Vaccine

FYI Everyone, all kids in the future will each have two dog angels like this on each side of them. Spike and Buster, Dog Angels to the rescue!!!

The DD.jpg
 
Last edited:
Since the polybasic furin site came up again, media speculation that this is some kind of smoking gun regarding origin is good for clicks and political theater but that's about it. The current state of the matter is that it really does not weigh in one way or another. Natural origin or accidental lab leak remain the two most probable interpretations. There is as of yet no firm proof of either scenario and neither one has been eliminated as a possibility.

https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(21)00991-0.pdf
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867421007091
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.22.427830v3
 
So what part of the opinion piece do you disagree with?

- That they should release the study information related to testing of the various vaccines?
- Or do you disagree with the fact that the FDA doesn't want to release certain information for 75 years?

And which of the above is right wing and not worthy of discussion?

Do you prefer not to know what their testing shows? And what rational basis would the FDA have for asking for a 75 yr delay in releasing information?

There is a coreection posted with the article now --

This editorial by Peter Doshi and colleagues (BMJ 2022;376:eek:102, doi:10.1136/bmj.o102) originally stated that the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has “stopped posting information released in response to freedom of information requests on its website.” The online version has been corrected to say that MHRA’s posting is delayed, not stopped completely. MHRA posted no additional freedom of information requests on its website between 14 August and 28 December 2021. Since 29 December, however, it has posted a selection of materials for responses from July to September.
 
The vaccines do not: provide complete protection to the vaccinated, confer immunity on par or better than prior infection, and do not prevent transmission. If all of this is true, then mandates don't make sense, the logic fails.

This is where I take issue. The vaccine, especially with a booster has shown to reduce infection. Is it 100% no, but we've gone over that over and over again. Every study, and every Bay Area county, has it around 70-75% reduction in infection. The data is clear. The counter argument you always come back with is natural immunity. Again, uninformed and misguided. The vaccine is much safer than taking a chance on getting infected and hoping you just have mild symptoms. On top of that, the vaccine helps reduce strain on our systems. The natural immunity path is not as predictable and there's no way to reverse course once you go that direction.

I personally don't care if y'all get the vaccine or not. Your choice. I've been clear about that since day one. I'm not pro-mandate. I am pro-logic. The politicization of this issue is the real drag -- and is abundantly present on this thread.
 
So what part of the opinion piece do you disagree with?

- That they should release the study information related to testing of the various vaccines?
- Or do you disagree with the fact that the FDA doesn't want to release certain information for 75 years?

And which of the above is right wing and not worthy of discussion?

Do you prefer not to know what their testing shows? And what rational basis would the FDA have for asking for a 75 yr delay in releasing information?

And another point -- the FDA did not ask for a 75-year delay in releasing information. The FDA stated that there was a lot of data and at its current rate of reviewing (for legal and scientific purposes) that data before releasing to the public (500 pages per day) that it would take 75 years to review and release it all. A federal judge has ordered the FDA to speed things up.

As for what is right wing -- I decided not to pay the $1 and read the paywalled Epoch Times article, so I don't know what is in there. In my opinion, however, the fallacy that the FDA will not release any data for 75 years smells like it came from an unreliable source. Further investigation of the source of that claim might be assisted if you tell us where you got it.
 
This is where I take issue. The vaccine, especially with a booster has shown to reduce infection. Is it 100% no, but we've gone over that over and over again. Every study, and every Bay Area county, has it around 70-75% reduction in infection. The data is clear. The counter argument you always come back with is natural immunity. Again, uninformed and misguided. The vaccine is much safer than taking a chance on getting infected and hoping you just have mild symptoms. On top of that, the vaccine helps reduce strain on our systems. The natural immunity path is not as predictable and there's no way to reverse course once you go that direction.

I personally don't care if y'all get the vaccine or not. Your choice. I've been clear about that since day one. I'm not pro-mandate. I am pro-logic. The politicization of this issue is the real drag -- and is abundantly present on this thread.

The problem is that it's not as cut and dry as you think it is. While they may reduce infection, 1) the effect seems to be only temporary, and 2) it isn't enough to control mass outbreaks (see Vermont, Spain, Ireland, Gibraltar, Germany, Israel, the United Arab Emirates). It means we don't really have much of a choice...in the end natural immunity, whether you like it or not, will be the only way out of it as it moves towards endemic status. You claim you don't like politicization, but then don't realize it is exactly what you are doing too by only focusing on on side of the situation. For some groups, the vaccine might not be warranted (like Norway has concluded for all but the most immunocompromised kids) and for others boosting may not be warranted (such as young men, particularly with Moderna). But yes, everyone over 40 that hasn't had it should get vaccinated (those over 30 should seriously consider it) and anyone over 70 should get boosted (those over 60 should seriously consider it) due to disease severity.
 
The problem is that it's not as cut and dry as you think it is. While they may reduce infection, 1) the effect seems to be only temporary, and 2) it isn't enough to control mass outbreaks (see Vermont, Spain, Ireland, Gibraltar, Germany, Israel, the United Arab Emirates). It means we don't really have much of a choice...in the end natural immunity, whether you like it or not, will be the only way out of it as it moves towards endemic status. You claim you don't like politicization, but then don't realize it is exactly what you are doing too by only focusing on on side of the situation. For some groups, the vaccine might not be warranted (like Norway has concluded for all but the most immunocompromised kids) and for others boosting may not be warranted (such as young men, particularly with Moderna). But yes, everyone over 40 that hasn't had it should get vaccinated (those over 30 should seriously consider it) and anyone over 70 should get boosted (those over 60 should seriously consider it) due to disease severity.

How long does natural immunity last?
 
This is where I take issue. The vaccine, especially with a booster has shown to reduce infection. Is it 100% no, but we've gone over that over and over again. Every study, and every Bay Area county, has it around 70-75% reduction in infection. The data is clear. The counter argument you always come back with is natural immunity. Again, uninformed and misguided. The vaccine is much safer than taking a chance on getting infected and hoping you just have mild symptoms. On top of that, the vaccine helps reduce strain on our systems. The natural immunity path is not as predictable and there's no way to reverse course once you go that direction.

I personally don't care if y'all get the vaccine or not. Your choice. I've been clear about that since day one. I'm not pro-mandate. I am pro-logic. The politicization of this issue is the real drag -- and is abundantly present on this thread.
You certainly like to minsconstrue my position. I assure you I'm neither uninformed nor misguided. I am clearly pro-vaccine to those most vulnerable. I am pro vaccine if you choose to get one. I am not pro forcing people to vaccinate healthy members of their family because others are scared, even if vaccinated. Please point out where I fall back on relying on natural immunity for everyone. Point out the clear data that indicates we should vaccinate healthy children? It's important to age stratify risk, especially when dealing with pharma products still under EUA. It's a basic principle.

We are in the midst of a waning pandemic, why mandate vaccines for previously infected people? If you are a fan of that, you are politicizing health, not following science but being an advocate for vaccines.

This horse is beat. We can agree to disagree. The story of SAR-COV-2 and vaccines hasn't been wriiten yet. Proabably a few more chapters to be written. Hopefully this new variant headed our way trends with little O.
 
when was the last time you had a really bad cold?

Yup in the end looks like what we are headed to is (at least until we get a new tech breakthrough which is at least a couple years away, more likely several, like the new vaccine the US army is looking into) the COVID vaccine is going to be like the flu shot....a yearly shot which misses the next variant most of the time.....get it if you want...if you are elderly/immunocompromised you probably should yearly just to boost your immunoresponse....less than fifty percent of the population gets it.
 
Since the polybasic furin site came up again, media speculation that this is some kind of smoking gun regarding origin is good for clicks and political theater but that's about it. The current state of the matter is that it really does not weigh in one way or another. Natural origin or accidental lab leak remain the two most probable interpretations. There is as of yet no firm proof of either scenario and neither one has been eliminated as a possibility.

https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(21)00991-0.pdf
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867421007091
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.22.427830v3


Do some research so you don't post the above CCCP Lies.

The CCCP and NIAID/NIH are joined at the hip with the Angel of Death
distributing the funds used for the Criminal acts out of the Wuhan Lab.

Unless you've personally seen a Bat injecting four strands of the HIV virus
into the (SARS-CoV) strand in a public setting to create the current Covid-19
strain and letting it " Fly ", I suggest you do some deep investigating and
bone up on the basics.

Here's a start:

Coronaviruses: An Overview of Their Replication and Pathogenesis (nih.gov)

That's right the very NIH has the basics and the TRUTH !
Imagine that.
 
Do some research so you don't post the above CCCP Lies.

The CCCP and NIAID/NIH are joined at the hip with the Angel of Death
distributing the funds used for the Criminal acts out of the Wuhan Lab.

Unless you've personally seen a Bat injecting four strands of the HIV virus
into the (SARS-CoV) strand in a public setting to create the current Covid-19
strain and letting it " Fly ", I suggest you do some deep investigating and
bone up on the basics.

Here's a start:

Coronaviruses: An Overview of Their Replication and Pathogenesis (nih.gov)

That's right the very NIH has the basics and the TRUTH !
Imagine that.

Who is CCCP?
 
Do some research so you don't post the above CCCP Lies.

The CCCP and NIAID/NIH are joined at the hip with the Angel of Death
distributing the funds used for the Criminal acts out of the Wuhan Lab.

Unless you've personally seen a Bat injecting four strands of the HIV virus
into the (SARS-CoV) strand in a public setting to create the current Covid-19
strain and letting it " Fly ", I suggest you do some deep investigating and
bone up on the basics.

Here's a start:

Coronaviruses: An Overview of Their Replication and Pathogenesis (nih.gov)

That's right the very NIH has the basics and the TRUTH !
Imagine that.

What a bunch of crap. You tell me how a DNA based retrovirus like HIV gets engineered into a completely unrelated RNA based cornavirus. That should be fun. BTW shouldn't it be 13 coils instead of 13 knots. Won't ever slide that way.
 
Do some research so you don't post the above CCCP Lies.

The CCCP and NIAID/NIH are joined at the hip with the Angel of Death
distributing the funds used for the Criminal acts out of the Wuhan Lab.

Unless you've personally seen a Bat injecting four strands of the HIV virus
into the (SARS-CoV) strand in a public setting to create the current Covid-19
strain and letting it " Fly ", I suggest you do some deep investigating and
bone up on the basics.

Here's a start:

Coronaviruses: An Overview of Their Replication and Pathogenesis (nih.gov)

That's right the very NIH has the basics and the TRUTH !
Imagine that.
This guy is coo coo for coco pops.
 
Funny how this works. And yet they were and are demanding proof of vaxx in some parts of the country and some groups want them in more places.

Amazing how wrong the experts have been, and how OFF BASE recommendations for proof of vaxx, etc have been.

"DENVER (KDVR) — Natural immunity was six times stronger during the delta wave than vaccination, according to a new report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The report, published Jan. 19, analyzed COVID outcome data from New York and California, which make up about one in six of the nation’s total COVID deaths."

--

"Vaccines were more effective at preventing infection or serious illness than natural immunity from prior infections before the delta variant became the dominant strain. After delta became the main strain, vaccines alone grew weaker against the virus and natural immunity got much stronger. This could be due in large part to the fact that vaccines began wearing off around the time delta spread, according to the study.

“Importantly, infection-derived protection was greater after the highly transmissible Delta variant became predominant,” reads the report, “coinciding with early declining of vaccine-induced immunity in many persons.”

 
Back
Top