Mau

Follow me as I seek to explain & validate the argument that wins the vaccine debate. My🧵s in search of the truth. 1) What happened in New Zealand? How and why does a small island country show us beyond doubt how safe vaccines are? twitter.com/MauritzPreller…

@TimothySawyerMD @AlexBerenson Done, Done. Your scpieel.

@MauritzPreller @AlexBerenson 1. You have created a very sophisticated, compelling argument, from “some smart people.” 2. Now, review and present the best counter-arguments and conflicting data you can find from other smart people. 3. Which part was mumble jumbo?

Why does the thought of following new evidence and updating your conclusions set you off like this? This is a serious question, why not engage with the data rather than these ad-hominem attacks? It makes you look intellectually brittle, at best.

@TimTrippDesign @MedRest1 @grok @DoctorTro @RogerSeheult How many studies do you need to make up your mind? I can keep going.

@TimTrippDesign @MedRest1 @grok @DoctorTro @RogerSeheult This study directly addresses the "waning" question. It found that even when neutralizing antibody levels drop substantially against variants like Omicron, vaccine effectiveness against severe and fatal outcomes remains above 75%. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40404724/

About transmission.. It seems some people “gave up in 2021 on the idea that COVID vaccines helped prevent infection, transmission, and hospitalization." I suspect the confusion is that some people heard “prevent” and interpreted it as “prevent all infection, all transmission, and all hospitalization.” Its a bit like the misdirected ideas that some had that "all people who get covid will end up hospitalised or dead". (Did I hear anyone say @MaryBowdenMD?) That was never the sensible standard. A vaccine can reduce infection risk without eliminating infection. It can reduce transmission without stopping every onward case. It can reduce hospitalization risk without making hospitalization impossible. Thinking vaccines must stop all transmission to have any transmission benefit is like thinking boots are useless in the rain because your socks might still get wet. The claim worth debating is not “perfect protection.” It is degree of risk reduction.

No. Some smart people found snd synthesised the data that allows us to analyze excess mortality for a very long list of countries. When we rank countries by this measure we find that the countries that did well at vaccination timing and coverage wise had low excess mortality and visa versa. Judge for yourself without the mumbo jumbo

@MauritzPreller @AlexBerenson You’re reasoning argumentatively, starting with your belief, and finding data to fit it. Truth discovery begins with opening your mind, THEN reviewing the most relevant data on both sides, focusing most on data that conflict with your intuitive supposition.

The #Ebola situation in the #DRC is deeply worrisome. So far, 82 cases have been confirmed, with seven confirmed deaths. But we know the epidemic in the DRC is much larger. There are now almost 750 suspected cases and 177 suspected deaths. The situation in #Uganda is currently stable, with two confirmed cases, and one death reported. There have been no new cases or deaths reported. An American national who was working in DRC has also been confirmed positive, and transferred to Germany for care. We are aware of the reports today about another American national who is a high-risk contact who has been transferred to the Czech Republic. These numbers are changing as surveillance efforts and laboratory testing is improving, but violence and insecurity are impeding the response. Additional @WHO personnel have deployed to Ituri, the epicentre of the DRC outbreak, to support affected communities. I am in regular contact with the government officials of the affected countries to coordinate response actions. I have just convened a Member States briefing to update them on the ongoing response.

@Frieren_elfie I did not think Hanta was a severe emergency? You have a rating approach you like to apply?

@MauritzPreller So did Hanta 3 weeks ago. H5N1 2 yrs ago. Depends on MSM pimps.

Seriously an Ex CDC Director? Predicting not ONE but TWO pandemics? Two seperate Viruses two years apart, RIGHT BEFORE ELECTIONS. Could yall NOT be MORE OBVIOUS! x.com/Frieren_elfie/…

@Frieren_elfie Well.. TB.

@MauritzPreller Is it? How many have occurred before? What abt Nipah which is active right now or Dengue?

@TimTrippDesign @MedRest1 @grok @DoctorTro @RogerSeheult Before we go there, at what % do you draw the line?

@MauritzPreller @MedRest1 @grok @DoctorTro @RogerSeheult What's your source for the 90%?

@Frieren_elfie Good topics, thank you. This Ebola outbreak seems like a severe emergency.

@MauritzPreller Look up what constitutes Epidemic vs Panidemic, that will define it. Also Novel viruses role in pandemic. After that you'll understand.

@Frieren_elfie I suspect we only disagree on the quantum of what would constitute fear mongering. Tx for what you hold

@MauritzPreller That's fine. I care abt all humans medical and mental health globally. Lying and using pandemic falsely retraumatizes ppl

@Frieren_elfie Thank you. Agreed. We need as many people who think like you as possible. It would make the world a better place. Apologies for the mischaracterization..

@MauritzPreller All countries should be helping. I have no angle. Public health has no place for lies, politics, and fear mongering

@Frieren_elfie Hehe. Sorry, I see your angle on this. To many lableak freaks on my timeline.

@MauritzPreller This shows how poor your insight is into this. Or you're making statements having not read my tl. As doctor without borders, multiple countries, and agencies are on this. We are raising funds, recruiting, organizing, etc

Btw. You asked this question and Ive not had the head space to answer. I can add more detail but almost certainly the vaccinated 50 year old. Being healthy is real immune support, but it’s non specific protection. A good lifestyle tunes up your immune system, but it can’t teach your body to recognise a brand-new virus. That’s what vaccination does. Vaccination cuts the risk of severe disease and death by ~90%+, even in high-risk groups. We can talk about waning but evidence suggests this remains a significant %. An unvaccinated, healthy 50-year-old has no prior specific immunity, their baseline hospitalisation risk might be ~2%, while the vaccinated high-risk person’s residual risk shrinks well below 1%. Deprivation and comorbidities multiply raw risk, but the vaccine’s protection shrinks that risk so much that the absolute gap becomes tiny. A vaccine provides a wall of specific defence that general health, affluence, and fitness alone cannot match facing a novel virus. x.com/i/status/20568…

Well, there are a few challenges with that line of thinking. Firstly, it was not only high-risk groups getting very sick or dying. Secondly, you often have no idea you are in a high-risk group. Thirdly, if your risk is statistically lower to take a prophylaxis against a pathogen that hold significant risk and eventual exposure is pretty certain, and if that prophylaxis is safer than most of the medicine they would treat you with if you get sick, the decision is pretty straightforward. Admittedly, that's just me. There are other advantages and risks too, but if those are not enough they probably wont inspire you to wisdom.

@Rozemar79838305 @mattwridley @MonaRahalkar @BillyBostickson @VBruttel @C_Small_ @BumblebeeJoe @MarionKoopmans was in fact right.

You can follow the transcript #DRASTIC @mattwridley @MonaRahalkar @BillyBostickson @VBruttel @C_Small_ @BumblebeeJoe

In April 2022, Marion Koopmans was interviewed in Room for Discussion (made by students, Amsterdam University). I missed this! Marion mentions here that she spoke with Shi Zhengli, that there was not GoF at WIV and that the GoF was done in the US. .... m.youtube.com/watch?v=zzkTyP…

@BarryYoungNZ @UncleJo46902375 @henjin256 @DrDaniel832 @scoopsmcgoo @waynewi62676963 @stkirsch Use the last column in this table Barry. Its almost the same as Scragg Table 1. Its in fact not "most accurate" because of the timing difference and your data covering multiple years but removes reinfection and some other things better.

@UncleJo46902375 @MauritzPreller @henjin256 @DrDaniel832 @scoopsmcgoo @waynewi62676963 @stkirsch I used Scraggs 2022. As I have said many times. If you have different numbers put them here and explain it. Then we can work out the expected deaths per 100k person years in each age group. Let's agree on a baseline and go from there.

🚨What the data shows🚨 The Crowns expert witness - a Professor of Epidemiology at Auckland University provided 2022 Age Standardised Mortality stats for NZ (easy to find). With that it is also easy to predict expected mortality according to all age groups and the length of time they were followed after their last vaccination. Remember this is for over 2 million people of ALL ages. The results are devastating. Overall SMR = 1.51 (using 2022 elevated mortality stats). Observed deaths were approximately 51% higher than expected even under the 2022 baseline rates, given the actual person-time at risk in the cohort. SMR is close to or below 1 in younger bands and rises steadily in older bands (reaching ~1.6 in the 75+ groups). This gradient is consistent. This is a clean, person-time-adjusted analysis. No subset cherry-picking...just data. P-value for this being a 'fluke' (Poisson test) Under the null hypothesis that the 2022 baseline rates fully explain the mortality (i.e. no excess), the number of observed deaths follows a Poisson distribution with mean = expected deaths. Observed deaths (O) = 37,250 Expected deaths (E) = 24,719.5 SMR ≈ 1.51 For large numbers the normal approximation to the Poisson is excellent: Test statistics z = (O − E) / √E ≈ (37,250 − 24,719.5) / √24,719.5 ≈ 79.7 The one-sided p-value for observing this many (or more) deaths by chance is: p < 10^{-1000} (effectively 0 for any practical or statistical purpose). ZERO CHANCE THIS IS A 'FLUKE'. Covid vaccines should have been investigated and stopped years ago.