Vaccine

Apparently now it's the twin threats of flu and COVID. This is the debate that's emerging in the blue states (it looks like Europe is over it and will be trying to return to normal....slowly but surely): whether there ever is such a thing as back to normal where schools go back without disruptions/masks and the offices actually open up. At least he's actually off the idea of zero COVID.


So, one opinion piece in the Atlantic now implies a complete change to government policy and social norms on two continents?

Dang. That is one powerful magazine.
 
This is a huge problem that very few outlets are reporting. "They" claim that it doesn't impact fertility, but this is incredibly disingenuous since "they" have no clue about the long term effects. Fertility isn't just a slice in time.
 
This is a huge problem that very few outlets are reporting. "They" claim that it doesn't impact fertility, but this is incredibly disingenuous since "they" have no clue about the long term effects. Fertility isn't just a slice in time.

Actually, there are very many outlets reporting the truth. In fact, the "they" you claim have no clue what they're talking about include the CDC, Yale, the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, University of Michigan, University of Colorado Health, Penn State, and well, pretty much everyone. They know this based on the extensive studies of similar vaccines that do not contain live virus, but also from the numerous studies that have been conducted on this very issue.


The reason "few" outlets are reporting vaccines negatively affect fertility is because only crackpot websites with zero medical expertise claim that. Maybe you should focus on the the real story that many are reporting, which is what happens when unvaccinated pregnant women get Covid. I know how you like anecdotal stories (unless they don't support you're conspiracy theory).

 
This is a huge problem that very few outlets are reporting. "They" claim that it doesn't impact fertility, but this is incredibly disingenuous since "they" have no clue about the long term effects. Fertility isn't just a slice in time.
That gets back to what I was talking about earlier.

We have zero long term studies on potential bad side effects of the various vaccines.

How can we mandate it with that in mind?

How can we mandate it on the majority of people who as it stands now have no real risk of covid?

Not good policy.
 
Actually, there are very many outlets reporting the truth. In fact, the "they" you claim have no clue what they're talking about include the CDC, Yale, the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, University of Michigan, University of Colorado Health, Penn State, and well, pretty much everyone. They know this based on the extensive studies of similar vaccines that do not contain live virus, but also from the numerous studies that have been conducted on this very issue.
Actually they don't.

The covid vaccine is new. There are no long term studies on it.

You seem to have a problem with the concept of long term and short term.

But try your google skills. See if you can pull up any long term studies on these new vaccines. Unless you can magically transport yourself to the future, your search will be in vain.
 
Actually, there are very many outlets reporting the truth. In fact, the "they" you claim have no clue what they're talking about include the CDC, Yale, the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, University of Michigan, University of Colorado Health, Penn State, and well, pretty much everyone. They know this based on the extensive studies of similar vaccines that do not contain live virus, but also from the numerous studies that have been conducted on this very issue.


The reason "few" outlets are reporting vaccines negatively affect fertility is because only crackpot websites with zero medical expertise claim that. Maybe you should focus on the the real story that many are reporting, which is what happens when unvaccinated pregnant women get Covid. I know how you like anecdotal stories (unless they don't support you're conspiracy theory).

Impressive research. But what many experts (lab jockeys) claim and what is reality are two completely different things. You have no clue of my situation. Furthermore, its already been explained to you by another poster the definition of "long term", your failure to understand that is either intentional or blissful ignorance. No one has a crystal ball regardless of how many degrees they may have or what colleges they attend.
 
[/QUOTE]
Actually, there are very many outlets reporting the truth. In fact, the "they" you claim have no clue what they're talking about include the CDC, Yale, the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, University of Michigan, University of Colorado Health, Penn State, and well, pretty much everyone. They know this based on the extensive studies of similar vaccines that do not contain live virus, but also from the numerous studies that have been conducted on this very issue.


The reason "few" outlets are reporting vaccines negatively affect fertility is because only crackpot websites with zero medical expertise claim that. Maybe you should focus on the the real story that many are reporting, which is what happens when unvaccinated pregnant women get Covid. I know how you like anecdotal stories (unless they don't support you're conspiracy theory).

You are a soup sandwich.

The NIH has been working towards this research since MAY. Clinical trials only collected last menstrual cycle data, completely omitting or waiting for menstrual cycle outcomes post-vaccine. Why? don't really know, maybe the FDA senior execs who recently resigned can shed some light on process.

There is always concern how vaccines can impact fertility. I don't know if you have ovaries, but it's a concern for many. It's why vaccines undergo rigourous and sytematic investigation into the impacts of the menstruation cycle. In NIH's own words, they haven't done this for Pfizer, Moderna, and JJ. Looks like they are about to do it. Which is nice, except that millions of young women have been vaccinated. So yes, if you have ovaries or are a parent of a DD, your ears should perk up. Full blown panic shouldn't occure, but you should pay attention when NIH research funding is headline news.

The rest of your wall splatter post means nothing.
 
You didn't look at the by line, did you??? It's Scott Gottlieb.
So? An epidemiologist predicts we all are going to start paying more attention to viruses. Should I be surprised?

Next you’ll tell me that there is a famous computer geek who thinks we all will start using cryptography. Or an aviation enthusiast who thinks flying cars are the way of the future.

People who write futurist articles tend to see themselves as a key part of the future. It’s just they way we think. Maybe I should write an article about how kids in the future will all study really hard in their STEM classes.
 
I'd think even you would agree a system of government that allows local elected officials to adopt local ordinances is the opposite of a dictatorship, but it is pretty clear that you define "dictatorship" as any form of government that doesn't give you what you want, including when decisions are made by officials elected by an overwhelming majority of voters.
Not sure why you thought I'd agree.

You wanted the president making the decisions up until the majority elected someone who disagreed with you. Then you wanted state government to make the decisions up until the majority disagreed with you also. Then you wanted local elected officials to make the decisions up until they also disagreed with you. Your post is a perfect example how people like you aren't serious. You don't care about thoughtful discussion or facts. Nothing you say is credible.
I didn't want the Prez nor the CAGOV making any of the decisions during this scamdemic. As far as my credibility goes you'll notice that most of what I post comes from those with credibility. You're free to tell us how much smarter you are than the signers of The Great Barrington Declaration.

Grace T., how do you feel about his understanding of different forms of government? Do you agree that a system of government in which local elected officials adopting local ordinances is a "dictatorship"? If not, why stay silent when those who share your hostility towards vaccines, masks, and the seriousness of Covid-19 say crazy things like this? Is it because you need all the crazies if you are to get what you want? Do you rationalize actual dictatorship under some "strict constructionist" bs that democracy should really just be whatever it takes for the ends justifying the means, as long as they are the ends that you prefer?
How about a government that protects individual liberty as opposed to the collectivist tyranny that you advocate?
 
So? An epidemiologist predicts we all are going to start paying more attention to viruses. Should I be surprised?

Next you’ll tell me that there is a famous computer geek who thinks we all will start using cryptography. Or an aviation enthusiast who thinks flying cars are the way of the future.

People who write futurist articles tend to see themselves as a key part of the future. It’s just they way we think. Maybe I should write an article about how kids in the future will all study really hard in their STEM classes.
...or maybe just provide one long term Covid vax study.
 
So, one opinion piece in the Atlantic now implies a complete change to government policy and social norms on two continents?

Dang. That is one powerful magazine.
Delta is Dying

An earlier study at the Cleveland Clinic of more than 52,000 health-care workers from December 16, 2020 to May 15, 2021 (just before Delta became dominant in the U.S.) found that both natural immunity and vaccine immunity provide good protection against infections. Not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated was reinfected. Their risk of infection was no higher than for vaccinated people, whether they were previously infected or uninfected.

Moreover, natural immunity thus far appears to be at least as long-lasting as vaccine immunity. Even before vaccines were widely available, studies indicated that four types of immune memory persist for more than six months after infection. The Cleveland Clinic results suggested that natural immunity provides protection against reinfection for ten or more months, leading the authors to conclude that previously infected Covid-19 patients are “unlikely to benefit” from vaccination. Another study found that convalescent individuals maintained immunologic protection for 12 months without vaccination, though protection could be enhanced by vaccination.

Covid-19 treatments have improved as well. Several versions of monoclonal antibodies have been authorized and are now readily available. These medicines are highly effective at keeping early Covid-19 from progressing, thus decreasing the risk of hospitalization or death by 70 percent to 85 percent, particularly for people at high risk of developing severe disease. Steroids and new, more effective ICU protocols have also led to lower Covid-19 mortality.
 
Actually, there are very many outlets reporting the truth. In fact, the "they" you claim have no clue what they're talking about include the CDC, Yale, the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, University of Michigan, University of Colorado Health, Penn State, and well, pretty much everyone. They know this based on the extensive studies of similar vaccines that do not contain live virus, but also from the numerous studies that have been conducted on this very issue.


The reason "few" outlets are reporting vaccines negatively affect fertility is because only crackpot websites with zero medical expertise claim that. Maybe you should focus on the the real story that many are reporting, which is what happens when unvaccinated pregnant women get Covid. I know how you like anecdotal stories (unless they don't support you're conspiracy theory).

Delta is Dying

An earlier study at the Cleveland Clinic of more than 52,000 health-care workers from December 16, 2020 to May 15, 2021 (just before Delta became dominant in the U.S.) found that both natural immunity and vaccine immunity provide good protection against infections. Not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated was reinfected. Their risk of infection was no higher than for vaccinated people, whether they were previously infected or uninfected.

Moreover, natural immunity thus far appears to be at least as long-lasting as vaccine immunity. Even before vaccines were widely available, studies indicated that four types of immune memory persist for more than six months after infection. The Cleveland Clinic results suggested that natural immunity provides protection against reinfection for ten or more months, leading the authors to conclude that previously infected Covid-19 patients are “unlikely to benefit” from vaccination. Another study found that convalescent individuals maintained immunologic protection for 12 months without vaccination, though protection could be enhanced by vaccination.

Covid-19 treatments have improved as well. Several versions of monoclonal antibodies have been authorized and are now readily available. These medicines are highly effective at keeping early Covid-19 from progressing, thus decreasing the risk of hospitalization or death by 70 percent to 85 percent, particularly for people at high risk of developing severe disease. Steroids and new, more effective ICU protocols have also led to lower Covid-19 mortality.
 
So? An epidemiologist predicts we all are going to start paying more attention to viruses. Should I be surprised?

Next you’ll tell me that there is a famous computer geek who thinks we all will start using cryptography. Or an aviation enthusiast who thinks flying cars are the way of the future.

People who write futurist articles tend to see themselves as a key part of the future. It’s just they way we think. Maybe I should write an article about how kids in the future will all study really hard in their STEM classes.
PFYT
 
Actually, there are very many outlets reporting the truth. In fact, the "they" you claim have no clue what they're talking about include the CDC, Yale, the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, University of Michigan, University of Colorado Health, Penn State, and well, pretty much everyone. They know this based on the extensive studies of similar vaccines that do not contain live virus, but also from the numerous studies that have been conducted on this very issue.


The reason "few" outlets are reporting vaccines negatively affect fertility is because only crackpot websites with zero medical expertise claim that. Maybe you should focus on the the real story that many are reporting, which is what happens when unvaccinated pregnant women get Covid. I know how you like anecdotal stories (unless they don't support you're conspiracy theory).


Actually, there are very many outlets reporting the truth. In fact, the "they" you claim have no clue what they're talking about include the CDC, Yale, the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, University of Michigan, University of Colorado Health, Penn State, and well, pretty much everyone. They know this based on the extensive studies of similar vaccines that do not contain live virus, but also from the numerous studies that have been conducted on this very issue.


The reason "few" outlets are reporting vaccines negatively affect fertility is because only crackpot websites with zero medical expertise claim that. Maybe you should focus on the the real story that many are reporting, which is what happens when unvaccinated pregnant women get Covid. I know how you like anecdotal stories (unless they don't support you're conspiracy theory).

Reminder: The CDC/NIH/Fauci-backed pause of the J&J vaccine did more to invigorate vaccine hesitancy in the US than any other factor.


May be an image of text that says 'Daily COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people Shown the rolling -day average per 100 people in the total population. For vaccines that require multiple doses, each individual dose is counted. LINEAR LOG Our World in Data Add country 0.8 0.6 J&J Pause 0.4 0.2 United States Dec21,2020 2020 21, Apr 15, 2021 Source: Official data collated by Our World in OurWorldinData.org/coronavirus BY Jun 2021 Sep 4, 2021 Last updated September 2021, 10:30 (London time)''Daily COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people Shown the rolling -day average per 100 people in the total population. For vaccines that require multiple doses, each individual dose is counted. LINEAR LOG Our World in Data Add country 0.8 0.6 J&J Pause 0.4 0.2 United States Dec21,2020 2020 21, Apr 15, 2021 Source: Official data collated by Our World in OurWorldinData.org/coronavirus BY Jun 2021 Sep 4, 2021 Last updated September 2021, 10:30 (London time)'
 
Back
Top