NOT extreme. He just say an argument could be presented and that’s fine. He’s not a misinformation spreader. He’s actually revealing your cognitive distance and censorship reflex trigger. I see the HIV Aids conspiracy as legitimate and it needs analysing and the during that DTF doesn’t get it back then and doesnt get it now for covid. Except AIDS was such a crazy long time ago and Fauci was the super spreader of misinfo saying you can catch it thru contact in the kitchen. 47:26 classic post modern tactic of referring to words as harmful. I’m sorry I’m gonna be debate bro but this is 49:02 appeal to emotion and anecdotal. Skip. 49:47 saying things that are easily demonstrated as false is not harmful or hatespeech. It’s free speech. This whole argument is anti free speech. Quite telling tbh. You can personally dislike Joe for saying wrong stuff but you can’t weight that opinion higher than your critique of authority and medical individuals. This means your entire point is about an appeal to populum whereby you’re worried ideas will hurt or damage peoples brain. Who put u in charge of policing this? 55:45 convincing people you disagree with is harmful. Oh no my authority that gives me power is melting 🧙♀️ 1:12:07 he’s said a lot of stupid shit since my last edit but we’re on polio for some reason lol this guy is the red herring of dreams 1:15:24 lol the old vax immunity is better than natural immunity. No it’s not. Natural immunity is always better than vaccinated. The vax was training your body on the spike protein from Wuhan, when they came out we were approaching omicron and studies showed that it was the spike that varied the most between contact. Even the vax manufacturers said we’re going all in on the spike protein lol so how could that be better than a more recent and nature immune response from the virus? Also this doesn’t take into account the incidence of adverse effects. Very early on there were studies showing that if you had natural immunity you’re at greater risk of adverse event from the vaccine so again he’s cherry picking 1:29:29 DTF advocating that this would’ve still happened if the rules were a lot less strict and promoted liberty is laughable. This dude is more tone deaf than Stevie wonder. He has no idea and will not listen to anyone who smells of an opposition that isn’t rooted in his subjective beliefs
I’m glad there are people like you out there in the real world. I could have made some of the points you did but 1. I’d have made a worse job of it and 2. I’d have had to bear this fool for longer than I did. It’s good to see people keeping up despite the disinformation of people like DTF.
@@Jacob-yb6bv I hate this dude debunk the funn, he attacks doctors critical on covid authority crying there is no censorship meanwhile these doctors get censored for talking about this if they reply. He’s an NPC baffles me how people are so ignorant even past all the Twitter files n Fauci leaks showing this whole thing was bullshit
So if the scientific literature says something you don’t like then that means by definition it’s probably not true. That’s very convenient. No need for any scientific rebuttal, just waving your hand is enough. You’ve convinced me!
Zuby asks if most children who died in USA had co morbidities, Wilson says “no” but immediately goes on to say “30% of the kids had NO co morbidities.” I.e 70% of children, or yes ‘most children’, who died DID have co morbidities.
this guy is disingenuous he conveniently leaves out all the rest of the aspects of the mrna v that really matter instead, he's spewing the same propaganda we've been hearing from the news, and he doesn't do it in an even remotely more convincing way
2021 -- 80% of American adults take the first two jabs. 2022 -- only 20% of American adults take the Omicron Bivalent booster. 2023 -- only 10% of American adults take the XBB 1.5 booster. Conclusion: America has spoken. The jabs SUCK.
They didn’t look at total risk. That was the whole point of the Great Barrington project. That was the point made by Scott Atlas. They weren’t looking at life yrs and who was being infected and how vax mandates and lock downs negatively impacted people’s lives. We put higher value on the lives of the elderly than we did of the young. That is not acceptable and I am elderly.
This guys is quite amateur. Vitamin D3 deficiency takes weeks to correct as it has to build up after consistent high dosage. So treating a hypoxic covid patient with eg a large bolus of vitamin D3 would not register. No doubt the vested interests who carried out this "study" knew this. Also D3 is fat soluble which is why obses people are prone to deficiency ie it ends up in their fast, not in their system, hence the deficiency.
For me, Zuby won this debate with intelligent discussion points and questions. The guest seemed to focus primarily on vaccines despite Zuby making several attempts to broaden the discussion. He seemed arrogant in that his view was the only reasonable one and any other view was based on ignorance! Was not convincing at all in his arguments for me. I have listened to many scientists and medical practitioners over the last 4 years and they take into account the nuances of healthcare. There is not and should not be a one size fits all approach to healthcare.
I found Dan very confescending, so head up his own, anyway. You conducted yourself well Zuby as always and amazed by your patience and wish I possessed your tolersnce.
I would love to hear his explanation about Africa. Their younger age, exposure to the sun etc. Also working for Janssen speaks volumes. Good talk, showing discussions can be congenial even when we are poles apart on ideas.
Those are the chief reasons that Africa had less trouble with covid. The very young population and the fact that they spend so much time out of doors, where airbourne virusses spread less easily.
zuby, now interview Kevin Mckernan. Funk works for Eurofins doing “clinical trial work” but doesn’t tell you that it’s one of the largest C19 testing labs in the world. Funk has 3 publications, t h r e e, under his belt. doesn't come close to experts like Sin Lee, Mckernan, or Buckhault, who all have hundreds of publications and debated & exposed Funk.
And being a scientist doesn't make you an expert on virology, epidemiology general health, statistics, etc. They aren't infallible and shouldn't be treated as such. It's why the pandemic response was a disaster
@@adamdrouin2295 the response was a bureaucratic disaster and a scientific triumph. the smart people saved us and the morons running public policy failed us.
How does one say politicians want to look good, news wants to sell a story, and then believe pharmaceutical companies and funded scientists wouldn't be wrong or lying?
Please have an expert on that can debate Dr. Wilson on the scientific issues. He repeatedly misrepresents what the literature actually says. For one, the vitamin D RCTs on mortality show a 34% lower risk with a confidence interval < 1
Your science is only as good as your data, so you can't have good science with bad data. Zero data on long term side effects of mRNA vaccines, so even if the data was good on short term risk which is questionable, we have zero science on long term side effects. The risk is highly dependent on the individual. I was sleeping in the same room with my wife when she got it from someone that was fully vaccinated at work. I ended up not even getting it from her despite no covid vaccines in the household. Her coworkers on the other hand, were all fully vaccinated and spread it to their also fully vaccinated spouses. I have since been exposed a few more times and still didn't get covid and haven't spread it to anyone. What is the argument for me to get the vaccine? It might boost my immunity? Really?
Interesting VitD debate… as someone who was VIT D deficient but otherwise healthy and ate healthy, I got covid prior to rollout but my spouse who had sufficient VitD levels did not get sick despite age, (over 65 and decade older than me with compromised liver / immune function.)
For the record, I didn't choose to not get vaccinated because of the mandates or because I was uninformed, I didn't take the vaccine because I simply didn't want to.
If you believe that has anything to do with the vaccine, why are the countries with the highest vaccination rates not running out of places to bury the bodies? They don't even have higher death rates than pre covid. When you look for something that is not there, you can still see it sometimes.
The medical community is now looking into covid vaccines linked with cancer. This was a concern 2 years ago. Why did the community waited for so long to make this consideration? Easy. You milk as much of the covid frenzy. When the well has dried up, you look for new fundings. Covid have shown that science is manipulated. People are influenced by money. Do you think a doctor would object to getting millions of dollars?
I think was injected cancer cells in this v..... normal cancer have millions of cure treatments, They have dancer research to understand how to make cancer, not to cure it.
Lol I couldn't help noticing zuby looking really healthy with a plant behind him while Dan looks like a stoner who has eaten so many barbecues he wears a shirt with the word on. It's like a before and after pic.
Hard disagree. LibsOfTikTok does nothing but platform Leftist nonsense and look how devastating that has been to the Left. And that's without even considering the moral implications of buying into their idea of "justified censorship."
@@lw1zfog If you don't have any scientific evidence to provide to bolster your point, why do you think you even have a point? If all of science is fabricated by biG pHaRmA as you put it, how do you know this is the case or what the real science is without having any to reference?
A good conversation.I have my views and these weren't changed after watching this but it would certainly have been far better had more of this dialogue taken place throughout the pandemic and even now.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." - At least he declared at the start that he works for The Jansen Pharmaceuticals Company of Johnson & Johnson.
Back in Spring 2022, I had back-and-forth exchanges with Wilson, and in doing so, I found him to be the height of dishonesty. He begins by talking about "bad science" and the misuse of papers. When discussing lockdownerism, he relied on a pair of papers "The Efficacy of Lockdown Against COVID-19: A Cross-Country Panel Analysis" by Alfano and Ercolano and "Back to basics: measuring the impact of interventions to limit the spread of COVID-19 in Europe" by Cortis and Vella King. I pointed out severe flaws in these analysis, such as Alfano using absolute case counts as opposed to per capita case counts, and also defining "lockdown" as "lockdown imposed by the federal government" and Cortis being a paper published in March 2022 that only considered European countries on the timeline of January-May 2020. So, for example, neither the US nor Canada had a "national lockdown", so they would be defined as not having a lockdown in the Alfano paper, despite much of both countries being under "lockdown" as imposed by state/provincial governments. In the conversation with me, Wilson claimed without evidence that "across the board, lockdowns resulted in a reversal of COVID case and death rates from increasing to decreasing", and it is a "fact" that "in early months of the pandemic, we saw a very consistent decrease of COVID cases following the implementation of lockdowns". However, when I pointed out various indisputable cases of exactly the opposite outcome, such as Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, and Peru, his response was nothing but gaslighting, saying that "in every example you mention, the increase and decrease in cases of COVID track with relaxation and implementation of lockdowns, respectively." When Wilson complains about "people not willing to learn", based on my experience with Wilson, that merely means people not willing to blindly follow his dogma that is at odds with the facts. I consider Zuby an absolute saint for putting up with Wilson for 2 hours.
I get what you’ve tried to do by interviewing this creature but it’s not like he’s simply mr. Pharmaceutical and therefore someone with a mainstream opinion to have a discussion with he’s a nasty piece of work who’s spent 4 years ignoring the problems and calling everyone with a different opinion names. He’s spent hours abusing the so called misinformers and he seems hell bent on ignoring reality.
Do you think you are about as shady as Dr Wilson’s left little toe or do we have to multiply your intelligence 20 times to even get close to his left little toes smarts ?
It takes several days at significantly high levels (not RDA levels) to get Vitamin D levels in blood to rise to the point where they would be helpful against covid. Giving moderate doses for a few days to someone hospitalized for covid and saying, see, Vit D doesn't work is what those that want to discredit D would put in a study. Studies on IVM with low doses given late in treatment is the same thing.
It was stated in 2020, then anti-vaxxers acted like the clueless loons they are and pretended this was news back in 2023. At any rate it's unethical at the start of a pandemic to test for reduction in transmission. As it happens it does reduce transmission somewhat as shown in many studies since then, but it's main aim is to prevent covid infections from becoming too serious.
So if this is the one he's talking about the south Korean study of 42 million, it's 36.9 million which equated to 153,183 AE's from 4 brands of COVID vaccine. 80% after first dose and 63% of those within a day. 4.5 % were severe adverse events. Increasing with age but let's be clear this study only runs from Feb 28 to august 2021 and South Korea had a limited supply of vaccines so they prioritised those perceived most at risk. I am looking now to see when the vaccines were rolled out to the under 18's but as they only began giving to the elderly on the 26 of feb I wonder how many children had even had a jab at that point. March 31 they started 5 to 11 year olds so almost a month after the start of this study. And it's only recommended in those at high risk, not in the general population as a whole. Looking to a more recent study it states that to this day vaccination rates are very low in children: the COVID-19 vaccination in children 5-11 years is recommended only in high-risk group and remained a choice among most healthy children in Korea, whether to get COVID-19 vaccination largely depends on their parents’ autonomy. Therefore, parental value judgement weighing the pros and cons of the pediatric vaccination for COVID-19 ever became more important and it appeared to be skewed to conclude not getting a vaccination for their final decision among most Korean parents. In this study it also states: As of January 2023, the COVID-19 vaccination rate for at least two doses among Korean children 5-11 years is low at 1.1%. We summarized the COVID-19 vaccination status for the pediatric population (5-17 years) with comorbidities through July 2022 using the National Health Insurance Service database. Pediatric patients with comorbidities had higher vaccination rates than the general pediatric population (2.4% vs. 1.1% in 5-11-year-olds [P < 0.001], 76.5% vs. 66.1% in 12-17-year-olds [P < 0.001]). However, there were substantial differences according to comorbidity category, and the 2-dose vaccination rate was lowest among children with immunodeficiency in all age groups (1.1% in 5-11-year-olds, 51.2% in 12-17-year-olds). The COVID-19 vaccination rate among Korean children has remained stagnant at a low proportion despite ongoing outreach. Thus, more proactive strategies are needed alongside continuous surveillance. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10427210/#S1 I believe this is the study he first mentioned: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S120197122200145X So while the one he quotes is less than 5 months data in a very low vaccinated subsection of the population I can not find any current childhood statistics after vaccines and the study he mentions is still shocking to read the vast number of adverse events seen in all age groups including the young. Now to the study of the 46 deaths Of the 46 children who have died of COVID up to September 2022. So annoying extra 13 months of study time past the previous study mentioned. Not the same study period as Dan alluded to. The study shows that : Among all cases, 47.8% (n = 22) had underlying diseases including neurologic diseases (n = 14), malignancy (n = 3), endocrinologic diseases (n = 2), obesity (n = 2), genetic syndrome (n = 2) and renal diseases (n = 2). Among these, one case had neurologic, endocrinologic and renal disease and one case had malignancy combined with renal disease. Among the 24 children with no underlying diseases, the reason for death was documented in 13 cases; myocarditis (n = 6), multiorgan failure (n = 3), disseminated coagulopathy (n = 1), brain swelling (n = 2), and encephalitis (n = 1). Among the 22 children with underlying diseases, the cause for death was documented in 9 cases and respiratory failure (n = 3), sepsis (n = 2), pneumonia (n = 1), pulmonary embolism (n = 1), cardiomyopathy (n = 1), and encephalitis (n = 1). One case was re-infected after 4 months in an immunocompromised child with malignancy. Four cases were vaccinated with 2 doses, all 12-18 years of age with underlying diseases (neurologic disease n = 2; obesity, n = 1; genetic disease n = 1) and 91.3% (n = 42) were not vaccinated. Among unvaccinated cases, 13 cases were 0-4 years of age and 8 cases and 21 cases were 12-18 years and 5-11 years of age, respectively. So that equates to 24 with no underlying conditions and 22 with. But look at the reasons for the deaths of the 24. These are conditions that happen regardless of whether a virus is present. For instance encephalitis is a known side effect from other vaccines. We could do with more detail on these. Plus if we look to the time of death it seems that many didn't make it to the hospital in the first place which will inflate numbers of death as they had no treatment at all: Among fatal cases, 58.7% (n = 27) occurred during admission whereas 41.3% (n = 19) occurred before admission. 4.3% (n = 2) were found dead before or on arrival and 37.0% (n = 17) died in the emergency department before hospitalization. The median days from diagnosis to death was 2 days (range: −1 day to 21 days). Thirty-seven percent (n = 17) died on the day of diagnosis; 41.3% (n = 19) within 1 to 5 days after diagnosis, 17.4% (n = 8) at 6 to 14 days, 4.3% (n = 2) at 15 to 21 days from the diagnosis. One patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 one day after death. Among the 39 subjects in which date of symptom onset was available, median time from symptom onset to death was 3 days (range: 0 day to 23 days). Of those, 15.4% (n = 6) died on the day of symptom onset and 59.0% (n = 23) at 1 to 5 days, 17.9% (n = 7) at 6 to 14 days, and 7.7% (n = 3) at 15 to 28 days after symptom onset. So questions need asking as to why they didn't make it to safety and why death is so rapid from onset of symptoms. Seems pretty fast killing for a virus considering it takes about 5 days to culture it in the lab I am lead to believe. Then the symptoms look dodgy as only 19% have a cough and 17% of those are diagnosed as pneumonia with 2 showing bacterial infection : When analyzing the symptoms of the cases, fever was reported in 30.4% (n = 14), respiratory symptoms (cough, sputum) in 19.6% (n = 9), dyspnea in 32.6% (n = 15), myalgia or lethargy in 21.7% (n = 10), altered consciousness in 26.1% (n = 12), seizure in 21.7% (n = 10) and gastrointestinal symptoms in 32.6% (n = 15). Pneumonia was diagnosed in 17.4% (n = 8) and two cases had combined bacteremia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Acinetobacter spp, respectively. Pharmacological treatments administered were remdesivir in 21.7% (n = 10), dexamethasone in 37.0% (n = 17), intravenous immunoglobulin in 19.6% (n = 9), tocilizumab in 4.3% (n = 2), and antibiotics in 30.4% (n = 14). None of the children had received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir. For respiratory support, 28.3% (n = 13) were on mechanical ventilation, 2.2% (n = 1) used inhaled nitrogen oxide and 8.7% (n = 4) applied extracorporeal membrane oxygenation So not only are the symptoms to be questioned, so are the treatments. Remdesevir is known to be toxic and dexamethesone I have seen mentioned. Plus ventilation has been discussed as a bad protocol due to high deaths resulting. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36647219/
A question to ask him would be how many people need to die of something, or get injured by something, before it is no longer considered safe?
We both know there's no number. As long as it's serving their purpose collateral damage is irrelevant.
Hence epidemic illegal immigration around the globe, etc, etc.
As long as it's making money they don't care
the big pHARMer likes the phrase ‘correlation is not causation’
With older vaccines it was less than 20. Total.
Collateral damage is always a predictable outcome of any infection until the body recognizes the infection. Look, we all know that scaffolds collapse from time to time. Yet, we still utilize them because they are useful. Since someone died from a scaffold fall yesterday, we should not ban using all scaffolds. That’s your logic?
Look, Epstein-Barr Virus was deadly when it was first contracted. Over time, it adapted so the outcome of infection was more favorable to the virus to survive. Today, more than 90% of the world has EBV. It adapted over time so that it didn’t kill its host, therefore killing itself. This phenomenon is played out through many different viral infections, although not all. Even Herpes Simplex D has become much safer over time. That shows a pattern. In this case, SARS-cov-2 has proved to follow that pattern, so far. Taking the shot isn’t going to save you from death. Death comes for us all, regardless of if we’re ready for him. Death will be the last Angel defeated before we find Paradise in our eternal sleep.
The best part about being a conspiracy theorist is not having myocarditis
or pericarditis, or GBS, or blood platelet issues, or thrombocytopenia, etc .... etc ... etc
Best part about the covid-19 vaccine is, that you have a much lower chance of getting myocarditis or getting hospitalized, compared to getting infected without the vaccine!
@@KordeMo1
😂🤣😂🤦🏽♂️🥴🤡
best part of your indoctrination is the relentless repetition of pHARMa $ales material
Haha. This is the perfect slogan.
If you got COVID. You have a higher chance of getting Myocarditis.
Thank you for platforming these people so they can't hide from their perfidy at a later date.
Sorry, but you're never going to get your sociopathic payoff where people tell you you're right, because you're f*cking wrong and always have been.
its been five years mate what are they hiding now lol
I remember the hospitals being so stressed that they were putting out dance videos.
That was so odd to me. My wife, an ICU nurse, would come home and cry about every day during the heat of it. It was such a contrast to what my wife was experiencing. I will never understand those dancing videos.
Totally compatible.
@charlag569 yeah man I remember I would dance the night away while having to preform cpr at minimum 5 to 6 times a shift for countless people during the height of if, crazy how I had that much time when there was so much suffering and pestilence. Oh wait we didn't have time for that silly shit because a vast majority of our community was dying all the while having people like this fool telling people not to get vaccinated and it wasn't that serious.
Literally got the two shots myself, my neighbor had a heart attack right after her second dose as 35 year old healthy woman, you can’t pretend these were completely safe unless you literally just lie.
Two guys I personally know had heart attacks. One in his 20s, one in 30s.
@@ZubyMusic that is what is so disingenuous about people on his side pretending that didn’t happen is convenient but false.
@@ZubyMusic surprised he didn’t outright call you a liar at that point. that’s their usual approach.
My friend got myocarditis and my old boss got a clot after their second shots. This "Dr" was just lying.
Exactly. This illustrates the difference between science papers, trotted out statistics, and reality.
Funny how the answer is always "get vaxxinated" no matter what the question was
not true at all
LOTS of shadowbanned comments under 'sort by top comment'. all shown under 'sort by newest first'
I don't doubt his intentions, but he doesn't have the necessary expertise to appraise evidence, hence some of his views are wrong. Prof. Vinay Prasad (promoted to full professor) does a much better job, though he is very fiery and draws hate from both pro-vax and anti-vax communities.
My favourite little quotes/headlines from the pandemic that I just can't forget.
"Vaccinated people do not carry the virus, do not get sick." (A blatent lie from the CDC director.) - Rochdale Walensky live on NBC.
"Toxic masks in canadian schools and daycares recalled." (Made in China.) - CBC News, 26th of march 2021 by Thomas Gerbet.
"People not wearing masks are sociopathic." (Said by a sociopath no doubt.) - CNBC, 2nd of September 2020 by Cory Steig.
"SARS survivors have high levels of Anti-RBD antibodies 17 years after infection." (An older study I can't find anymore but definitely read pre/early pandemic.)
"Chinese experts anally swab entire bejing school after 9 year old tests positive." 😮 - 26th of January 2021 by Gabriel Keane.
"Cautious fully vaccinated man dies, docters say it could have been worse if he was not vaccinated at all." (How?) - The Hill, 11th of August 2021 by Christian Spencer.
"New CDC director expects annual covid shots for the most vulnerable groups."
_I have to laugh._
saFE & eFfEcTivE & fULLy tE$TeD ! 😂
Trudeau: anti vaxxers are : NAZIS, MYSOGENISTS, FAR RIGHT EXTREMISTS , RACISTS ..
Erhm.... Justin...I can HEAR you...
It was Mike Yeadon ex-Pfizer chief scientist whistleblower who pointed out something important. Selectively protecting vulnerable groups would seem like an important strategy in the light of the failure of vaccinating everybody, e.g just vaccinate the elderly. But, as he points out, the elderly are PRECISELY the sector of society that does not respond to the vaccines. Their immune systems cannot properly respond. Yeadon mentions that this has been shown time and time again for the flu vaccine. So there.
Such a weird notion, that simply because someone misspoke, that the entire vaccine should be discredited because of that. Anyone that has a loved one that was in a nursing home can see the vaccines were effective though.
@@jackeagleeye3453 my father in a nursing home bc of a stroke....yeah...I can see the benefits .... another patient came living there after a stroke and surgery to safe him when on holiday in Spain. Churgin to him : you were vaxxed?? I mainly operate vaxxed who got shortly after vax a stroke....
You are right...look in the nursing homes seeing the safe and very effective
It's safe to say science isn't sending their best anymore.
I had repressed any memory of this ‘expert’. If I had remembered him - I’d have hoped never to see him again.
These people constantly make accusations of cherry picking and such like, well I’ve never witnessed so much cherry picking. I’ve no interest in his qualifications but I’d bet money his pay relies on him having a rather narrow field of view in line with the pharmaceutical industry.
You got it! (I love your mind.)
yep, he’s an unabashed big pHARMer $hill
You should once again renew your suppression of his memory. I know I have.
As always follow the money to find ones morality.
@@deadreckoning6288 - Peter McCullough sells useless supplement pills to you loons at $75 a bottle. Is that the money you were talking about?
Simone Gold made millions of dollars and bought herself a mansion from pushing worthless treatments at gullible anti-vaxxer loons. That money?
His line of work preludes him from speaking the truth about the topic.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."- Upton Sinclair
That's a load of sh*t. He is speaking the truth - you just don't like it.
He could have given some reference to the medical journals he is using to promote his premise. Right?
@@teresakarr8328 Or the opposite. Anti vax is not pseudo science at all. By all means there SHOULD be a way to let people in the industry KNOW about your vaccine injury and that for the most part vaccines do hurt some people.
@@FFGG22E I feel genuinely sad for you. People like you are beyond the pale. You live in a completely different epistemic reality and, unfortunately, there's absolutely nothing that would change your mind.
You ask about the Korean study's comorbiditys and he dodges the question, just saying "well most of them were unvaccinated"
He literally did not answer the question. How many of them had comorbidities? His answer was pure sophistry.
Not to mention how the cases were coded, were they just not within a currently "vaccinated" window, were they treated, and with what, etc....
You were not considered vaccinated until two weeks after the second shot, so anyone who died within that time frame were considered unvaccinated, that's how they fiddled the numbers.
Are you serious ? He answered it completely. He even explained what comorbidities mean. Did you not listen or are you simply stupid ? Let's assume stupid.
The study is nonsense. What intervention has zero adverse outcomes? They make it sound too good to be true because it isn’t true.
Here's the thing: the average number of years lost by someone who dies of COVID-19 is 13-15 years. Comorbidities do no mean you are going to be dead by Christmas.
Vaccines were not sold as something to prevent infection? So this “expert” needs to explain how that correlates with “herd immunity”.
He calls it science but worshipping anything called a vaccine is more like a religion.
They constantly claim that the polio vaccine ended the polio epidemic in the 1950's. Now they claim vaccines aren't suposed to prevent infection and transmission.
It does though, less effective than what was maybe shown in tge trials doesn't mean it's not effective at all. Any reasonable logical person would take the option that would improve they're health outcome versus not.
@@redaderoua8816 asymptomatic spread is one of the primary justifications for lockdowns and mask mandates etc. sounds like you bought the bullshit.
Why even bring this up. This was like a pipe dream that no scientist stuck with. Maybe a better aspect to focus on is the fact that in every demographic the vaccinated did significantly better than the unvaccinated. Just to be clear we are talking about deaths and hospitalizations. So you are focusing on something that was a non-issue whereas people dying is cool. I suggest you need to reassess your beliefs.
He did a good job of explaining why he came to the scientific conclusions he did, but you can tell he hadn't put much thought into the ethics and human rights of the situation. Several times Zuby would ask about the moral aspects of things like censorship and forced vaccination, and Wilson would walk right up to the edge of taking away people's rights and then realize it wasn't going to sound good. So then he'd just back off and say "something should be done" but he was unwilling to say what. If there's anything this episode convinced me of, it's that it's not just about the science.
Great observation. He constantly hedges his position saying things along the lines of, "of course I support free speech, but we need to understand it's irresponsible for the social media companies to just allow misinformation run rampant.."
dR dAn is an ardent convert to the new C21st Church of $cientism, please do not question the faithful !
Agreed. He also didn't have a good answer as to why he only goes after certain people on the "misinformation " front.
I havent seen the whole interview yet, but did Zuby bring up the 5X mortality rate amongst young people post covid? -Young healthy people just dropping dead from heart failure at an alarming rate - which just happens to take place right after a mass vaxination with a new untested medicine....
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” - George Orwell, 1984
@@lw1zfog Good summary of the anti vaxxers.
@jackeagleeye3453 If you haven't taken 9 mRNA shots as recommended by the CDC then STFU, you anti-vaxxer
Links?
@jackeagleeye3453
"Anti-vaxxer" used as you have invoked it is nothing more than a thought terminating cliché.
Anyone following the CDC's current advice is on their 9 shot. 2 to start and in a few months they will be going on their 10th shot as they take their 8th booster.
If you are not at least 7 shots in you @jackeagleeye3453 are an "Anti-vaxxer" just as much as anyone who took no shots.
If you are 7+ injections deep at this point the majority of people at this point think you're an idiot and you are in the company of less than 5% of other idiots. So at this point you are either an anti-vaxxer or an idiot.
Dan, Dan the Pfizer Man.
He actually stated at the beginning that he works for "Jan sen" so that is, I believe, Janssen Biotech, makers of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine.
@@wzpu3283 Dan, Dan the JJ Man?
lol you think me corrupt like your parents ? No he is not. Stop telling us about your parents . Do you think both your parents put together have the integrity as Dr Dan Wilson has in his left little toe ?
@@wzpu3283so I understand that it’s a pre requisite to be an antivaxer that one must be dumb . So it’s given you last be very dumb but do you also have to cheap ?
Just because you are too dumb to point out where he is incorrect should kit mean you have to compare them with your parents
I agree with Zuby that there should not have been covid vax mandates. Overall the policies around covid were bad and had a negative effect on the population.
Zuby is right on this. A study pub. in PNAS showed mandates actually reduced uptake of boosters and flu shots.
Mandates would've been much less controversial if applied only to older ppl.
Antivax, antivax, antivax, this guy is like a cracked record and he thinks that we are all dumb, he called Dr. Peter McCullough, arguably the top man in his field, a bozo..he needs to learn some respect..
> Dr. Peter McCullough, arguably the top man in his field
What is his field these days? Selling worthless supplements to you dumb-dumbs for $75 a bottle?
@@FrostekFerenczy fRosTy continues with its daily struggles 🥴🤦🏽♂️🤡
anyone who shares a panel with a maniac like steve kirsch is a laughingstock what are you on about
@@bobbyologun1517 sTaY bOo$tEd !!!
@@lw1zfog ???
Hearing ppl speak is never dangerous. What’s dangerous is not allowing ppl to air their views….whatever those views are as long as they fall within pre existing law.
This dude says he’s against censorship but in his next breath says social media companies should censor.
I amyet to meat an antivaxer activist who is honest or has not harmed humans even children. So fir example this clown says mRNA vaccine is dangerous, lol
when people like alex jones spread absolute filth for years and years until the families were forced to take legal action what do you suggest instead? are lies protected under freedom of speech
If they’re so safe and effective why did they want 75 years to release their data?
And why was so much of what was released redacted?
you dont really want to know you just want to churn the waters
I wonder if he gave the jab to his own newborn.
I hope not. It's terrible to have idiot parents.
If you are still backing the jab you either aren't paying attention or are a nefarious actor.
Or that we aren't a dumb-dumb anti-vaxxer loser.
@@FrostekFerenczy
Or you understand science
@@antonioiniguez1615 ‘$cience’
@@antonioiniguez1615 ‘$ciENcE’
Nuremberg Codes? 🤷🏿♂️
Inconvenient to psychopaths.
Nuremberg doesn't apply, dumb-dumb.
1:04:30 - This is why "scientists" should never have power over others.
Debunk is such a clown. He’s been wrong about everything yet accuses everyone else of spreading ‘misinformation’ 🤡
Can you give an example of where you think he's wrong?
Except he's not wrong. Anti-vaxxers are wrong, and always have been.
@@FrostekFerenczy 😂🤣😂🥴🤦🏽♂️🤡
what specifically is dr wilson wrong about? be precise
I've literally had him try to tell me that cases went down in Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, and Peru in Spring 2020 immediately after the implementation of faucism.
Thank you for platforming and (nicely) destroying this shill
did we watch the same video
Decent convo but could've done with a few more fireworks...I think Zuby was going easy on Dr Wilson 😂😅
Far too easy. He should have called him on the efficacy claim. There's no way to tell if a vaccine has saved a life.
I like his style. He is non confrontational which gives the interviewee an opportunity to really speak. It's just unfortunate that Dan waffles on while not saying much of substance but I don't think pushing him on anything would have resulted in anything other than an " I will look at the paper and let you know" as he's not even clear on the studies he's quoting from.
@@clairewheeler2937 I would have loved Zuby to ask him more pressing questions about these studies. Just because something is in a study, that doesn't automatically translate to the same outcome in the real world.
@@reallyshel personally that's exactly what I would have done too. I would have wanted to go through each study point by point but that's what comments sections are for. We can go through them. I did and saw the holes in his argument. The way he conducted this interview meant there was more time to get into the mandates and lack of efficacy whereas one or 2 studies from south Korea don't really tell us much at all. Especially not in the timescale of the study whereby it was only for 6 months and the first month there was no rollout of childhood vaccines while the rest were in those most at risk with no mandates with an extremely low uptake amongst the children even up to 2023 from what I'm saw and the study he mentioned was from 28 Feb 2021 to august 2021 and the first 5 to 11 yr old vaccines were not in use until the 30th march 2021.
Then the one with 46 deaths in kids 22 had comorbidities and 24 didn't but the conditions they died from are not only caused by viruses. For instance myocarditis and encephalitis, strokes that sort of thing. He avoided letting that be known by saying something which was true which is that only 4 of those deaths were vaccinated but he failed to mention that the first study was only for six months and the second study that he mentioned about the 46 deaths was 13 months after the end of the first. So no was the answer he should have given. Neither study was for the 3 year period.
@@reallyshel yes there is. you can compare vaccinated population to un-vaccinated. you can compare hospitalisation, duration of stay and mortality. all this and more was done and vaccinated people get less sick and die less than non-vaccinated. hth
Guy is wrong with many things, but overall he sounds and formulates his thought patterns in wokeism. His uppity prissy tone. His talkdown talking style. He's an activist doosh imo🤷
still pushing the vaccine agenda, fake dr
I am in full agreement with your assessment. Dan is, at minimum, a woke POS.
‘$CIENTISM’ ™️
Wokism? You nutters are hilarious.
> His uppity prissy tone
People being right, when you aren't really gets under your skin doesn't it?
Dan's take on Vitamin D is pretty whack. 90% of Canadians are considered vitamin D deficient. The fact that he says "but you can't give someone vitamin D in the hospital to cure COVID" sounds like a pretty disingeuous version of the argument. I like how Zuby countered with "but giving someone a vaccine once hospitalized wouldn't either."
But high dose intravenous vitamin D is very helpful. Same for IV C.
@@OceanFrontVilla3high dose C is something we don't talk about enough. IV vitc is extremely effective in treating disease.
Remember old black and white photos of hospital patients outside in the sun in their beds. That generation figured it out but then the information died with them. Forgotten public knowledge.
Literally no one ever said that giving someone the vaccine once you are hospitalized will help. In fact, we know it's the complete opposite!
Exactly. With proper vit.D levels (s)he wouldnt even be in a hospital.
I don't agree with what most of this guy is pushing, but I do respect him being willing to participate in a dialogue with opposing views. He is one of the few that will.
he’s that desperate fort he ‘air time’ that he doesn’t mind the public humiliation
@@lw1zfog He's there himself not for the public, he trying to justify vaccination for all but he wont openly say it.
IFR is a much better indicator than CFR, contrary to what the guest says. He then argues that CFR is a better indicator and that we should not only look at people that have died, showing he does not understand the meaning of the word “fatality” in case FATALITY rate.
Citing from John Ioannidis’s study Age-stratified infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in the non-elderly population: “The current analysis suggests a much lower pre-vaccination IFR in non-elderly populations than previously suggested.”
“The CFR is not the same as the risk of death for an infected person - even though, unfortunately, journalists sometimes suggest that it is. It is relevant and important, but far from the whole story.”
“The key question for understanding the mortality risk of a disease is the following: if someone is infected with the disease how likely is it that they will die from it? The answer to that question is captured by the infection fatality rate, or IFR.”
(Our World in Data)
Young guy Dr. Dan Wilson has a lot to learn. He reminds me of myself back in the day when I worked at Pfizer. Reminds me of myself when I was his age interms of making the good decision to go to industry instead of staying in academia, but also being naive about politics, policy, industry influence and propaganda. Hopefully he figures things out.
I also got some flashbacks. Unfortunately I don't think he'll figure it out having invested to heavily in the present position. Interesting to note him saying that he used to be a conspiracy theorist, but science made him wake up.
Want to point anything out specifically?
What changed your mind?
I don’t think he has fallen prey that why he fights lies from antivaxers . Eg Zulu is clearly harmful but does not understand it .
There is not a single reason save allergy to not get primary civ vaccine . The science abd facts are so crystal clear about it . Yet in this comments side thin under his video I find one dumb comment after another and no body cares about facts.
@@endofscene change mind about what?
I just hope Dr Dan is not in charge of next pandemic.
I just hope your ignorant brain is never in charge of anything.
how come
The dude was wrong about everything
Such a dishonest person. And he was avoiding answering a lot of the questions.
I hope you are talking about zuby?
@@KordeMo1nope
@@KordeMo1 Aah, you're one of those.. Well you can hope in your left hand and s#it in the other, and see which one fills up first.
@@KordeMo1 🥴🤦🏽♂️🤡
Zuby I love how you held this at first I found it frustrating at first but now realised how well you composed yourself thankyou ✌️💚🙏🏻
Dan Wilson works for industry. Case closed.
We we we he doesn't even hide it
Who are scientists supposed to work for? The govt?
who would you like him to work for snowbird
One important point I would like to make, re: v*ccines and other interventions:
*Public Healthcare,* as a concept, is something that should be avoided. It lumps everyone into one overly simplistic category ("the public") and applies one-size-fits-all healthcare solutions. Healthcare should always be based upon the individual, because we all interact differently with different diets, supplements, medications, and more.
Good point!
This guest says he works for Jannsen (J&J) and keeps bringing up studies that support his position. There are no doubt studies that don't support his position, which he wont mention. The problem is that with censorship, lots of non narrative studies don't get published, and this guy knows that.
I would not waste my time debating this individual because all he's doing is taking notes when his argument points are weak, and he's simply going to find big pharma funded or narrative studies to try and support his position.
The host had lots of excellent points that the guest really could not counter - the best point was on Risk/Benefit for this vaccine. The guest simply took notes, so my guess is he is going after Podcasters because they are effective at countering the BS narrative of big pharma and the media. Again, this individual stated that he works for J&J, so he is on a mission to discredit Podcaster that don't share his/ big pharma's narrative.
My scientific papers are real science, because they agree with my opinion, your scientific papers are fringe science, or pseudoscience, because they don't agree with my opinion.
How are vitamins not essentials to the proper health of a biological being? I just don't get that.
Not lucrative enough.
And where does Dr. Wilson say that?
They're not cure-alls.
I've been to many dozens of meetings hosted by pharmaceutical "drug reps." They virtually always make the case that their drug's benefits outweigh it's risks, not only for people who are sick, but also for people who are in a group they consider "at risk." In almost all cases, they also say that even given to a healthy population, more undiagnosed people would be saved that would die from prescribing the drug. So, the implication is that everyone walking in the office should be given the drug statistically speaking. Does Dr. Wilson feel that any time a drug company makes this claim, and can produce papers that support this statistic, a healthy person should be started on a drug?
I think it's further complicated in the case of a vaccine that is relatively new in large human trials. It's simply not possible to know yet what results will be in the following decades.
I've watched other well researched recommendations change radically just in the 30 years I've worked around the field. Would his policy actually be as simplistic as medicating everyone when drug company studies claimed their drug would likely be more beneficial than harmful?
Who made Dr. Wilson the arbiter of what is bad science? I think he should have direct debate with authors of the papers he calls "bad science" so he can be directly confronted about his conclusions. He is not all knowing of all things.
but .... but .... hE’s gOt a PHD ! 😂
@@lw1zfog 👍👍👍
Uh, he's a scientist?
@@motiOn732 he also has a t-shirt that bears the legend ‘tHis iS wHaT a $ciENtiST LoOks LiKe’.
at least crazy old dOc hOoTERz wears his lab coat !!!
😂🤣😂🤦🏽♂️🥴🤡
@@motiOn732 With apparently little regard for other scientists who write scientific papers to be published. Just my personal opinion after watching many of his videos.
I can’t listen to this wishy washy guy. Geesh. Have him talk to Dr. McCullough. 😮
Would love to see McCullough take him to school. He would get scorched
I'd love to see him debate Steve Kirsch, the data guy on the "vaccines" that aren't and "vaccine" injury stats. Steve would wipe the floor with him, but that's not going to happen. Nobody will debate Steve Kirsch, despite the big money he always puts on the table for those he invites to throw down.
@@JohnnyJazzFreak - Steve Kirsch has no clue about "the data" or statistics. He's pathetic.
McCullough is too busy selling his worthless, over-priced supplements to you rubes.
@@FrostekFerenczy
And you do ?
Calling people that reject only mRNA "anti-vax" is intellectual dishonesty.
That's like calling someone teetotal, because they don't drink one brand of beer.
The label 'anti-vaxxer' is used to slander those who are considered dissidents for questioning their government's collusion with the corrupt companies of the pharmaceutical industrial complex.
Good on you guys. Glad to see people that DONT agree can still have a conversation
I'm not confident that Wilson's definition of gene therapy is actually on the level. Whether a therapy treats genetic disease is arguably superfluous ...gene therapy defined as a medical intervention which functions at the level of gene expression (as mRNA lipid nanoparticles clearly do) would seem to be the most straightforward definition. I suspect Wilson has selected a narrower definition because this functions as a workaround, enabling exclusion of mRNA lipid nanoparticle injections. Therefore this would represent a rhetorical attemp to make a public relations equivalence between an entirely novel experimental treatment and traditional vaccines such as polio which the public is broadly more familiar and comfortable with.
semantics is a fundamental part of faith based ‘$cientism’
Nailed it.
So essentially...a bait and switch.
And the pharmaceutical heads admitted just that in videos expressing their excitement about this entirely new delivery mechanism. Not to mention Dr Dan glosses over the entirely new MRNA delivery. I have yet to hear him address the actual warnings of those who developed the technology!! Conveniently discusses RFK Jr in Rogan but ignores Dr. Malone and company.
“And for us therefore, we are really taking that leap -- us as a company Bayer -- in cell and gene therapy, which to me is one of these examples, where we are really going to make a difference, hopefully, moving forward. Ultimately the mRNA vaccines are an example for that cell and gene therapy. I always like to say, if we had surveyed two years ago in the public, ‘would you be willing to take gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body?,’ we would have probably had a 95% refusal rate. I think this pandemic has also opened many people’s eyes to innovation in the way that was maybe not possible before.” Stefan Oelrich, Bayer AG’s Board of Management and head of their Pharmaceuticals Division, 2021
Has he got pseudo-myocarditis? Pseudo turbo cancer?
Pseudo-CVA… or Pseudo-Dead?
It's funny how Wilson got hoof-and-mouth disease after all his inj______s.
😅
He seems like a company man through and through. Does he not understand that what he considers as ‘anti-vaxxers’ were mostly pro-vax until they got injured. 🤷🏽♂️ Most of those folk stopped at 3, but now will be classed as anti-vaxxers because they’ve not kept up to date. 🤷🏽♂️
he’s a shameless $hill for the big pHARMer
Most of the supposed vaccine injuries you loons claim are nothing of the sort. Anti-vaxxers are hugely dishonest narcissists with no sense of responsibility.
@@FrostekFerenczy oh dear, oh dear fRoStY. bit late in the game for you to continue down that path. at this stage your just embarrassing yourself even further 😂
He also doesn’t mention how his fellow covidian propagandists changed the definition of “anti-vax”. Prior to 2021, anti-vax meant someone who is opposed to all vaccines and/or never received any vaccines.
But in 2021, the covidians changes the definition to anyone who opposes the covid-1984 “vaccine”, anyone who opposes the C19 vax mandates, and anyone who even questions the C19 vax. Regardless if we got the C19 shot or not, and regardless if we got past shots and just opposed the C19 shot.
This is completely Orwellian!
@@lw1zfogsays the most dishonest and dumb clown . You always confide him with your dad . I have told you he is not third class like your dad . Don’t feel ashamed just stop acting like your dad .
What an absolute clown
Sounds like someone's suffering from a nasty case of buyer's remorse.
Maybe try engaging your 14 brain cells before falling for such an obvious scam, next time.
You're welcome.
Which guy is the clown? According to you.
@emmajones8590
Obviously the one who's at odds with reality.
The one who works for a huge drug company.
The one who doesn't understand basic statistics.
The one who's lying though his teeth.
So, Dan.
@@skinsuit2000 can you give specific examples where he's saying something that's objectively wrong or not in accordance with peer-reviewed data?
@@ronintage
Yes, I can
Debunk is epitome of academic arrogance coupled with systemic racism. I call his show the sunk cost fallacy channel.
In my view, Dan is a DEI PhD recipient.
dR dUNniNg kRuGEr personified
Looks like a white guy w Jew curls whose water must be shut off.. what category does that fit?
@@lw1zfog That's brilliant
Exactly!
I'm sure that Dr Wilson is a nice person but he is truly one dimensional. He reminds me of a musician who can only play if they have sheet music in front of them. If you say "let's jam" , he doesn't know what to do. He'd need to see the studies to prove that the sky is blue.
I've known people like him and, for all their academic brilliance and degrees, they are incapable of operating outside of the box and always lack basic common sense skills.
Yes. This is a guy who need a peer-reviewed study for everything, every little detail. Some silly (and over-exaggerated) examples: As a child he probably refused to walk because his mom never showed him a peer-reviewed study on walking. Later in his life he burned his hand time and time again because there were no peer-reviewed study that said that a wood-burning stove is hot after 5 hours of usage.
PhD-students are highly theoretical and they often forget how the real world actually works ==> Politics, human behavior & incentives, policy-making and lobbying, propaganda and so on. The total disregard of what effect the ongoing cancel-culture have on doctors and other professionals is another one. Very few (brave) people will risk their livelihood (job, career, reputation) to do the right thing (speak out loudly & truthfully) which is why you get the false impression that "everyone" is onboard with the ruling narrative. It's a "either you're with us, or you're OUT". Most people will choose to follow, especially those who have a lot to risk by not following. The more "exclusive" job you have, the more bound you are to follow the narrative. Dissenting voices will quickly be frozen out and dismantled. This is a crucial point that Dan Wilson and his minions don't understand - or more likely, don't WANT to understand - because it's true and it really shakes up their (ideological) narrative.
(Real) science and reality/truth are not important anymore. Following a certain ideology that leads to a narrative is.
@@rexmentula1089 Indeed!
Dan said 2000 kids died from covid over three years and that the study he's quoting said 30% DID NOT have co-morbidities.... which means 70% of these kids DID have co-morbidities. Again, showing how low the mortality rate is for kids that are healthy. That 90% were unvaccinated (many factors beyond vax status come into play) doesn't change the fact that young healthy kids, by and large, don't need this vax!!!!
I’m about a third through but will have to come back to this as I can’t handle so much douche baggery from this guest in one go.
He unironically believes that we need vaccine mandates because "not everybody can get vaccinated."
It makes sense to anyone with a working brain.
@@FrostekFerenczy oh dear. 🥴🤦🏽♂️🤡
Yeah that always used to be the excuse until they started jabbing everyone including the immune compromised.
16:43 wrong.
He presented a false dichotomy whereby the choice was vax or not vax or mask or not mask. Those weren’t the only options, those were the only options OR ELSE!
He is directly implying his complicit was as a medical professional in using government authority to enforce law or policy based on views he agrees with. He does not see morality, he sees a means to an end. The government is his means, the end is you.
16:50 in all age groups better off vax vs no vax is another false dichotomy lol this is his theory of what is best but in reality this doesn’t take into account previous infection or comorbidities. A vaccine does not give you antibodies. I repeat the vaccine does not fix you if your immune system is wrong. Your immune system the limiting factor to taking a vaccine. If you are immunocompromised the chances of being no injured from the vaccine is AT LEAST the same as being classified as an extreme severity in condition when contracting ‘covid-19’. This is simple. Something that people don’t understand that an obese person that is immunocompromsied due to his obesity may not defend well against a virus, or any foreign substance for that matter. The issue is that the issue of safety ENOUGH is already assumed to be safe for this entire argument but this entire argument is not on the degree to which it’s safe, it’s IF it’s safe or not. Zuby thinks they’re not safe. DTF thinks there are tradeoffs. This again is the exact morality on display here that we can see. He sees human suffering as a trade off. We should be saving life. Not trading it off. In an event where a virus spreads, we cannot contribute or weaken the healthy population to protect the vulnerable. This is anti science, it’s extinguishing fire with oxygen.
19:18 Zuby is agreeing with him here but let’s all make this clear, DTF cannot specify the time frame or further information and declares he’ll send it to Zuby. In this video we can only go on arguments made and DTF has already submitted on not having the evidence to exclaim or present handy to support his claim. So his evidence can be given the benefit of the doubt in this sense ONLY bc we are arguing in good faith. His argument about Korea and this study is moot unless you can answer the follow ups by your opponent. It does not follow that unvaccinated is the factor that made them sick, comorbidities included. As we have explained the vaccine can’t supersede the immunecompromised comorbidities and if this study didn’t include immunocompromised as a disntugihsing factor then it’s irrelevant. DTF is claiming that 100% of the time it’s better to be vaccinated. We’ve established that sort of his reasoning is flawed bc to him any appropriately sized negative to the positive is subjective. If only 1000 people die and it saves a million for every 1000 then it’s safe. I want everyone to know that this is NOT safe by ANY medical authority ever. Especially for not a vaccine. DTF is already hanging by a thread.
26:17 comorbidities is a touchy area and this is why none of this shit is even analysable. The government big pharma poisoned the well that NEAR ZEO real high confidence interval can be said about anything during the ‘pandemic’ for ‘covid-19’. How many people had kidney failure due to covid? How many people had pneuomonia due to covid? Ahh another loaded question presented in black and white. Michael Jackson’s would love this guy. Let’s ask how many people presented with a positive PCR for covid were treated with remdesivir or ventilators? Let’s see. Hmm. A lot. Hmm oh yeah remdesivir can cause kidney failure and ventilators can cause pneumonia in misuse. Notice how I’m not speaking in absolute. Can cause. Unless he accounts for these factors his argument is MOOT. MOOT. If your study doesn’t evaluate its conclusion with appropriate factors that could undermine its integrity then it’s, say it with me, BAD SCIENCE.
29:20 yawn, vitamins d not effective. Listen to this dumbass literally talk about how vitamins d is not an effective treatment, AS A FALSE DICHOTOMY. These vitamin supplements work in a multi drug therapy which is why Peter McCullough talks about and who DTF believes is a misinformation and even worse a disinformation super spreader. Wow. He is so ignorant to the actual other side that he doesn’t even realise he agrees with him. Vitamins D may not solve covid and you don’t need a peer reviewed study but were vitamin d deficient people worse effective? In extreme sense YES 100%. Who the hell has ever told someone to not take vitamin d bc it won’t work. There is ZERO harm for a sedated, malnourished average micronutrient American or Westerner to not take vitamin d. In fact India gave it to their covid out patients patients in Uttar Pradesh along side another SAFE DRUG ivermectin. I’m not claiming it’s effective but notice how the narrative DTF is playing is overestimating the efficacy and safety use case for his interventions and the lack of critical analysis to ivermectin, vitamin d, hydroxychloroquine, monoclonal antibodies, EXERCISE, SUNLIGHT, POSITIVITY, SOCIALISATION, NO LOCKDOWNS. This guy is brainwashed.
32:27 doctors have always said eat well and get exercise
They incentivised getting French fries for vaccines, donuts, fast food. They shut down gym. They covered skate parks in sand. They locked up parks. They fined you for being outside. Domestic abuse went up. Alcohol abuse went up. Depression went up. Do we need a peer reviewed study to show that these are helpful to fighting covid? Im sure there are. Do you need to be a doctor to make that identification? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂no
42:09 covid vaccines are gene therapy. They mRNA tech is a gene therapeutic with the use case of the protein being produced being to illicit an immune response. Also note that all mRNA interventions in the past have failed and the covid reputation for it is being bolstered to usher in more vaccines as mRNA in theory is a crazy super scientific advancement. Even with how much I think DTF is wrong and how I didn’t get the vax. The application is amazing in theory but does not work in reality. It’s gene therapy. It’s in the documentation for BNT162b2
43:34 it is not anti vax misinformation to state that 17 million people have died from the covid vaccine. It’s incredulous. That is subjective to you. Argument from incredulity. This statistic comes from a projection study that estimates 17 million based on the adverse event rate. The exact same thing the pro vax people do when their final string of denial wants to last, they claim ‘it’s saved millions of lives’ well that statistic is derived the exact same way the 17 million statistic so you can’t have it both ways. Once again. This is a motivated reasoning fallacy. He over accepts his own arguments but under accepts opposing
47:11 LOL this is not an argument is it? Is DTF a podcaster? Why is his side job criticising independent podcasters? Did he do a module on that? On the topics of saying that there’s a good argument to show that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. This is something that reveals that DTF is an ignorant fool. He has not done his research. He may claim he has but clearly hasn’t. RFK said something NOT extreme. He just say an argument could be presented and that’s fine. He’s not a misinformation spreader. He’s actually revealing your cognitive distance and censorship reflex trigger. I see the HIV Aids conspiracy as legitimate and it needs analysing and the during that DTF doesn’t get it back then and doesnt get it now for covid. Except AIDS was such a crazy long time ago and Fauci was the super spreader of misinfo saying you can catch it thru contact in the kitchen.
47:26 classic post modern tactic of referring to words as harmful.
I’m sorry I’m gonna be debate bro but this is 49:02 appeal to emotion and anecdotal. Skip.
49:47 saying things that are easily demonstrated as false is not harmful or hatespeech. It’s free speech. This whole argument is anti free speech. Quite telling tbh. You can personally dislike Joe for saying wrong stuff but you can’t weight that opinion higher than your critique of authority and medical individuals. This means your entire point is about an appeal to populum whereby you’re worried ideas will hurt or damage peoples brain. Who put u in charge of policing this?
55:45 convincing people you disagree with is harmful. Oh no my authority that gives me power is melting 🧙♀️
1:12:07 he’s said a lot of stupid shit since my last edit but we’re on polio for some reason lol this guy is the red herring of dreams
1:15:24 lol the old vax immunity is better than natural immunity. No it’s not. Natural immunity is always better than vaccinated. The vax was training your body on the spike protein from Wuhan, when they came out we were approaching omicron and studies showed that it was the spike that varied the most between contact. Even the vax manufacturers said we’re going all in on the spike protein lol so how could that be better than a more recent and nature immune response from the virus? Also this doesn’t take into account the incidence of adverse effects. Very early on there were studies showing that if you had natural immunity you’re at greater risk of adverse event from the vaccine so again he’s cherry picking
1:29:29 DTF advocating that this would’ve still happened if the rules were a lot less strict and promoted liberty is laughable. This dude is more tone deaf than Stevie wonder. He has no idea and will not listen to anyone who smells of an opposition that isn’t rooted in his subjective beliefs
I’m glad there are people like you out there in the real world.
I could have made some of the points you did but 1. I’d have made a worse job of it and 2. I’d have had to bear this fool for longer than I did.
It’s good to see people keeping up despite the disinformation of people like DTF.
@@Jacob-yb6bv I hate this dude debunk the funn, he attacks doctors critical on covid authority crying there is no censorship meanwhile these doctors get censored for talking about this if they reply.
He’s an NPC baffles me how people are so ignorant even past all the Twitter files n Fauci leaks showing this whole thing was bullshit
@@kklh7918worse than a mere NPC, he’s an active $hill for pHARMa
As an individual. The HALT in societal movement impaired me beyond belief.
@@Jacob-yb6bvI second Jacob. I love people like you. Fantastic post 👏
I'm over the moon that he's so protected... Keep getting them!!!
The whole discussion assumes that the numbers, the research and facts presented are true… That’s why there’s no point having the conversation.
Best comment on here. When they refer to ‘the data’ they mean CDC’s website, which you would be an absolute fool to take at face value at this point.
So if the scientific literature says something you don’t like then that means by definition it’s probably not true. That’s very convenient. No need for any scientific rebuttal, just waving your hand is enough. You’ve convinced me!
@@petercornwell5880you can flip that around as well. Something you do like has to be true!
Dan reminds me of Neil Degrasse Tyson. I can’t listen to either of them … way too much ego and not enough true science.
he literally constantly cites data, point to a single time where he was objectively wrong
@@ronintage he literally appeals to perceived authority on a constant basis
😂🤣😂🤦🏽♂️🥴🤡
@@lw1zfog how?
@@ronintage you should say something about ‘pEeR rEvieW’ with a confident tone ! 😂
He lost me at "I work for Jansen"
Janssen*
So much money and manipulation behind these products. Wouldn't be needed if they actually did what they said.
Zuby asks if most children who died in USA had co morbidities, Wilson says “no” but immediately goes on to say “30% of the kids had NO co morbidities.”
I.e 70% of children, or yes ‘most children’, who died DID have co morbidities.
this guy is disingenuous
he conveniently leaves out all the rest of the aspects of the mrna v that really matter
instead, he's spewing the same propaganda we've been hearing from the news, and he doesn't do it in an even remotely more convincing way
2021 -- 80% of American adults take the first two jabs.
2022 -- only 20% of American adults take the Omicron Bivalent booster.
2023 -- only 10% of American adults take the XBB 1.5 booster.
Conclusion: America has spoken. The jabs SUCK.
Or that the pandemic was over by 2023, dumb-dumb.
@@FrostekFerenczy you’re so far gone it’s comical
😂🤣😂🤦🏽♂️🥴🤡
@@lw1zfog yes you are.
@@suprlite who are you ? fRosTys mum ?😂
if you’re going to bring it, at least try to make it slightly less weak 🥴
@@suprlite who are you ? fRosTyS mum ? 🤦🏽♂️
They didn’t look at total risk. That was the whole point of the Great Barrington project. That was the point made by Scott Atlas. They weren’t looking at life yrs and who was being infected and how vax mandates and lock downs negatively impacted people’s lives. We put higher value on the lives of the elderly than we did of the young. That is not acceptable and I am elderly.
This guys is quite amateur. Vitamin D3 deficiency takes weeks to correct as it has to build up after consistent high dosage. So treating a hypoxic covid patient with eg a large bolus of vitamin D3 would not register. No doubt the vested interests who carried out this "study" knew this. Also D3 is fat soluble which is why obses people are prone to deficiency ie it ends up in their fast, not in their system, hence the deficiency.
For me, Zuby won this debate with intelligent discussion points and questions. The guest seemed to focus primarily on vaccines despite Zuby making several attempts to broaden the discussion. He seemed arrogant in that his view was the only reasonable one and any other view was based on ignorance! Was not convincing at all in his arguments for me. I have listened to many scientists and medical practitioners over the last 4 years and they take into account the nuances of healthcare. There is not and should not be a one size fits all approach to healthcare.
I found Dan very confescending, so head up his own, anyway. You conducted yourself well Zuby as always and amazed by your patience and wish I possessed your tolersnce.
Just take a deep breath. I know have to before I start shouting at the computer monitor.
I'm usually condescending to clueless, ignorant anti-vaxxer scumbags too.
@@FrostekFerenczy such a brave lone voice, persistently ringing out in the defence of a failed paradigm 😂
@@lw1zfog like you he is wrong about most things. You posted your own ignorance and BS proudly .
@@Sceince007 why do you persist in typing out illegible waffling ? 🥴
I would love to hear his explanation about Africa. Their younger age, exposure to the sun etc. Also working for Janssen speaks volumes. Good talk, showing discussions can be congenial even when we are poles apart on ideas.
or Papua New Guinea
Those are the chief reasons that Africa had less trouble with covid.
The very young population and the fact that they spend so much time out of doors, where airbourne virusses spread less easily.
@@emmajones8590 correct and they don't all have television sets.
@@emmajones8590 🥴🤦🏽♂️🤡
@@emmajones8590 😂🤣😂🤦🏽♂️🥴🤡
zuby, now interview Kevin Mckernan.
Funk works for Eurofins doing “clinical trial work” but doesn’t tell you that it’s one of the largest C19 testing labs in the world.
Funk has 3 publications, t h r e e, under his belt. doesn't come close to experts like Sin Lee, Mckernan, or Buckhault, who all have hundreds of publications and debated & exposed Funk.
Looking at scientific studies doesn't make you a scientist.
Does being anti vax make you a scientist?
@@DigitalGnosis - Nope. It does make you more likely to die or be harmed from diseases though.
Publishing them does though, which Dan has done.
And being a scientist doesn't make you an expert on virology, epidemiology general health, statistics, etc. They aren't infallible and shouldn't be treated as such. It's why the pandemic response was a disaster
@@adamdrouin2295 the response was a bureaucratic disaster and a scientific triumph. the smart people saved us and the morons running public policy failed us.
How does one say politicians want to look good, news wants to sell a story, and then believe pharmaceutical companies and funded scientists wouldn't be wrong or lying?
Yes, strange that the "want to look good" logic doesn't apply to them
Zuby, you do good work. You HAVE to talk with Ethical Skeptic - nobody has the low down on C and V likes he does.
He has all the receipts and the technical chops to perform the analysis.
Dr. wilson nailed it. Very happy to see you have an educated person on your show!
Hahaha haha good one! 😂😂
Please have an expert on that can debate Dr. Wilson on the scientific issues. He repeatedly misrepresents what the literature actually says. For one, the vitamin D RCTs on mortality show a 34% lower risk with a confidence interval < 1
pHARMa $hill is gonna $hill for the pHARMer 🤷🏽♂️
Link it bro, that's the whole point
Your science is only as good as your data, so you can't have good science with bad data. Zero data on long term side effects of mRNA vaccines, so even if the data was good on short term risk which is questionable, we have zero science on long term side effects. The risk is highly dependent on the individual. I was sleeping in the same room with my wife when she got it from someone that was fully vaccinated at work. I ended up not even getting it from her despite no covid vaccines in the household. Her coworkers on the other hand, were all fully vaccinated and spread it to their also fully vaccinated spouses. I have since been exposed a few more times and still didn't get covid and haven't spread it to anyone. What is the argument for me to get the vaccine? It might boost my immunity? Really?
Interesting VitD debate… as someone who was VIT D deficient but otherwise healthy and ate healthy, I got covid prior to rollout but my spouse who had sufficient VitD levels did not get sick despite age, (over 65 and decade older than me with compromised liver / immune function.)
For the record, I didn't choose to not get vaccinated because of the mandates or because I was uninformed, I didn't take the vaccine because I simply didn't want to.
i have more respect for people who just say no with no further explanation
Why even give this guy an energy? Thanks, not wasting any time
“Do I agree with censorship? No. But I believe that social media platforms can and should censor people”
~Dan Wilson
What a clown 🤡
state censorship vs private enterprise like youtube censors not the same hth
Five neighbours lost in the space of a year, all vaxed.
If you believe that has anything to do with the vaccine, why are the countries with the highest vaccination rates not running out of places to bury the bodies? They don't even have higher death rates than pre covid. When you look for something that is not there, you can still see it sometimes.
how did they die? car wreck
Yes or no: was it ethical to give AIDS patients non stop AZT
No. AZT is a poison, as Fauci desired it to be. It's the same for Remdesivir ("run death is near").
No it was evil, but nobody cared because mostly gays were dying.
I think you forget (or never knew) just how fast AIDS killed people back then.
what do you mean non stop AZT
The medical community is now looking into covid vaccines linked with cancer. This was a concern 2 years ago. Why did the community waited for so long to make this consideration?
Easy. You milk as much of the covid frenzy. When the well has dried up, you look for new fundings. Covid have shown that science is manipulated.
People are influenced by money. Do you think a doctor would object to getting millions of dollars?
I think was injected cancer cells in this v..... normal cancer have millions of cure treatments, They have dancer research to understand how to make cancer, not to cure it.
he conflates vaccines with the mrna treatment
Dan looks like a naughty schoolboy that has just been told off by the teacher and had his sweets taken off him.
Bless 😂
He looks so uncomfortable
@@jellybean6582 lol yep
@@jellybean6582 Looks like a naughty scoolboy who has just had a bollocking anh his toffes took away.🤣🤣
Lol I couldn't help noticing zuby looking really healthy with a plant behind him while Dan looks like a stoner who has eaten so many barbecues he wears a shirt with the word on. It's like a before and after pic.
@@clairewheeler2937 Yep
He went into industry. Shocker that he's making excuses for his paycheck.
oh god this is one rare case where ill go full SJW and say "DONT PLATFORM" this guy... dude really is an agent of evil...
Hard disagree. LibsOfTikTok does nothing but platform Leftist nonsense and look how devastating that has been to the Left.
And that's without even considering the moral implications of buying into their idea of "justified censorship."
No, let him speak so he can eat his own words later.
I believe in discussion and respect him for coming on. These conversations are rare and hard to have without sliding into insults and bad faith.
Thank you for bringing him on
shameless, no empathy
No one was dying of measles when we grew up.
How would you know? You were just a kid.
@@FrostekFerenczy oh dear fRosTy, how awfully embarrassing for you ! 😂
Frostec is a bot. 😉
This is painful to listen to. This guest is extremely backwards and pushing horrible propaganda. He must think we have the intelligence of toddlers
Could you give a specific example where he said something that's objectively wrong or not backed by peer-reviewed data?
@@ronintage
‘saFE’
‘eFfEcTivE’
‘fULLy tE$TeD’
😂🤦🏽♂️🥴
read the room kiddo, the big pHARMer’s party is over
@@lw1zfog can you provide peer-reviewed research that contradicts any of his claims?
@@ronintage can you defer to perceived pHARMa Corps(e) authority any harder ? 🤦🏽♂️
@@lw1zfog If you don't have any scientific evidence to provide to bolster your point, why do you think you even have a point? If all of science is fabricated by biG pHaRmA as you put it, how do you know this is the case or what the real science is without having any to reference?
A good conversation.I have my views and these weren't changed after watching this but it would certainly have been far better had more of this dialogue taken place throughout the pandemic and even now.
Agreed. The country would have certainly benefitted from an open ended,subjective dialogue instead of censorship.
This guy said so many dishonest and contradictory things it's just too much to respond to.
He isn't worth the time.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." - At least he declared at the start that he works for The Jansen Pharmaceuticals Company of Johnson & Johnson.
Pharmaceutical industry $0.00 Liability.... yet MORTICIANS censored. Let it sync.
❤only 1 minute in and that respectfull tact is why Zuby your the man!
This one was painful to listen to.
Absolutely, the monotone voice of the guest put me to sleep twice.
Back in Spring 2022, I had back-and-forth exchanges with Wilson, and in doing so, I found him to be the height of dishonesty. He begins by talking about "bad science" and the misuse of papers. When discussing lockdownerism, he relied on a pair of papers "The Efficacy of Lockdown Against COVID-19: A Cross-Country Panel Analysis" by Alfano and Ercolano and "Back to basics: measuring the impact of interventions to limit the spread of COVID-19 in Europe" by Cortis and Vella King. I pointed out severe flaws in these analysis, such as Alfano using absolute case counts as opposed to per capita case counts, and also defining "lockdown" as "lockdown imposed by the federal government" and Cortis being a paper published in March 2022 that only considered European countries on the timeline of January-May 2020. So, for example, neither the US nor Canada had a "national lockdown", so they would be defined as not having a lockdown in the Alfano paper, despite much of both countries being under "lockdown" as imposed by state/provincial governments.
In the conversation with me, Wilson claimed without evidence that "across the board, lockdowns resulted in a reversal of COVID case and death rates from increasing to decreasing", and it is a "fact" that "in early months of the pandemic, we saw a very consistent decrease of COVID cases following the implementation of lockdowns". However, when I pointed out various indisputable cases of exactly the opposite outcome, such as Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, and Peru, his response was nothing but gaslighting, saying that "in every example you mention, the increase and decrease in cases of COVID track with relaxation and implementation of lockdowns, respectively."
When Wilson complains about "people not willing to learn", based on my experience with Wilson, that merely means people not willing to blindly follow his dogma that is at odds with the facts.
I consider Zuby an absolute saint for putting up with Wilson for 2 hours.
I get what you’ve tried to do by interviewing this creature but it’s not like he’s simply mr. Pharmaceutical and therefore someone with a mainstream opinion to have a discussion with he’s a nasty piece of work who’s spent 4 years ignoring the problems and calling everyone with a different opinion names. He’s spent hours abusing the so called misinformers and he seems hell bent on ignoring reality.
This comments section is literally the reason the human race is doomed
Dan looks like a schoolboy who has just had sweets taken off him by a teacher.😂
Proper immature.
Do you think you are about as shady as Dr Wilson’s left little toe or do we have to multiply your intelligence 20 times to even get close to his left little toes smarts ?
It takes several days at significantly high levels (not RDA levels) to get Vitamin D levels in blood to rise to the point where they would be helpful against covid. Giving moderate doses for a few days to someone hospitalized for covid and saying, see, Vit D doesn't work is what those that want to discredit D would put in a study. Studies on IVM with low doses given late in treatment is the same thing.
They proved in court that they admitted they didn't have the time to see if it stopped transmission
It was stated in 2020, then anti-vaxxers acted like the clueless loons they are and pretended this was news back in 2023.
At any rate it's unethical at the start of a pandemic to test for reduction in transmission.
As it happens it does reduce transmission somewhat as shown in many studies since then, but it's main aim is to prevent covid infections from becoming too serious.
@@FrostekFerenczy poor old fRosTy, still out there & attempting to rewrite recent history
😂🤣😂🥴🤦🏽♂️🤡
So if this is the one he's talking about the south Korean study of 42 million, it's 36.9 million which equated to 153,183 AE's from 4 brands of COVID vaccine. 80% after first dose and 63% of those within a day. 4.5 % were severe adverse events. Increasing with age but let's be clear this study only runs from Feb 28 to august 2021 and South Korea had a limited supply of vaccines so they prioritised those perceived most at risk. I am looking now to see when the vaccines were rolled out to the under 18's but as they only began giving to the elderly on the 26 of feb I wonder how many children had even had a jab at that point.
March 31 they started 5 to 11 year olds so almost a month after the start of this study. And it's only recommended in those at high risk, not in the general population as a whole. Looking to a more recent study it states that to this day vaccination rates are very low in children:
the COVID-19 vaccination in children 5-11 years is recommended only in high-risk group and remained a choice among most healthy children in Korea, whether to get COVID-19 vaccination largely depends on their parents’ autonomy. Therefore, parental value judgement weighing the pros and cons of the pediatric vaccination for COVID-19 ever became more important and it appeared to be skewed to conclude not getting a vaccination for their final decision among most Korean parents.
In this study it also states:
As of January 2023, the COVID-19 vaccination rate for at least two doses among Korean children 5-11 years is low at 1.1%. We summarized the COVID-19 vaccination status for the pediatric population (5-17 years) with comorbidities through July 2022 using the National Health Insurance Service database. Pediatric patients with comorbidities had higher vaccination rates than the general pediatric population (2.4% vs. 1.1% in 5-11-year-olds [P < 0.001], 76.5% vs. 66.1% in 12-17-year-olds [P < 0.001]). However, there were substantial differences according to comorbidity category, and the 2-dose vaccination rate was lowest among children with immunodeficiency in all age groups (1.1% in 5-11-year-olds, 51.2% in 12-17-year-olds). The COVID-19 vaccination rate among Korean children has remained stagnant at a low proportion despite ongoing outreach. Thus, more proactive strategies are needed alongside continuous surveillance.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10427210/#S1
I believe this is the study he first mentioned:
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S120197122200145X
So while the one he quotes is less than 5 months data in a very low vaccinated subsection of the population I can not find any current childhood statistics after vaccines and the study he mentions is still shocking to read the vast number of adverse events seen in all age groups including the young.
Now to the study of the 46 deaths
Of the 46 children who have died of COVID up to September 2022. So annoying extra 13 months of study time past the previous study mentioned. Not the same study period as Dan alluded to. The study shows that :
Among all cases, 47.8% (n = 22) had underlying diseases including neurologic diseases (n = 14), malignancy (n = 3), endocrinologic diseases (n = 2), obesity (n = 2), genetic syndrome (n = 2) and renal diseases (n = 2). Among these, one case had neurologic, endocrinologic and renal disease and one case had malignancy combined with renal disease. Among the 24 children with no underlying diseases, the reason for death was documented in 13 cases; myocarditis (n = 6), multiorgan failure (n = 3), disseminated coagulopathy (n = 1), brain swelling (n = 2), and encephalitis (n = 1). Among the 22 children with underlying diseases, the cause for death was documented in 9 cases and respiratory failure (n = 3), sepsis (n = 2), pneumonia (n = 1), pulmonary embolism (n = 1), cardiomyopathy (n = 1), and encephalitis (n = 1). One case was re-infected after 4 months in an immunocompromised child with malignancy. Four cases were vaccinated with 2 doses, all 12-18 years of age with underlying diseases (neurologic disease n = 2; obesity, n = 1; genetic disease n = 1) and 91.3% (n = 42) were not vaccinated. Among unvaccinated cases, 13 cases were 0-4 years of age and 8 cases and 21 cases were 12-18 years and 5-11 years of age, respectively.
So that equates to 24 with no underlying conditions and 22 with. But look at the reasons for the deaths of the 24. These are conditions that happen regardless of whether a virus is present. For instance encephalitis is a known side effect from other vaccines. We could do with more detail on these. Plus if we look to the time of death it seems that many didn't make it to the hospital in the first place which will inflate numbers of death as they had no treatment at all:
Among fatal cases, 58.7% (n = 27) occurred during admission whereas 41.3% (n = 19) occurred before admission. 4.3% (n = 2) were found dead before or on arrival and 37.0% (n = 17) died in the emergency department before hospitalization. The median days from diagnosis to death was 2 days (range: −1 day to 21 days). Thirty-seven percent (n = 17) died on the day of diagnosis; 41.3% (n = 19) within 1 to 5 days after diagnosis, 17.4% (n = 8) at 6 to 14 days, 4.3% (n = 2) at 15 to 21 days from the diagnosis. One patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 one day after death. Among the 39 subjects in which date of symptom onset was available, median time from symptom onset to death was 3 days (range: 0 day to 23 days). Of those, 15.4% (n = 6) died on the day of symptom onset and 59.0% (n = 23) at 1 to 5 days, 17.9% (n = 7) at 6 to 14 days, and 7.7% (n = 3) at 15 to 28 days after symptom onset.
So questions need asking as to why they didn't make it to safety and why death is so rapid from onset of symptoms. Seems pretty fast killing for a virus considering it takes about 5 days to culture it in the lab I am lead to believe.
Then the symptoms look dodgy as only 19% have a cough and 17% of those are diagnosed as pneumonia with 2 showing bacterial infection :
When analyzing the symptoms of the cases, fever was reported in 30.4% (n = 14), respiratory symptoms (cough, sputum) in 19.6% (n = 9), dyspnea in 32.6% (n = 15), myalgia or lethargy in 21.7% (n = 10), altered consciousness in 26.1% (n = 12), seizure in 21.7% (n = 10) and gastrointestinal symptoms in 32.6% (n = 15). Pneumonia was diagnosed in 17.4% (n = 8) and two cases had combined bacteremia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Acinetobacter spp, respectively. Pharmacological treatments administered were remdesivir in 21.7% (n = 10), dexamethasone in 37.0% (n = 17), intravenous immunoglobulin in 19.6% (n = 9), tocilizumab in 4.3% (n = 2), and antibiotics in 30.4% (n = 14). None of the children had received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir.
For respiratory support, 28.3% (n = 13) were on mechanical ventilation, 2.2% (n = 1) used inhaled nitrogen oxide and 8.7% (n = 4) applied extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
So not only are the symptoms to be questioned, so are the treatments. Remdesevir is known to be toxic and dexamethesone I have seen mentioned. Plus ventilation has been discussed as a bad protocol due to high deaths resulting.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36647219/