Several Substackers have been on the case of Paxlovid for leading to rebounds — essentially creating a scenario where individuals who may have otherwise stayed home and rested believe they are “cured” increasing transmission potential in the best case scenario.
We should not be too terribly surprised by instances of rebound infection beyond Paxlovid. Rebound infection from COVID-19 was a known phenomenon even before the mRNA inoculations.
However, what has been noted with Paxlovid appears to be that rebound infection is more common among the inoculated than the non-inoculated. Given that Paxlovid itself would work the same in both patient cohorts, that variance is a strong signal of immunological damage from the mRNA inoculations.
Elevated cases of rebound infection among COVID patients treated with Molnupiravir arguably sends the same signal.
Where the efficacy of the drug is inherently suspect, elevated instances of rebound infection among inoculated patients should be the expected scenario, so far as I can tell.
Yes. The important part here is that those taking Molnupiravir are rebounding at the same (or higher) rate as with Paxlovid, which has been established to be well above baseline
I'm trying real hard to be shocked by all of this. Really, I am.
At this point it's becoming hard to avoid the inevitable cynicism. We're so far past any reasonable debate over the toxicity of both the mRNA inoculations and these poisonous concoctions masquerading as therapies that the only real question is when do we apply a dose of tar and feathers to the FDA and CDC "experts" pushing this crap on the people?
I think it's a good wake up calling a way. I remember Toby Rogers pointed out the vast majority of FDA approved drugs end up being recalled. More people are becoming skeptics than ever before and that, at least, is a positive outcome
Bingo. Good catch! Actually, it may be a bit more complicated than as those are the numbers after matching, before matching it is 19.9% vaccinated who took Paxlovid and 24.8% rebounds, and 12.7% vaccinated who took Molnupiravir making up 17.6% of rebound cases. I don't think they have the after matching rates, but the authors did actually notice this, too, and came to the Church of COVID conclusion:
"The EHR-documented COVID-19 vaccination rate was higher in patients with COVID-19 rebound than those without, suggesting that vaccination is not a major contributor to COVID-19 rebound (Table 2). Similar trends were observed for Molnupiravir."
I should make one other note: this could easily be spurious. It seems they only took vaccination status as captured by those who took the vaccine in their EHR meaning the vaccination status of the entire population was likely far higher but they just didn't have data on people that were vaccinated at pharmacies etc
Molnupiravir was developed at Emory, who are in bed with the CDC, I'm sure there are absolutely no conflicts of interest.
It seems our entire healthcare system is one big grift.
Very interesting!!!
Air hammer
Forged by dwarves.
Evildwarves.
We should not be too terribly surprised by instances of rebound infection beyond Paxlovid. Rebound infection from COVID-19 was a known phenomenon even before the mRNA inoculations.
https://allfactsmatter.substack.com/p/cdc-issues-paxlovid-warning-but-what
However, what has been noted with Paxlovid appears to be that rebound infection is more common among the inoculated than the non-inoculated. Given that Paxlovid itself would work the same in both patient cohorts, that variance is a strong signal of immunological damage from the mRNA inoculations.
Elevated cases of rebound infection among COVID patients treated with Molnupiravir arguably sends the same signal.
Where the efficacy of the drug is inherently suspect, elevated instances of rebound infection among inoculated patients should be the expected scenario, so far as I can tell.
Yes. The important part here is that those taking Molnupiravir are rebounding at the same (or higher) rate as with Paxlovid, which has been established to be well above baseline
I'm trying real hard to be shocked by all of this. Really, I am.
At this point it's becoming hard to avoid the inevitable cynicism. We're so far past any reasonable debate over the toxicity of both the mRNA inoculations and these poisonous concoctions masquerading as therapies that the only real question is when do we apply a dose of tar and feathers to the FDA and CDC "experts" pushing this crap on the people?
I think it's a good wake up calling a way. I remember Toby Rogers pointed out the vast majority of FDA approved drugs end up being recalled. More people are becoming skeptics than ever before and that, at least, is a positive outcome
The wake up call is at least necessary.
But DAMN it's an expensive way to go about it!
Bingo. Good catch! Actually, it may be a bit more complicated than as those are the numbers after matching, before matching it is 19.9% vaccinated who took Paxlovid and 24.8% rebounds, and 12.7% vaccinated who took Molnupiravir making up 17.6% of rebound cases. I don't think they have the after matching rates, but the authors did actually notice this, too, and came to the Church of COVID conclusion:
"The EHR-documented COVID-19 vaccination rate was higher in patients with COVID-19 rebound than those without, suggesting that vaccination is not a major contributor to COVID-19 rebound (Table 2). Similar trends were observed for Molnupiravir."
I should make one other note: this could easily be spurious. It seems they only took vaccination status as captured by those who took the vaccine in their EHR meaning the vaccination status of the entire population was likely far higher but they just didn't have data on people that were vaccinated at pharmacies etc