Vaccine

Fauci vague on changing definition of 'fully vaccinated': 'We might modify'

Dr. Anthony Fauci has cautioned that health officials may change the definition of "fully vaccinated" to include COVID-19 booster shots – if the data suggests it.

"We’re going to take a look right now at what the durability is of the booster," Fauci told "State of the Union" host Dana Bash. "We’re going to follow people who get boosted."

"People should not be put off by the fact that as time goes by and we learn more and more about the protection that we might modify the guidelines," he explained. "That’s what we’ve been saying all along by follow the science, things change and you have to follow the data."


1637516887545.png
 
Novak Djokovic on Australian Open plans after COVID vax mandate: 'We’ll just have to wait and see'
Tennis Australia CEO said vaccinations will be required for players during the Australian Open
 
dad4 said:
Guessing? No, and that's not what I wrote.

There is a boatload of work to prove safety and efficacy. They did all of that.

What they did not do was figure out whether some other schedule was slightly better.

That doesn't mean they were "guessing". The goal was to get a vaccine out quickly. So they chose a schedule that could be tested quickly.

As a result, we were able to vaccinate a lot of our 80+ population before the winter wave got to them.

Most people see that as a good thing.
Click to expand...
Most 80 year olds made it through 80 because they access to clean drinking water, excellent sanitation systems and a long list of therapies that have been employed to limp the vaccine along during breakthrough infections. I personally know 6 octogenerian's that survived covid infections pre-vax. All tested positive for the anti-bodies. Based on those results one couple has freely chosen their mandated immune system as their first line of defense. Of course that system is fueled by exercise, good diet, and a purposeful life as brown rice farmers for 57 years. Three of their daughters are RN's and are well aware of the mini-risk of a 55 million year old Corona virus given their parent's health profile. None of the three couples have had breakthrough infections.
 
dad4 said:
Yes, the kind of educated guess that involves tens of thousands of clinical trial participants followed by very difficult statistics work.

Maybe, someday, if you spend the next 15 years studying, you could become qualified to help make that kind of educated guess.

Probably not. For that kind of educated guess, the education requirements are wicked hard.
Click to expand...
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.--Upton Sinclair
 
watfly said:
How many years of education, research and statistical analysis does it take to make a prediction like this?

www.sandiegouniontribune.com

UC San Diego virus expert pleads with surfers to stay out of the ocean to avoid coronavirus

Kim Prather — a UC San Diego atmospheric scientist who studies how viruses and bacteria are ejected from the ocean — pleaded with surfers on Monday to stay out of the water to minimize …
www.sandiegouniontribune.com www.sandiegouniontribune.com
Click to expand...

Funnier still is the UT putting this article in their Science section. No wonder all the white shark sitings near socal shores haven't resulted in any attacks. I wonder if the Rona gives off a certain frequency that warns Sharks that someone is vaxxed and or infected with the Rona.
 
watfly said:
How many years of education, research and statistical analysis does it take to make a prediction like this?

www.sandiegouniontribune.com

UC San Diego virus expert pleads with surfers to stay out of the ocean to avoid coronavirus

Kim Prather — a UC San Diego atmospheric scientist who studies how viruses and bacteria are ejected from the ocean — pleaded with surfers on Monday to stay out of the water to minimize …
www.sandiegouniontribune.com www.sandiegouniontribune.com
Click to expand...
March 2020?

That's back when people were hoarding hand sanitizer and the best treatment available was a ventilator and a coma.

The core message at the time was "stay away from other people while we figure this thing out." Right up there with "please do not outbid hospitals for the medical supplies."

Nobody knew much back then.
 
dad4 said:
Guessing? No, and that's not what I wrote.

There is a boatload of work to prove safety and efficacy. They did all of that.

What they did not do was figure out whether some other schedule was slightly better.

That doesn't mean they were "guessing". The goal was to get a vaccine out quickly. So they chose a schedule that could be tested quickly.

As a result, we were able to vaccinate a lot of our 80+ population before the winter wave got to them.

Most people see that as a good thing.
Click to expand...
You ( and most people) will never admit or want to believe that the process for this vaccine rollout was a tad sketchy. And in many ways, given the environment, they had to push aside some norms in order to achieve the speed required to approve a vaccine in the middle of a pandemic. Many are willing to take the risk, nothing wrong with that. Placing blind trust in governmetn and government influenced science/medicine is foolhardy.

With that said, some basic scientific norms have been violated, bypassed and no one is willing to publicly speak out. You have to ask yourself why the control groups for moderna and pfizer were vaccinated? I believe JJ did the same thing. I certaily believe the risk/reward benefit for some age groups is well worth it. Control groups obviously are around for a reason. I suspect (we likely will never address it in this forum, every) there will be something that comes up over time in the out years that shows negative effect, some severe. This will effect the healthy 20/30 somethings with a long life ahead of them. Never mind the U18s we are ridicuously trying to vaccinate. That is irresponsible medicine. I would love to see pharma executives leading the charge on getting their rugrats vaccinated live on TV for the world to see. I highly suspect (and know some in that world) that the vaxx rates for U18s with parents in that business will vaccinat their healthy children.

So, if you are an older he/him/her/zir/thir, have at it, jab away as much as you would like. The low risk group should be given the option. We are well past that. Funny thing, most of the mandates are being driven by old, scared crotchety old people with limited turns remaining around the buoys. Scared of those with many years to live. Quite sad and disgusting actually.
 
what-happened said:
You ( and most people) will never admit or want to believe that the process for this vaccine rollout was a tad sketchy. And in many ways, given the environment, they had to push aside some norms in order to achieve the speed required to approve a vaccine in the middle of a pandemic. Many are willing to take the risk, nothing wrong with that. Placing blind trust in governmetn and government influenced science/medicine is foolhardy.

With that said, some basic scientific norms have been violated, bypassed and no one is willing to publicly speak out. You have to ask yourself why the control groups for moderna and pfizer were vaccinated? I believe JJ did the same thing. I certaily believe the risk/reward benefit for some age groups is well worth it. Control groups obviously are around for a reason. I suspect (we likely will never address it in this forum, every) there will be something that comes up over time in the out years that shows negative effect, some severe. This will effect the healthy 20/30 somethings with a long life ahead of them. Never mind the U18s we are ridicuously trying to vaccinate. That is irresponsible medicine. I would love to see pharma executives leading the charge on getting their rugrats vaccinated live on TV for the world to see. I highly suspect (and know some in that world) that the vaxx rates for U18s with parents in that business will vaccinat their healthy children.

So, if you are an older he/him/her/zir/thir, have at it, jab away as much as you would like. The low risk group should be given the option. We are well past that. Funny thing, most of the mandates are being driven by old, scared crotchety old people with limited turns remaining around the buoys. Scared of those with many years to live. Quite sad and disgusting actually.
Click to expand...
Can you name any vaccine which turned out to have a severe side effect which only became apparent more than a year after approval?

If no, then you're just scaremongering.
 
dad4 said:
March 2020?

That's back when people were hoarding hand sanitizer and the best treatment available was a ventilator and a coma.

The core message at the time was "stay away from other people while we figure this thing out." Right up there with "please do not outbid hospitals for the medical supplies."

Nobody knew much back then.
Click to expand...
Just stop. If a surfer is a threat to anyone not surfing next to him, there is zero hope of containing a virus. If the "core message" was, "We discourage being out as it is natural to interact and that interaction can spread the virus.", then that is what they should have said. Instead, ridiculous statements of risk such as this started the process of eroding trust.
 
More risk assessment observations. While taking my 40-minute ride yesterday through town (about 1/3) and bike trails (the other 2/3), I passed 11 other riders on the bike trails. Of the 11, 4 were wearing full masks - a lone female rider and three boys who appeared to be riding with an older man (father?) who was not wearing a mask. Anecdotally, that indicates to me that there is still significant support for masking in my area of SC county.
 
kickingandscreaming said:
Just stop. If a surfer is a threat to anyone not surfing next to him, there is zero hope of containing a virus. If the "core message" was, "We discourage being out as it is natural to interact and that interaction can spread the virus.", then that is what they should have said. Instead, ridiculous statements of risk such as this started the process of eroding trust.
Click to expand...
... speaking of eroding trust...They changed the definition of case. They changed the definition of infection. They changed the definition of herd immunity. They changed the definition of vaccine...and then wonder why so many people are suspicious.
 
met61 said:
... speaking of eroding trust...They changed the definition of case. They changed the definition of infection. They changed the definition of herd immunity. They changed the definition of vaccine...and then wonder why so many people are suspicious.
Click to expand...
Those terms were created for conversations within the medical and scientific community. Your understanding and misunderstanding of such terms is essentially irrelevant.

The definitions of case, infection, vaccine, and herd immunity will be based on what is necessary for experts to meaningfully communicate with each other at a given time.

And, as the scientific community learns, they will update those terms to reflect the current understanding within the scientific community.

It happens in any field. For most disciplines, you never noticed.
 
dad4 said:
March 2020?

That's back when people were hoarding hand sanitizer and the best treatment available was a ventilator and a coma.

The core message at the time was "stay away from other people while we figure this thing out." Right up there with "please do not outbid hospitals for the medical supplies."

Nobody knew much back then.
Click to expand...
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.--Upton Sinclair
 
Bruddah IZ said:
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.--Upton Sinclair
Click to expand...
My pal the teacher was told to get ready for layoffs next year in his district. It seems their losing customers everyday and word on the street they might lose 10%-15% of their customers.
 
dad4 said:
Those terms were created for conversations within the medical and scientific community. Your understanding and misunderstanding of such terms is essentially irrelevant.

The definitions of case, infection, vaccine, and herd immunity will be based on what is necessary for experts to meaningfully communicate with each other at a given time.

And, as the scientific community learns, they will update those terms to reflect the current understanding within the scientific community.

It happens in any field. For most disciplines, you never noticed.
Click to expand...
“Those terms were revised by your betters as needed. It is not for you to question them, peasant.

the definitions of case, infection, vaccine and herd immunity will be adjusted to support the necessary policy objectives.

if we are wrong, we will adjust the definitions to reflect the new reality and policy objectives”

wow Just dripping with meritocratic arrogance. The problem with thus approach is there is no accountability. If we had an independent (including scientific beat) press it would be less if an issue but we dont
 
A
dad4 said:
Those terms were created for conversations within the medical and scientific community. Your understanding and misunderstanding of such terms is essentially irrelevant.

The definitions of case, infection, vaccine, and herd immunity will be based on what is necessary for experts to meaningfully communicate with each other at a given time.

And, as the scientific community learns, they will update those terms to reflect the current understanding within the scientific community.

It happens in any field. For most disciplines, you never noticed.
Click to expand...
Everyone of those terms have been updated to justify a denial of our constitutional rights to due process and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top