Delta soj je laž, oboljenje širi spike protein u cjepivu.

Hop portal

Srećko Sladoljev

Na internetu se pojavila tvrdnja da Delta soj COVID-19 ne postoji i da oboljenje širi spike protein u cjepivu. Ova tvrdnja je izazvala zabrinutost i potrebu za detaljnom provjerom.
Delta varijanta COVID-19, poznata i kao B.1.617.2, prvi put je identificirana u Indiji u prosincu 2020. godine. Ova varijanta je brzo postala dominantna u mnogim dijelovima svijeta zbog svoje visoke zaraznosti. Znanstveni dokazi pokazuju da Delta varijanta ima mutacije koje povećavaju njenu sposobnost vezivanja za stanice domaćina, što rezultira većom zaraznošću.
Tvrdnja da oboljenje širi spike protein u cjepivu je također netočna. Cjepiva protiv COVID-19, posebno mRNA cjepiva kao što su Pfizer-BioNTech i Moderna, koriste mRNA kako bi instruirali stanice da proizvedu spike protein. Ovaj protein potiče imunološki odgovor koji pomaže tijelu da se zaštiti od infekcije. Međutim, spike protein proizveden cjepivom ne širi infekciju, već pomaže tijelu da razvije imunitet.
Studije su pokazale da cjepiva protiv COVID-19 su sigurna i učinkovita. Na primjer, studija objavljena u časopisu <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2101765">New England Journal of Medicine</a> pokazuje da mRNA cjepiva imaju visoku učinkovitost u prevenciji teških oblika bolesti i smrti.
Također, tvrdnja da anti-spike protutijela ne neutraliziraju virus je netočna. Protutijela proizvedena nakon cijepljenja su sposobna neutralizirati virus i spriječiti njegovo širenje. Studija objavljena u časopisu <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03696-9">Nature</a> pokazuje da protutijela proizvedena nakon cijepljenja imaju visoku neutralizacijsku sposobnost.
Zaključno, tvrdnja da Delta soj ne postoji i da oboljenje širi spike protein u cjepivu je netočna. Znanstveni dokazi pokazuju da Delta varijanta postoji i da cjepiva ne uzrokuju širenje infekcije. Važno je da se oslanjamo na pouzdane izvore informacija i znanstvene dokaze kako bismo donosili informirane odluke o našem zdravlju.

Provjera tvrdnje: Delta soj je laž, oboljenje širi spike protein u cjepivu

The claim that the spike protein generated by the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is a cardiotoxin, causing an epidemic of heart disease, especially among young patients, has been circulating in various articles and discussions. This claim was made at a meeting of cardiologists in Auckland, New Zealand, and has been reported by Dr. Guy Hatchard in his articles. To evaluate this claim, it is essential to examine the scientific evidence available. The spike protein produced by mRNA vaccines is designed to mimic the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, triggering an immune response. While there have been reports of myocarditis and pericarditis following vaccination, these cases are rare and typically mild. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other health authorities have been monitoring these adverse events closely. A study published in the journal <a href='https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01630-0'>Nature Medicine</a> found that the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is higher in adolescents and young adults, particularly after the second dose of mRNA vaccines. However, the overall incidence remains low, and most cases resolve with appropriate treatment. The study also noted that the benefits of vaccination in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes outweigh the risks of these rare adverse events. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis published in the <a href='https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext'>Lancet Infectious Diseases</a> concluded that the risk of myocarditis is higher after COVID-19 infection than after vaccination. This suggests that the spike protein produced by the virus itself may be more harmful than the vaccine-induced spike protein. In conclusion, while there is evidence of rare cases of myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA vaccination, the claim that the spike protein is a cardiotoxin causing an epidemic of heart disease is not supported by robust scientific evidence. The benefits of vaccination in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes outweigh the risks of these rare adverse events. Therefore, the claim is rated as 2 out of 5.

Claim Review: Spike Protein from mRNA Vaccines as a Cardiotoxin

U posljednje vrijeme, mnoge tvrdnje o učincima cjepiva protiv COVID-19 kruže medijima i društvenim mrežama. Jedna od takvih tvrdnji je da spike protein, koji se proizvodi nakon primjene mRNA cjepiva, ubija spermatoidne stanice. Ova tvrdnja je iznesena od strane prof. dr. Arne Burkhardta, poznatog njemačkog patologa.
U svojoj prezentaciji, prof. dr. Burkhardt tvrdi da obdukcije pokazuju da mRNA cjepivo razbija ljude iznutra i da spike protein snažno izražen u spermatogenom organu ubija spermatoidne stanice. Ova tvrdnja je izazvala veliku zabrinutost među ljudima, posebno među onima koji planiraju majčinstvo.
Međutim, treba napomenuti da ova tvrdnja nije potvrđena znanstvenim istraživanjima. Do sada nema dovoljno dokaza koji bi potvrdili da spike protein ima takav učinak na spermatoidne stanice. Većina znanstvenih studija koje su istraživale učinke mRNA cjepiva na reproduktivno zdravlje nisu pronašle dokaze koji bi podržali ovu tvrdnju.
Na primjer, studija objavljena u časopisu <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03906-2">Nature</a> pokazuje da mRNA cjepiva protiv COVID-19 ne utječu na plodnost muškaraca. Studija je provedena na velikom uzorku muškaraca i nije pronađena nikakva povezanost između primjene cjepiva i smanjenja broja spermatozoida.
Druga studija, objavljena u časopisu <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00947-8/fulltext">The Lancet</a>, također nije pronašla dokaze koji bi podržali tvrdnju da spike protein ima negativan učinak na reproduktivno zdravlje. Studija je istraživala učinke cjepiva na različite organske sustave i nije pronađena nikakva povezanost između primjene cjepiva i oštećenja spermatoidnih stanica.
Stoga, na temelju dostupnih znanstvenih dokaza, tvrdnja da spike protein ubija spermatoidne stanice nije potvrđena. Važno je da se oslanjamo na znanstvene činjenice i dokaze prije nego što donosimo odluke o svojem zdravlju. Ako imate bilo kakve zabrinutosti vezane za učinke cjepiva, preporučuje se da se savjetujete sa svojim liječnikom ili stručnjakom za zdravstvenu zaštitu.
Zaključak: Tvrdnja da spike protein ubija spermatoidne stanice nije potvrđena znanstvenim dokazima. Ocjena tvrdnje je 2 od 5.

Provjera tvrdnji: Spike protein ubija spermatoidne stanice

<h2>Introduction</h2>
La revue Néosanté se présente comme une source d'information indépendante et sans publicité, offrant des articles sur le décodage biologique des maladies et les moyens naturels de les prévenir ou d’en guérir. Mais qu'en est-il réellement de ces affirmations ?
<h2>Le Décodage Biologique des Maladies</h2>
La revue Néosanté met en avant le concept de décodage biologique des maladies, une théorie qui prétend que les maladies ont un sens biologique et peuvent être décodées pour comprendre leur origine et les traiter de manière naturelle. Cette théorie est souvent associée à des figures controversées comme Ryke Geerd Hamer, dont les travaux ont été largement critiqués par la communauté scientifique.
Une étude publiée dans le <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4315890/">Journal of Clinical Oncology</a> a montré que les théories de Hamer n'ont aucune base scientifique et peuvent même être dangereuses pour les patients.
<h2>Les Moyens Naturels de Prévention et de Guérison</h2>
Néosanté promeut également l'utilisation de moyens naturels pour prévenir et guérir les maladies. Bien que certaines pratiques naturelles puissent avoir des effets bénéfiques, il est important de noter que de nombreuses affirmations sur les bienfaits des traitements naturels ne sont pas soutenues par des preuves scientifiques solides.
Par exemple, une revue systématique publiée dans le <a href="https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004396.pub2/full">Cochrane Library</a> a conclu que les preuves sur l'efficacité des traitements naturels pour certaines maladies sont limitées et souvent de faible qualité.
<h2>L'Indépendance et la Qualité de l'Information</h2>
Néosanté se vante d'être une revue indépendante sans publicité, ce qui pourrait laisser penser que l'information qu'elle fournit est impartiale et de haute qualité. Cependant, l'indépendance ne garantit pas nécessairement la fiabilité de l'information.
Il est crucial de vérifier les sources et les preuves scientifiques derrière les affirmations faites dans la revue. Une analyse critique des articles de Néosanté révèle souvent des affirmations non prouvées et des théories controversées.
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
En conclusion, bien que la revue Néosanté prétende offrir une vision alternative et indépendante de la santé, il est important de faire preuve de prudence et de scepticisme. Les théories de décodage biologique des maladies et les moyens naturels de prévention et de guérison doivent être évalués à la lumière des preuves scientifiques disponibles. Les lecteurs doivent être vigilants et vérifier les sources avant de prendre des décisions basées sur les informations fournies par Néosanté.

Analyse de la Revue Néosanté : Une Nouvelle Vision de la Santé ?

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "Delta soj je laž, oboljenje širi spike protein u cjepivu." is False

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: