Become a Member

Catching Up on COVID and Keeping Up to Date on Monkeypox

Latest updates from Doc Gumshoe

By Michael Jorrin, "Doc Gumshoe", August 24, 2022

I’m not quite old enough to remember what the view was on influenza after the 1918 pandemic eased off, but my general impression is that a lot of people – physicians and ordinary folks alike – thought that it would more or less be around forever, not raging and slaughtering millions, but certainly not dimming down into nothingness.

That’s more or less the prevailing opinion about COVID-19. You remember, of course, why it was called COVID-19 – because that’s when the disease emerged, late in 2019, and it hasn’t yet faded away. COVID may well be with us as a part of our overall health concerns “for the duration.” Much like the flu virus, new varieties are likely to keep emerging, and it may be necessary – or at least strongly advisable – to keep tweaking the vaccines so that they confer protection against these new strains. And it may be a good practice to get re-vaccinated periodically as the new varieties emerge. I would expect to get my annual COVID shot just as I get my annual flu shot. But, at the same time, I would not expect to keep having to wear a mask whenever I’m indoors with other people. This coming season, our chorus may sing masked, at least through the December concert, but not forever.

In the meantime, even as the rates of new cases, hospitalizations, and deaths stays at fairly low levels, COVID continues to surprise us.

A surprise that made front pages was that President Biden had a recurrence of COVID quite soon after he had been successfully treated with Paxlovid. This was not a reinfection – it was a resurgence of infection with the virus that infected him initially.

Paxlovid rebound – what might account for it?

Paxlovid, from Pfizer, is a combination of two drugs – nirmatrelvir, which inhibits the replication of the coronavirus, and ritonavir, which slows the breakdown and inactivation of nirmatrelvir. It is given as three separate pills, two nirmatrelvir, and one ritonavir. Ritonavir is a protease inhibitor which is primarily used in the treatment of HIV/AIDS. Protease inhibitors prevent the replication of viruses by preventing the cleaving of proteins, which is an essential step in viral replication. In the Paxlovid combination, ritonavir is not working as an antiviral, but as a protector of nirmatrelvir, the active antiviral in the combination.

Paxlovid is available under the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for adult and pediatric patients at least 12 years of age and weighing at least 88 pounds. Treatment should be initiated as soon as possible, but at least within 5 days of symptom onset. Patients eligible for treatment must have mild-to-moderate disease, but not require hospitalization, and not have severe kidney or liver involvement.

The CDC defines Paxlovid rebound as reemergence of COVID symptoms or positive tests after a previous negative test, occurring 2 to 8 days after initial recovery. Pfizer reported that between 1% and 2% of subjects in the Paxlovid clinical trial tested positive after finishing the course of treatment.

The experts have been unusually reticent in ascribing specific causes for Paxlovid rebound. They have mentioned several possible scenarios as to how rebound might appear to have taken place. For example, it has been pointed out that some respiratory illnesses have what they call a “bimodal course” – specifically, that symptoms may surge after having initially receded. Another suggestion is that secondary bacterial infections might occur – sinusitis, bronchitis, pneumonia – in patients with COVID-19, and these might be mistaken for rebounds. However (says Doc Gumshoe) these infections would not result in a positive COVID test.

Experts also point to possible inaccuracies in COVID antigen testing, including the possibility that dead coronavirus would still result in a positive test. Some patients who have recovered from COVID symptoms continue to test positive for the virus.

An obvious possibility that has not been discussed publicly is that the dose of Paxlovid and/or the duration of treatment is not sufficient to eliminate the pathogen. Determining those parameters is one of the first objectives of the clinical trial process, and something of the sort must have taken place in the early trials with the Paxlovid combination.

Clinical trials of drugs meant to treat infectious diseases usually have dual outcome measures. The investigators, having determined a dose of the candidate drug that is safe, then need to check whether that dose accomplishes two separate goals: relief of symptoms and elimination of the pathogen. Frequently, separate arms of the trial use different dosing regimens – a higher dose for a shorter period, or a lower dose for a longer period. And even when the research is done with maximum care, it often happens that when the drug is in wide use, there are instances where either the symptoms persist or the pathogens survive.

Sometimes, when the pathogens survive, what has happened is that insufficient exposure to the drug permitted some pathogens to evade the action of the drug. The drug eliminated the susceptible pathogens, but the ones that got away had a characteristic that in some way permitted them to avoid the specific mechanism of the drug that had killed their fellow pathogens. That characteristic would then be passed on to the descendants of the surviving pathogen, and those descendants would then become a resistant strain.

Avoiding the creation of antimicrobial resistant pathogenic strains is one of the principal objectives of the treatment of infectious diseases. It is for that reason that patients are strongly urged to continue taking antimicrobial medications for the complete course of treatment, and not to discontinue taking the drug when their symptoms abate.

Doc Gumshoe is not accusing Joe Biden of having stopped taking his Paxlovid prescription for the full course. But it may be that what was determined as a full course of Paxlovid was based on imprecise clinical trial data.

The CDC data on Paxlovid rebound states that the patients who experienced rebound had completed the 5-day course of treatment and had negative test results as well as recovery from COVID-19 symptoms. Their symptoms re-emerged between 2 and 8 days after the negative tests, and these patients had positive antigen and/or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction testing (RT-PCR). The CDC statement asserts that these patients did not experience re-infection. That assertion is qualified by the phrase “based on information from the case reports.”

I agree with the CDC that it is highly unlikely that the rebound patients would have been re-exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in time to bring about a re-emergence of symptoms so quickly after both symptomatic and virologic clearance. That means (unless my logic is hopelessly fallacious) that the rebound must have been brought about by coronavirus that remained in the patients after their recovery and negative test results. The negative rest results did not mean that every single bit of the virus had been eliminated. Some virus must have remained in the patients’ bodies, and it was those virus particles that multiplied and brought about the return of symptoms.

What that must mean, according to Doc Gumshoe, is that either the dosage quantity or duration of treatment was insufficient to eliminate the virus.

Fortunately for those patients experiencing rebound, their acquired immunity was enough to deal with their symptoms in fairly short order.

The CDC advises that persons with a recurrence of symptoms or a new positive viral test after having tested negative should restart isolation for at least 5 days. Some individuals may continue to test positive after 10 days, but there is no evidence that they transmit infectious virus. Currently, there are no reports of severe disease among persons with COVID-19 rebound.

How long can an infected person continue to transmit the coronavirus?

A small study conducted at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston from 5 January to 11 February of this year found that of 40 subjects, 30 continued to test positive on the rapid antigen test (RAT) on day 6 after their first positive test. The predominant strain in the Boston area at that time was Omicron BA.1.

Are you getting our free Daily Update
"reveal" emails? If not,
just click here...


The researchers then collected nasal and oral swabs from a 17-person subset of the group in order to grow the virus in a culture. If a virus will grow in a lab culture, it is highly likely that the virus is transmissible and that the individuals from whom the swabs were collected had the capacity to transmit COVID-19 to other persons. Six of the 17 individuals in that subset were harboring culturable virus and were therefore deemed to be able to transmit disease 6 days after the first positive antigen test, even if they are over their symptoms and have no fever.

All 40 of the patients in the study were negative by day 14. In those patients who had experienced symptoms after the positive RAT, the average time to a negative rapid antigen test was just over 9 days. In those who had not experienced symptoms, that time was about 8 days.

Lisa Cosimi, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital pointed to two other small studies that confirmed these findings. One study found that 17% of vaccinated college students had culturable virus beyond day 5 after symptom onset, with the latest on day 12. Another study found that the median time to conversion to a negative culture test was 6 days after an initial PCR positive test.

Current CDC guidelines recommend ending isolation after 5 days if the patient has been free from fever for 24 hours and symptoms are improving. The evidence that fully one-third of patients could continue to transmit COVID after the CDC isolation period is over casts doubt on the validity of those guidelines.

The conclusion of the Brigham and Women’s researchers was cautiously stated:

“The data suggest that a negative RAT result in individuals with residual symptoms could provide reassurance about ending isolation. However, a universal requirement of a negative RAT result may unduly extend isolation for those who are no longer infectious. Meanwhile, a recommendation to end isolation based solely on the presence of improving symptoms risks releasing culture-positive, potentially infectious individuals prematurely, underscoring the importance of proper mask wearing and avoidance of high-risk transmission venues through day 10.”

In other words, they refrain from saying that isolation should be extended to day 10, which would cover the average time from the first positive RAT to a negative RAT in most patients. However, they do emphasize mask-wearing and avoidance of indoor crowds.

There has been a great deal of pressure on the CDC to lighten up on restrictions, and this subject is discussed below. But knowing that persons who have tested positive via the rapid antigen test are allowed to end the period of isolation after only 5 days, when a significant portion of those persons are carrying enough of the virus to transmit infection to others, puts much of the burden of preventing transmission on the public at large and not on the potential sources of the infection.

I think a reasonable period of isolation after a positive test should be 10 days.

Revised CDC guidelines and FDA recommendation on testing

These revised guidelines were published the week of August 8th, and on the whole they shift the management of risk to the individual. On a number of the key issues, the guidelines are more lenient and they leave it up to each of us to decide what our risk-managing behaviors should be.

For example, while the earlier guidelines were specific about maintaining a six-foot distance from others while in any public space, the revised guidelines say that we “may want to avoid crowded spaces” and may want to maintain a distance (unspecified) from others in order to minimize exposure to the virus. The guidelines pointed out that this precaution might be especially important for those who are at high risk for severe COVID-19.

The masking guidelines have not changed much. The CDC continues to recommend that everybody aged two years and up wear a mask in public indoor spaces when the local community COVID level is high, which is the case currently in 40% of the counties in the US.

The CDC recommendations regarding quarantining for the unvaccinated who have been exposed to an infected person have disappeared. Under the current recommendations, people who have been exposed to the virus can continue their daily routines regardless of vaccination status, as long as they remain asymptomatic. However, they should continue to wear masks, monitor themselves for symptoms, and get tested at least five days after exposure.

Persons who test positive for the virus should stay at home for at least five days and maintain a distance from other persons in the household. If they remain asymptomatic, or if symptoms are improving and they are fever-free for at least one day, they can leave isolation after five days.

In the previous guidelines, persons infected with the coronavirus were to wear a mask at all times for 10 days. Under the new guidelines, they can discontinue masking if they test negative on two successive rapid antigen testing 48 hours apart.

Individuals who have moderate or severe illnesses should remain in isolation for a full 10 days.

And, on Thursday, August 11th, the FDA issued revised recommendations regarding testing. Asymptomatic people should do three RATs spaced 48 hours apart, in order to be sure that they have not missed an infection. Persons who have COVID-19 symptoms should take two RATs, 48 hours apart. These recommendations were based on a study from the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School. The study found that in persons with COVID symptoms, two tests, 48 hours apart, detected the coronavirus in 93% of the 154 subjects. But in another group of asymptomatic subjects, two tests detected the coronavirus in just 63% of subjects who had been determined to be infected with the virus by the more accurate PCR tests; thus, the three-test recommendation for asymptomatic individuals.

The FDA testing recommendations for asymptomatic individuals are obviously not meant to apply to every man, woman, and child in the country, but only to those who have reason to think that they have been exposed to the virus.

The response to the CDC and FDA recommendations from clinicians and epidemiologists has varied a good deal. On balance, as I have been paying attention to these responses, it seems as though the epidemiologists are more critical, while the clinicians have a more measured view. The epidemiologists are looking at these recommendations from their perspective, which is that the goal is to stamp out the disease once and for all. Of course, they realize that eliminating the SARS-CoV-2 virus, with its many variants, is not going to happen, but they would have liked to pursue the somewhat more realistic goal of reducing its presence on Planet Earth to that of a rare disease which only occasionally pops up.

The clinicians are looking at the overall situation from the perspective of the individual patients that they treat. What they’re seeing is that transmission is down, hospitalizations are down, while the death rate has not changed that much over the past few months. But the death rate lags those other indicators considerably, and a reasonable expectation is that the death rate will also be down.

Clinicians tend not to be focused on one particular disease, but on the general health and well-being of their patients, and their response (in general) has been that these revised recommendations align well with the present status of the disease, taking into account the greatly increased levels of immunity that are out there, based on the great numbers of people who have some immunity due to having been infected, and also on the numbers who have been at least partly vaccinated.

It’s fairly evident that the CDC/FDA positions are to some degree influenced by politics. Neither agency wants to be viewed as dictatorial. They fully understand that the public is weary of COVID-linked restrictions, and that to maintain their authority and credibility they need to be attuned to what the public wants. Responding to public sentiment, the CDC/FDA have put in place restrictions that are shorter-term and looser that some of the strictest authorities would favor.

Will I still be wearing a mask a year from now? We’ll see.

During these past few months, another disease has emerged in the US and several developed countries, that has people and government authorities considerably concerned: monkeypox.

Monkeypox – what is it and where is it going?

Before April of this year, monkeypox was essentially unknown outside of Africa, where it has been fairly common. The virus is a member of the Orthopox class. There are two monkeypox “clades” (related groups) – the Congo basin clade and the West African clade. The disease is present in 11 nations in Africa, but the total number and frequency of cases is unknown. The fatality rate is about 3%.

The disease is transmitted from animals to humans, the animal carriers being simians and also squirrels, rats, and dormice.

The first case in the US emerged in 2003. The patient had been infected by a prairie dog which had been housed with rats and dormice from Gambia.

In the US as of August 12th there were 10,708 cases of monkeypox, of which 2,187 were in New York state, 1,812 in California, and 1,035 in Florida.

By far the majority of monkeypox cases outside of Africa have been in men who have sex with men. That proportion has been put at 97%, 98%, and 99% by various authorities.

The New England Journal of Medicine reported on the results from a consortium of physicians in 16 countries who diagnosed monkeypox infections in 528 persons between April 27 and June 24 of 2022. In this group, NEJM reported that 98% were gay or bisexual men. Of these, 41% had concurrent HIV infections, 95% presented with a rash, 73% had anogenital lesions, and 41% had mucosal lesions. Common symptoms preceding the rash were fever (62%), lethargy (41%), muscle pain (31%), and headache (27%). Other sexually transmitted infections were reported in 109 of 377 persons (29%) who were tested. Seventy individuals (13%) were hospitalized for pain management, mostly for severe anorectal pain. There were no deaths. (NEnglJMed 7/21/22 DOI:10.056/NEJMoa2207323)

The authorities have been a bit equivocal about characterizing monkeypox as overwhelmingly a disease that is associated with male homosexual activity. There is, of course, nothing intrinsic in the pathology of monkeypox that limits the disease to that particular group. Transmission of the virus can take place under any circumstances where there is close skin-to-skin contact, which would certainly include heterosexual activity. However, the actual data thus far indicate that transmission through sexual contact between men and women is rare.

The authorities are understandably reluctant to label monkeypox as a gay men’s disease, as happened with HIV/AIDS. This reportedly discouraged men who thought they might be infected with that disease from coming forward and seeking treatment. However, that reluctance has prevented the CDC/FDA and other healthcare authorities from issuing warnings about group sex and casual sexual contacts. Settings where men have intimate contact with multiple partners are the monkeypox equivalent of COVID-19 super-spreader events.

A Lancet study, made public a few days ago, found strong statistical links between the specific sexual activity and the viral load. Proctitis, an inflammation in the lining of the rectum, was more likely in individuals who reported anal receptive sex, while nearly all of those who presented with ulcerative tonsillitis reported oral receptive sex. The findings were consistent with a viral load more than three orders of magnitude higher in lesion samples than in respiratory samples. (Mitjà O., Lancet 08/08/2022)

The researchers stated that “Strikingly higher viral loads in lesion swabs than in pharyngeal swabs should be further investigated to guide the decision on whether respiratory transmission is relevant and respiratory isolation at home is necessary.”

Of course, monkeypox is not exclusively transmitted through gay sex. A man in California was recently diagnosed with monkeypox, which he probably got at an event in the UK where many casually dressed people were dancing – skin-to-skin contact, but not sexual. There have been a few cases of monkeypox in women, who in all likelihood had skin-to-skin contact with infected men. And there have even been a few – very few – cases of monkeypox in children. Again, skin-to-skin contact was the likely route. I have not run across documented instances of respiratory transmission.

Prevention and treatment: vaccines and drugs

People vaccinated against smallpox have robust protection against the monkeypox virus. However, routine vaccination against smallpox in the US was discontinued in 1972, when the disease had been virtually eliminated globally.

The vaccine currently available against monkeypox is JYNNEOS, also called the Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA) vaccine, made by Bavarian Nordic in Denmark. It was approved by the FDA in 2019 for prevention of smallpox and monkeypox in adults 18 years of age and older determined to be at high risk for smallpox or monkeypox infection. JYNNEOS is administered subcutaneously as two doses, four weeks apart. For individuals 18 years of age and older determined to be at high risk of monkeypox infection, an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) as of August 9th allows for a fraction of the JYNNEOS dose to be administered between the layers of the skin (intradermally). A similar policy has been adopted in European nations. This will reportedly quintuple the available doses of the vaccine, as compared with subcutaneous injection.

The JYNNEOS vaccine can prevent infection if given up to four days after exposure to the monkeypox virus, and it can mitigate the effects of the infection if given as long as 14 days after exposure.

Bob Fenton, the White House monkeypox response coordinator, called the announcement of intradermal use a “game-changer” for the administration’s vaccine response. “It’s safe, it’s effective, and it will significantly scale the volume of vaccine doses available for communities across the country. In addition to the 670,000 vials of the JYNNEOS vaccine that have already been distributed, “we have 400,000 vials in the Strategic National Stockpile that [are] ready to be ordered, when jurisdictions use 90% of their current supply. With today’s announcement, those 400,000 vials have the potential to provide up to 2 million doses to Americans. We encourage jurisdictions to utilize the alternative dosing method as quickly as possible.”

While it appears that there will be enough of the JYNNEOS vaccine to meet current needs in the US, the situation in Europe is somewhat different. “Vaccine tourism” has been described as on the rise, as individuals who are at risk of infection, but cannot find the vaccine in their home countries, travel to other countries where the vaccine is more available. The manufacturer, Bavarian Nordic, has expressed doubts as to their ability to meet the current needs. The Danish company is exploring the possibility of outsourcing some of its production, including a technology transfer to a US contract manufacturer, to meet accelerating demand. A company spokesperson said that Bavarian Nordic “is in conversations with multiple companies to further expand manufacturing capacity globally.”

Another smallpox/monkeypox vaccine, ACAM2000 (Sanofi Pasteur Biologics), was approved by the FDA in 2018 for persons determined to be at high risk for smallpox infection. The vaccine uses the live vaccinia virus, and has the capacity to infect vaccine recipients with the actual disease. FDA approval of ACAM2000 was motivated by the possibility that smallpox could be used as a biological weapon.

TPOXX

At this time, the only drug authorized in any way for the treatment of monkeypox is TPOXX (tecovirimat, from SIGA Technologies). Only a few of the people who would be appropriate candidates for treatment with TPOXX have received the drug, partly because the supply is limited, and also partly because in order to prescribe the drug, physicians have to go through an extremely elaborate and time-consuming process. Since monkeypox is rarely fatal, many physicians avoid that process and simply address their patients’ pain and skin lesions.

The focus of SIGA Technologies has been on treatment of smallpox and related viruses – cowpox, monkeypox, and related vaccinia viruses. Tecovirimat was developed as a smallpox vaccine and tested in humans for safety, but only in animals for efficacy. It would be unethical (to say the least!) to test tecovirimat for efficacy in humans. Such a test would have required exposing the human subjects to a virus closely related to the smallpox virus, with potentially lethal consequences for the trial subjects.

In 2013, SIGA delivered 590,000 courses of tecovirimat (then called Arestvy) to the US Strategic National Stockpile for use in the event of urgent need, presumably an outbreak of smallpox.

The FDA granted approval of TPOXX in 2018, and in 2019 SIGA signed a $23 million contract with the US Department of Defense to supply TPOXX for smallpox “post-exposure prophylaxis,” i.e., treatment. The FDA has approved TPOXX for the treatment of monkeypox under “investigational approval,” which adds complications for physicians who want to prescribe TPOXX to patients who they think would benefit.

About a week ago, the US Department of Health and Human Services purchased $26 million worth of TPOXX specifically to treat monkeypox. SIGA expects to deliver the drug next year.

Doc Gumshoe is almost embarrassed to mention monkeypox in the same piece as COVID-19. The COVID death rate in the US is still running at something like 400 per day, while (so far as I know) there have been zero monkeypox deaths in the US. According to WHO, there have been two monkeypox deaths in Spain, one in Brazil, one in Ecuador and one in India. In Africa, perhaps 3% of the people who get monkeypox die; however, many or most of these persons also have HIV, which powerfully diminishes the effectiveness of their own immune response. Most persons who catch this disease recover completely in two to four weeks. Yes, the disease can be excruciatingly painful, and it’s highly important to our society to do what we can to prevent the further spread of this disease, and to be able to offer humane and effective treatment to those who have the misfortune to get the disease. But there’s no cause to panic.

* * * * * * * *

I’ve made note of several of the comments in response to my last disquisition about inflammation and also some requests that have come in off-line, and I will try to address them in the next installment, which won’t be until we come back from our annual vacation in Maine. My wife and I are praying for cool weather, but not too cool!

Many thanks for all responses! Stay well, best to all! Michael Jorrin (aka Doc Gumshoe)

[ed note: Michael Jorrin, who I dubbed “Doc Gumshoe” many years ago, is a longtime medical writer (not a doctor) and shares his commentary with Gumshoe readers once or twice a month. He does not generally write about the investment prospects of topics he covers, but has agreed to our trading restrictions.  Past Doc Gumshoe columns are available here.]

guest

12345

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

30 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JustJohn
Irregular
JustJohn
August 24, 2022 12:44 pm

Good info as usual. Thanks Doc!

👍 87
Uncle Albert
Member
Uncle Albert
August 24, 2022 2:35 pm
Reply to  JustJohn

I second what JustJohn said but that does not mean I accept anything the gubmint says esp. now that the TPTB have retracted their previous bulls*hit
in re: the virus, masking, and social distancing.
Carry on and keep calm.

Sam Whitmore
Guest
Sam Whitmore
August 24, 2022 2:15 pm

Maybe the good doctor might like to explain why five physicians in Toronto died suddenly from heart attacks and/or cancer soon after receiving another vaccination jab. They all reportedly were in good health and fairly young prior to the jab with no symptoms. Curiously the main stream media in Canada ignored the story.

Add a Topic
3397
Add a Topic
6113
Add a Topic
1515
KenC
Guest
KenC
August 24, 2022 11:05 pm
Reply to  Sam Whitmore

Cluster of Physician Deaths at Canadian Hospital Spurs Misinfo Campaign
— All three doctors died from cancer, but became the subject of anti-vax social media posts

https://www.medpagetoday.com/

Add a Topic
3397
Sam Whitmore
Guest
Sam Whitmore
August 25, 2022 2:45 pm
Reply to  KenC

There were five, and they didn’t all die from cancer. In fact one young female (or person with a vagina if your woke) was a young triathlete in perfect health who had a heart attack while swimming. Go figure!

Add a Topic
3397
Wombat
Guest
Wombat
August 28, 2022 9:26 am
Reply to  Sam Whitmore

FFS Sam, take your B$ conspiracy theories over to Fox. We are her to make money…

Add a Topic
cvid
Add a Topic
cvid
Add a Topic
cvid
Royalty Investor
Irregular
Royalty Investor
August 28, 2022 11:10 am
Reply to  Wombat

Make money but die early isn’t really winning now is it?

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/the-safe-and-effective-narrative

👍 62
Paul
Irregular
Paul
August 25, 2022 5:46 am
Reply to  Sam Whitmore

You might like to provide a little documentation, since it could be false or misleadingly out of context.

kapphx
August 24, 2022 3:11 pm

“The authorities are understandably reluctant to label monkeypox as a gay men’s disease.”

Understandably????

Add a Topic
13132
Jeff
Member
August 24, 2022 7:21 pm
Reply to  kapphx

Scared into silence by The Illuminati!!!!

Paul
Irregular
Paul
August 25, 2022 6:23 am
Reply to  Jeff

Those darn Illuminati dog-eared a bunch pages in my books!

Royalty Investor
Irregular
Royalty Investor
August 24, 2022 4:12 pm

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/the-safe-and-effective-narrative

Please point the thinkolator to the above list and tell us what it concludes about COVID.

👍 62
Alice
Guest
Alice
August 24, 2022 4:15 pm

I think the Ovid,monkey pox scares are mostly exaggerated because of the politics involved. Stop wearing unhealthy masks ..especially children! Live life! With all its risks. It’s better than the alternative

Paul
Irregular
Paul
August 25, 2022 6:21 am
Reply to  Alice

Alice – Tell that to surgeons, too, who keep keeling over while performing operations. They’ve been doing that for years, killing surgery patients left and right for decades, but does The Medical-Industrial-Pharma-Agribusiness-Bill Gates-Lizard People-Clinton Foundation-WHO-CDC Complex Care?

Tell that to the Japanese, Taiwanese, Koreans, etc. who are too Asian to know The All-American Truth that wearing masks may help you not get flu or other airborne diseases, but they will hurt you in every other way: devalue your currency, give you worse gas mileage, make your neighbors laugh at you behind your back, make your cars too small, etc.

No masks for kids! They should be encouraged to cough on each other, to build up their immunity to permanent invincibility when they’re young. They should also be eating bugs and moldy bread, etc. for the same reason.

Add a Topic
6225
deumberger
deumberger
August 24, 2022 11:18 pm

Masks do not stop the virus as they ride on aerosol particles. If you can breathe through a mask a virus can pass through. (see INFECTED by Ralph LA Guardia, MD.) One of the best and safest treatments for Covid 19 is Ivermentin. It has been used to treat millions of people and I may add millions of livestock (cattle, sheep, horses, etc).
Personally, I use a natural approach consisting of Vitamin D3, A, C, Zinc, Quercetin, selenium and iodine. Iodine by itself will kill viurses. Dr LA Guardia provides detail on the amounts to take in his excellent book.
Dwaine Umberger

Add a Topic
560
Add a Topic
12315
👍 15
Myron Annis
Member
Myron Annis
August 25, 2022 12:31 am

IT IS SO SAD TO SEE FOLKS BELIEVING IN VACCINES RATHER THAN THAN RELYING UPON NATURAL WAYS TO SUPPORT YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM.

AtHomeInTaiwan
AtHomeInTaiwan
August 25, 2022 2:18 am

My neighbor has a really bad mosquito problem so I put up a chain link fence to keep his mosquitoes out of my yard. I hope you see the correlation between that and masks preventing a virus from entering your body. I have been prophylactically using HCQ and Ivermectin, once a week since Jan., and have yet to get covid. Facts speak volumes (look at all the countries who were victorious with Ivermectin use) if you can find them despite the concerted efforts to suppress the truth. If you need brain surgery do you want the administrators of the CDC, FDA, or Hospital doing the surgery or the doctors on the front line who are doing the surgeries daily? I will stick with the recommendations from the America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) and FLCCC Alliance. Thanks!

Add a Topic
12228
Add a Topic
6225
Paul
Irregular
Paul
August 25, 2022 5:44 am

Does my smallpox vaccination from the mid-1950’s still have any effectiveness? My risk is very low for more than one reason, so I’m not really worried, but I’m still curious.

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul
cgrady
cgrady
August 25, 2022 7:38 am

As a long time subscriber to Stock Gumshoe, I am going to cancel my subscription if you keep promoting this hack. Anybody that is not admitting that the covid vaxxx was a failure and that masks do not work is ignorant or complicate in the medical industrial complex. The truth is being exposed, it’s obvious to anyone that wants to look, and allowing Doc Gumshoe to continue spewing the propaganda is going to cost you subscribers.

Add a Topic
1881
Add a Topic
4515
👍 40
Travis Johnson, Stock Gumshoe
August 25, 2022 8:01 am
Reply to  cgrady

I take some offense at your assertion that Michael is a “hack”. I find his articles well-reasoned and interesting.

If you disagree with his viewpoint or choose not to read his work, or decide to cancel your membership, that’s obviously your choice.

Add a Topic
4515
👍 21718
cgrady
cgrady
August 25, 2022 8:23 am

I found his articles interesting as well, up until Covid. This is a period in time referred to as the “Great Awakening” and it’s time for people to wake up. I don’t know who Michael is, I can only speculate, as you do, as the premise of this website. I speculate that Michael is a victim, as many of us are, of the Medical Industrial Complex. Which has completely corrupted and destroyed all of my trust and faith in our medical system. Until our medical doctors and officials admit that they were wrong about Covid, Vaxxx, Masks, Lockdowns, etc, and stop the corruption from corporate money, faith will never be restored. It’s time for people to start calling them out.

Yet instead of admitting it, Michael is promoting annual Covid Vaxxx’s and publishing advice from the CDC to continue masking. So I’m sorry, but he is a hack in my opinion.

Add a Topic
4515
👍 40
cartero
cartero
August 25, 2022 11:36 am

Why is it not possible to have an informative debate on national TV about the mRNA vaccines? Instead we are told to follow tbe science as if we are children unable to make an informed decision. It would be nice to see a panel of experts from the pro and anti mRNA vaccines debate.

Add a Topic
10036
👍 73
mattremote
August 25, 2022 4:04 pm

Oh no!! Doc, you have done it again. You posted more about COVID19 as well as comments about vaccines and treatments!!!

You must realize by now that COVID19 is so contagious it can be transmitted merely by reading the word on a screen! How else can we explain the gross diminishment of cognitive faculties and strangely aggressive credulousness demonstrated by so many who post in response to this and previous COVID19-related articles.

👍 120
garyb014
Member
garyb014
August 27, 2022 6:53 pm

Steve Deace had 2 medical people on his show during the last 2 weeks talking about how toxic the jab is/was. Look it up on Rumble.

👍 348
Royalty Investor
Irregular
Royalty Investor
August 28, 2022 11:11 am
Reply to  garyb014
👍 62
harpswell
harpswell
August 28, 2022 6:05 pm

The anti-vaxers are always good for a laugh. Bless them. We need laughter these days.

👍 44
garyb014
Member
garyb014
August 28, 2022 7:00 pm
Reply to  harpswell

Not anti-vax, pro safe vax. Why did Pfizer want their data hidden for 75 years? Now we know why, they lied about how safe it is.

Add a Topic
12887
👍 348
InPursuitOfGrowthWithPatience
August 29, 2022 9:30 pm

Would like your thoughts on combo vaccine (Covid and Flu) developments and prospects from Moderna, Novavax and Pfizer/BioNTech.

👍 1
champ1
August 30, 2022 5:06 pm

I live in Australia, have had 3xAstra Zeneca, 1Pfizer jab and a flu vaccination. Aged 70. Obviously I grew up before various sprays “kills 99.9% of all known germs” and all of that claptrap. Played in parks amongst the mud and ….I don’t believe in a theory of a world wide conspiracy to mandate vaccinations for countries populations. That would mean for example that our Prime Minister never had the jabs shown on tv; he would have convinced the nurses, the hospitals, the tv cameras etc to falsely report that he had had the jabs. It is not feasible. He had the jabs, as have I, because we believe in the medical advice.

Add a Topic
1270
Add a Topic
6113
👍 5
garyb014
Member
garyb014
August 30, 2022 5:28 pm
Reply to  champ1

I’m sure he did, but why hide the data, why mandate an experimental vax? It is against the Nuremburg code.

👍 348

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.

More Info  
34
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x