Vaccine failure thread
- Thread starter Boston.Knight
- Start date
No.., it’s a mirror image of what @Boston.Knight looks like, but shorter, gray for his age, wimpy, with little round glasses. A total tool in person
He knows what it means
Jason Ross, 36, Peachtree City, GA, Iraq War Veteran, Anti-vaxxer, Dead from COVID
Jason & Briana Ross tied the knot in October 2020 and one year later, Jason was dead from COVID. Jason served three tours with the US Marine Corps on Corporal Active Duty in Iraq from 2003 until 2009. After leaving the military, he worked in finance for a pool company. Jason and Briana have...
www.sorryantivaxxer.com
The CDC says. The vaccines are safe and effective.....................................in causing early disease and death.
You’re vaccinated Mr. Pool cleaner. Have you died yet? Any side effects? Please stop continuing to look like an utter got damn fool. You’ve been doing it now for over 20 years.
Isn’t it amazing? Now the covidians want to sweep it under the rug. Just go on with life like this cluster never happened
Problem is half the world is still under vaccine mandate or only delayed mandates , including communist states like CA for kids
Totally missed this the first time around, but industry lapdog and vaccine safety board member Paul Offitt has been making some noise about safety and efficacy, and not in a good way.
Is Original Antigen Sin (OAS) the reason why vax updates are delayed? What happened to mRNA 90 days? Now Pfizer/Mo are saying fall. @UCFBS
Is Original Antigen Sin (OAS) the reason why vax updates are delayed? What happened to mRNA 90 days? Now Pfizer/Mo are saying fall. @UCFBS
You really let us down by not posting this sooner. Buy gold!
The daily routine of @Boston.Knight
1) Wake up
2) Search bogus Conspiracy Theory Twitter feeds about COVID/COVID vaccine deaths all day. Betty Bootylicker and Igor Chudov are your goto information sources 😂
3) Fantasize about how discouraging vaccines can kill more people than he already has
4) Post Twitter feeds in the WC so that an audience of <10 people can read them 😂
5) Think that you’re important or knowledgeable in the subject matter 🤦🏻♂️🙄🤷♂️
6) Go to bed thinking that you had a productive day
7) Buy Gold!
8) Rinse, repeat
@Boston.Knight
“I won’t get drawn in with the JV crowd guys sorry. Got bigger fish to fry. The truth is out there though, go find it!
Good luck and cheers”
“I won’t get drawn in with the JV crowd guys sorry. Got bigger fish to fry. The truth is out there though, go find it!
Good luck and cheers”
Yeah, I read this with plenty of links to authorities earlier this month, after Offit's previously pro-vax voice is being used to throw up all the red flags.
Original antigenic sin: Are boosters a threat?
Many are trying to decide whether to get another booster.
yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com
This came out after the new, reconstituted, 25 member FDA Panel met, but the previous panel that voted 2-16 (against) using the same Wuhan-1 vaccine as a booster did so citing concerns that SARS-CoV-2 could go the way of both Flu and HPV.
That's the big problem with annual Flu shots. If you keep getting the same B/C strains over and over, your body just starts to refuse to accept any new strains when the season changes.
That's why the CDC has to admit the efficacy is only 16-25%, including when they even get some of the strains correct. This 'it cannot hurt' bullshit needs to die. Americans need to *avoid* getting flu vaccines with the same B or C strains they had within the last 5 years or so.
HPV had been yanked and replaced so many times, it's kinda a joke at this point too.
And this '0% science, 100% market' bullshit - to push product and revenue, as liability immunity has been granted (why not?) - of 'waning immunity' has *never* been shown in the general population. The data doesn't support it at all! And that's what our top Coronavirus experts stated, but only outside the US after they resigned.
Which brings us back to OAS...
Because the FDA Expert Panel did say the data is asking as many questions as it answers. And now we could very much be looking the cause.
And given the IgG predominant intra-muscular vaccine vectors don't stop any spread, and don't stop any disease that doesn't move into the lungs, they aren't stopping Omicron at all. Which is why even the brand new 'Boosters' in trials aren't doing shit against Omicron.
The data and articles aren't matching the headlines at all.
Yeah, I read this with plenty of links to authorities earlier this month, after Offit's previously pro-vax voice is being used to throw up all the red flags.
Original antigenic sin: Are boosters a threat?
Many are trying to decide whether to get another booster.
This came out after the new, reconstituted, 25 member FDA Panel met, but the previous panel that voted 2-16 (against) using the same Wuhan-1 vaccine as a booster did so citing concerns that SARS-CoV-2 could go the way of both Flu and HPV.
That's the big problem with annual Flu shots. If you keep getting the same B/C strains over and over, your body just starts to refuse to accept any new strains when the season changes.
That's why the CDC has to admit the efficacy is only 16-25%, including when they even get some of the strains correct. This 'it cannot hurt' bullshit needs to die. Americans need to *avoid* getting flu vaccines with the same B or C strains they had within the last 5 years or so.
HPV had been yanked and replaced so many times, it's kinda a joke at this point too.
And this '0% science, 100% market' bullshit - to push product and revenue, as liability immunity has been granted (why not?) - of 'waning immunity' has *never* been shown in the general population. The data doesn't support it at all! And that's what our top Coronavirus experts stated, but only outside the US after they resigned.
Which brings us back to OAS...
Because the FDA Expert Panel did say the data is asking as many questions as it answers. And now we could very much be looking the cause.
And given the IgG predominant intra-muscular vaccine vectors don't stop any spread, and don't stop any disease that doesn't move into the lungs, they aren't stopping Omicron at all. Which is why even the brand new 'Boosters' in trials aren't doing shit against Omicron.
The data and articles aren't matching the headlines at all.
Yeah, I read this with plenty of links to authorities earlier this month, after Offit's previously pro-vax voice is being used to throw up all the red flags.
Original antigenic sin: Are boosters a threat?
Many are trying to decide whether to get another booster.
This came out after the new, reconstituted, 25 member FDA Panel met, but the previous panel that voted 2-16 (against) using the same Wuhan-1 vaccine as a booster did so citing concerns that SARS-CoV-2 could go the way of both Flu and HPV.
That's the big problem with annual Flu shots. If you keep getting the same B/C strains over and over, your body just starts to refuse to accept any new strains when the season changes.
That's why the CDC has to admit the efficacy is only 16-25%, including when they even get some of the strains correct. This 'it cannot hurt' bullshit needs to die. Americans need to *avoid* getting flu vaccines with the same B or C strains they had within the last 5 years or so.
HPV had been yanked and replaced so many times, it's kinda a joke at this point too.
And this '0% science, 100% market' bullshit - to push product and revenue, as liability immunity has been granted (why not?) - of 'waning immunity' has *never* been shown in the general population. The data doesn't support it at all! And that's what our top Coronavirus experts stated, but only outside the US after they resigned.
Which brings us back to OAS...
Because the FDA Expert Panel did say the data is asking as many questions as it answers. And now we could very much be looking the cause.
And given the IgG predominant intra-muscular vaccine vectors don't stop any spread, and don't stop any disease that doesn't move into the lungs, they aren't stopping Omicron at all. Which is why even the brand new 'Boosters' in trials aren't doing shit against Omicron.
The data and articles aren't matching the headlines at all.
IT
Stands for "Information Technology," and is pronounced "I.T." It refers to anything related to computing technology, such as networking, hardware, software, the Internet, or the people that work with these technologies. Many companies now have IT departments for managing the computers, networks, and other technical areas of their businesses. IT jobs include computer programming, network administration, computer engineering, Web development, technical support, and many other related occupations. Since we live in the "information age," information technology has become a part of our everyday lives. That means the term "IT," already highly overused, is here to stay.
Yeah, I read this with plenty of links to authorities earlier this month, after Offit's previously pro-vax voice is being used to throw up all the red flags.
Original antigenic sin: Are boosters a threat?
Many are trying to decide whether to get another booster.
This came out after the new, reconstituted, 25 member FDA Panel met, but the previous panel that voted 2-16 (against) using the same Wuhan-1 vaccine as a booster did so citing concerns that SARS-CoV-2 could go the way of both Flu and HPV.
That's the big problem with annual Flu shots. If you keep getting the same B/C strains over and over, your body just starts to refuse to accept any new strains when the season changes.
That's why the CDC has to admit the efficacy is only 16-25%, including when they even get some of the strains correct. This 'it cannot hurt' bullshit needs to die. Americans need to *avoid* getting flu vaccines with the same B or C strains they had within the last 5 years or so.
HPV had been yanked and replaced so many times, it's kinda a joke at this point too.
And this '0% science, 100% market' bullshit - to push product and revenue, as liability immunity has been granted (why not?) - of 'waning immunity' has *never* been shown in the general population. The data doesn't support it at all! And that's what our top Coronavirus experts stated, but only outside the US after they resigned.
Which brings us back to OAS...
Because the FDA Expert Panel did say the data is asking as many questions as it answers. And now we could very much be looking the cause.
And given the IgG predominant intra-muscular vaccine vectors don't stop any spread, and don't stop any disease that doesn't move into the lungs, they aren't stopping Omicron at all. Which is why even the brand new 'Boosters' in trials aren't doing shit against Omicron.
The data and articles aren't matching the headlines at all.
It’s also glaringly obvious to anyone paying attention that there are huge safety and efficacy problems with mRNA.
Did you see the propaganda NHS sent to mums in UK about myocarditis? Temporary and mild 💰🤦♀️. Same thing CDC says
Giving kids old stock vaccine that doesn’t work is tantamount to murderer in my eyes. OAS, injuries and permanent immune dysregulation all in the name of 💰
Follow up studies are saying heart damage not temporary a year out. Parents just blindly trust government and do as the nudge team wants. Creating a whole new generation of antivaxxers down the road .🤦♀️
Yeah, it's unreal how we don't give our doctors the info to catch major heart complications after the first shot to prevent kids and young men from getting a second shot.
Every other country does, but not us. "Oh, you're fine, it's minor."
I’m also now convinced the old school anti vaxxers had it right with TDAP and other traditional vaccines. My brother can pin point the exact symptoms following my nephews vaccination that he believes in hindsight showed the adverse event. It’s likely the adjuvant though in the old school jabs, which is criminal since better and safer (ie more expensive) adjuvants are available @nosurf2day
Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date
Patients who got the antiparasitic drug didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo
Ivermectin got attention from celebrities including podcast host Joe Rogan, but researchers said they found no indication that it is clinically useful against Covid-19.
PHOTO: MIKE STEWART/ASSOCIATD PRESS
I By
Sarah Toy
Updated March 18, 2022 10:16 am ET
Researchers testing repurposed drugs against Covid-19 found that ivermectin didn’t reduce hospital admissions, in the largest trial yet of the effect of the antiparasitic on the disease driving the pandemic.
Ivermectin has received a lot of attention as a potential treatment for Covid-19 including from celebritiessuch as podcast host Joe Rogan. Most evidence has shown it to be ineffectiveagainst Covid-19 or has relied on data of poor quality, infectious-disease researchers said. Public-health authorities and researchers have for months said the drug hasn’t shown any benefit in treating the disease. Taking large doses of the drug is dangerous, the Food and Drug Administration has said.
The latest trial, of nearly 1,400 Covid-19 patients at risk of severe disease, is the largest to show that those who received ivermectin as a treatment didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo.
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
How should the most recent studies on the efficacy of ivermectin against Covid-19 influence its use going forward? Join the conversation below.“There was no indication that ivermectin is clinically useful,” said Edward Mills, one of the study’s lead researchers and a professor of health sciences at Canada’s McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.
Dr. Mills and his colleagues looked at 1,358 adults who visited one of 12 clinics in the Minas Gerais region of Brazil with Covid-19 symptoms. The patients all had a positive rapid test for SARS-CoV-2, and were at risk of having a severe case for reasons including a history of diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease or lung disease.
Poster with the phrase, ‘We have ivermectin,’ at a pharmacy in Ceilândia, Brazil.
PHOTO: RICARDO JAYME/AGIF/ASSOCIATED PRESS
The researchers prescribed half of the patients a course of ivermectin pills for three days. The other half received a placebo. They tracked whether the patients were hospitalized within 28 days. The researchers also looked at whether patients on ivermectin cleared the virus from their bodies faster than those who received a placebo, whether their symptoms resolved sooner, whether they were in the hospital or on ventilators for less time and whether there was any difference in the death rates for the two groups.
To make sure they were being thorough, the researchers analyzed the data in three different ways. They looked at data from all patients; then analyzed data from patients who received ivermectin or a placebo 24 hours before they were hospitalized; and in a third review, looked at data from patients who said they had adhered strictly to their dosing schedule. In each scenario, they found ivermectin didn’t improve patient outcomes.
“This is the first large, prospective study that should really help put to rest ivermectin and not give any credibility to the use of it for Covid-19,” said Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, who reviewed the findings.
Ivermectin is used primarily to treat patients with certain parasitic diseases. Some doctors have been prescribing it to Covid-19 patients, and some people have been found ways to obtain ivermectin without a prescription. The drug has antiviral properties, but hasn’t been approved by the FDA to treat any viral infections.
Given its antiviral prospects, scientists early in the pandemic thought it could be a candidate for treating Covid-19. In June 2020, a group of researchers in Australia published a paper showing that large amounts of ivermectin could halt replication of the coronavirus in cell cultures. But there was a problem: To achieve that effect, a person would have to take up to 100 times as much ivermectin as the dose approved for use in humans.
Some studies on ivermectin published in journals or on preprint servers ahead of peer review have demonstrated no benefits, or worsening of Covid-19 symptoms, after ivermectin use. Some have shown some benefit, such as shorter time to symptom resolution, reduction in inflammation, faster viral clearance and lower death rates.
Ivermectin capsules, seen last year in the Philippines, where the drug was distributed in some places despite a lack of evidence to show it prevents or cures Covid-19.
PHOTO: ROLEX DELA PENA/SHUTTERSTOCK
But most studies showing positive effects had significant limitations such as small sample sizes or poorly defined outcomes, according to the NIH. Several studies on ivermectin have been withdrawn from publication, including a randomized controlled trial looking at 100 patients in Lebanon that was retracted by the journal Virusesdue to issues with the statistical analysis, according to the journal. Researchers at the NIH and Oxford University also are conducting large trials on the effectiveness of ivermectin, though results haven’t been published.
Dr. Mills said ivermectin could improve outcomes in Covid-19 patients who are fighting off certain parasitic diseases at the same time. But based on his team’s findings, he said, the drug doesn’t seem to have any effect on Covid-19 itself.
Dr. Mills and his colleagues also are studying other drugs that could be repurposed to work against Covid-19. Such drugs could be useful because their side effects are well known and they may be cheaper to deploy in poor countries than drugs like Merck & Co. and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics LP’s molnupiravir or Pfizer Inc.’s Paxlovid.
Related Video
Amid a surge in cases, some countries are handing out second booster shots. In Israel, early data suggest a fourth vaccine dose can increase antibodies against Covid-19, but not enough to prevent infections from Omicron. WSJ explains. Photo composite: Eve Hartley/WSJTHE WALL STREET JOURNAL INTERACTIVE EDITION
Merck said it has taken steps to make molnupiravir available in low- and middle-income countries, including allocating three million courses for distribution through aid groups and granting licenses to generic manufacturers. Pfizer said it was working to expand its supply chain and licensing production of Paxlovid through a United Nations program.
Dr. Mills and his collaborators have looked at 11 repurposed treatments against Covid-19, of which at least one has shown promise—fluvoxamine, which is commonly used to treat obsessive compulsive disorder and depression. They published the research in the Lancet Global Health in October, showing that Covid-19 patients who received fluvoxamine were less likely to require hospitalization than those who didn’t.
The researchers are looking at the effect in Covid-19 patients of combining fluvoxamine and an inhaled steroid, budesonide, as well as a drug called peginterferon lambda, which is used to treat chronic viral hepatitis
And that's the thing ...
At this point, the anti-vaxxers aren't any 'wronger' than the pro-vaxxers. They are just as right, as they are wrong, about a lot.
As the reconstituted, 25-member FDA expert panel said best, "We have as many questions as answers." And that's just reality.
In any case, they are against re-vax'ing (boosters) for the general population, unchanged from last summer-fall. Let me say that again people ... the FDA's own experts strongly continue to be against boosters for the general popluation.
Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date
Patients who got the antiparasitic drug didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo
Ivermectin got attention from celebrities including podcast host Joe Rogan, but researchers said they found no indication that it is clinically useful against Covid-19.
PHOTO: MIKE STEWART/ASSOCIATD PRESS
I By
Sarah Toy
Updated March 18, 2022 10:16 am ET
Researchers testing repurposed drugs against Covid-19 found that ivermectin didn’t reduce hospital admissions, in the largest trial yet of the effect of the antiparasitic on the disease driving the pandemic.
Ivermectin has received a lot of attention as a potential treatment for Covid-19 including from celebritiessuch as podcast host Joe Rogan. Most evidence has shown it to be ineffectiveagainst Covid-19 or has relied on data of poor quality, infectious-disease researchers said. Public-health authorities and researchers have for months said the drug hasn’t shown any benefit in treating the disease. Taking large doses of the drug is dangerous, the Food and Drug Administration has said.
The latest trial, of nearly 1,400 Covid-19 patients at risk of severe disease, is the largest to show that those who received ivermectin as a treatment didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo.
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
How should the most recent studies on the efficacy of ivermectin against Covid-19 influence its use going forward? Join the conversation below.“There was no indication that ivermectin is clinically useful,” said Edward Mills, one of the study’s lead researchers and a professor of health sciences at Canada’s McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.
Dr. Mills and his colleagues looked at 1,358 adults who visited one of 12 clinics in the Minas Gerais region of Brazil with Covid-19 symptoms. The patients all had a positive rapid test for SARS-CoV-2, and were at risk of having a severe case for reasons including a history of diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease or lung disease.
Poster with the phrase, ‘We have ivermectin,’ at a pharmacy in Ceilândia, Brazil.
PHOTO: RICARDO JAYME/AGIF/ASSOCIATED PRESS
The researchers prescribed half of the patients a course of ivermectin pills for three days. The other half received a placebo. They tracked whether the patients were hospitalized within 28 days. The researchers also looked at whether patients on ivermectin cleared the virus from their bodies faster than those who received a placebo, whether their symptoms resolved sooner, whether they were in the hospital or on ventilators for less time and whether there was any difference in the death rates for the two groups.
To make sure they were being thorough, the researchers analyzed the data in three different ways. They looked at data from all patients; then analyzed data from patients who received ivermectin or a placebo 24 hours before they were hospitalized; and in a third review, looked at data from patients who said they had adhered strictly to their dosing schedule. In each scenario, they found ivermectin didn’t improve patient outcomes.
“This is the first large, prospective study that should really help put to rest ivermectin and not give any credibility to the use of it for Covid-19,” said Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, who reviewed the findings.
Ivermectin is used primarily to treat patients with certain parasitic diseases. Some doctors have been prescribing it to Covid-19 patients, and some people have been found ways to obtain ivermectin without a prescription. The drug has antiviral properties, but hasn’t been approved by the FDA to treat any viral infections.
Given its antiviral prospects, scientists early in the pandemic thought it could be a candidate for treating Covid-19. In June 2020, a group of researchers in Australia published a paper showing that large amounts of ivermectin could halt replication of the coronavirus in cell cultures. But there was a problem: To achieve that effect, a person would have to take up to 100 times as much ivermectin as the dose approved for use in humans.
Some studies on ivermectin published in journals or on preprint servers ahead of peer review have demonstrated no benefits, or worsening of Covid-19 symptoms, after ivermectin use. Some have shown some benefit, such as shorter time to symptom resolution, reduction in inflammation, faster viral clearance and lower death rates.
Ivermectin capsules, seen last year in the Philippines, where the drug was distributed in some places despite a lack of evidence to show it prevents or cures Covid-19.
PHOTO: ROLEX DELA PENA/SHUTTERSTOCK
But most studies showing positive effects had significant limitations such as small sample sizes or poorly defined outcomes, according to the NIH. Several studies on ivermectin have been withdrawn from publication, including a randomized controlled trial looking at 100 patients in Lebanon that was retracted by the journal Virusesdue to issues with the statistical analysis, according to the journal. Researchers at the NIH and Oxford University also are conducting large trials on the effectiveness of ivermectin, though results haven’t been published.
Dr. Mills said ivermectin could improve outcomes in Covid-19 patients who are fighting off certain parasitic diseases at the same time. But based on his team’s findings, he said, the drug doesn’t seem to have any effect on Covid-19 itself.
Dr. Mills and his colleagues also are studying other drugs that could be repurposed to work against Covid-19. Such drugs could be useful because their side effects are well known and they may be cheaper to deploy in poor countries than drugs like Merck & Co. and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics LP’s molnupiravir or Pfizer Inc.’s Paxlovid.
Related Video
Amid a surge in cases, some countries are handing out second booster shots. In Israel, early data suggest a fourth vaccine dose can increase antibodies against Covid-19, but not enough to prevent infections from Omicron. WSJ explains. Photo composite: Eve Hartley/WSJTHE WALL STREET JOURNAL INTERACTIVE EDITION
Merck said it has taken steps to make molnupiravir available in low- and middle-income countries, including allocating three million courses for distribution through aid groups and granting licenses to generic manufacturers. Pfizer said it was working to expand its supply chain and licensing production of Paxlovid through a United Nations program.
Dr. Mills and his collaborators have looked at 11 repurposed treatments against Covid-19, of which at least one has shown promise—fluvoxamine, which is commonly used to treat obsessive compulsive disorder and depression. They published the research in the Lancet Global Health in October, showing that Covid-19 patients who received fluvoxamine were less likely to require hospitalization than those who didn’t.
The researchers are looking at the effect in Covid-19 patients of combining fluvoxamine and an inhaled steroid, budesonide, as well as a drug called peginterferon lambda, which is used to treat chronic viral hepatitis
Hundreds of Millions of People Have Safely Received a COVID-19 Vaccine
More than 558 million doses of COVID-19 vaccine had been given in the United States from December 14, 2020, through March 21, 2022. To view the current total number of COVID-19 vaccinations that have been administered in the United States, please visit the CDC COVID Data Tracker.
COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. COVID-19 vaccines were evaluated in tens of thousands of participants in clinical trials. The vaccines met the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) rigorous scientific standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality needed to support emergency use authorization (EUA). Learn more about EUAs in this video.external icon
The Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson/Janssen COVID-19 vaccines will continue to undergo the most intensive safety monitoring in US history. This monitoring includes using both established and new safety monitoring systems to make sure that COVID-19 vaccines are safe.
Common Side Effects
After COVID-19 vaccination, some people may feel ill, with symptoms like fever or tiredness for a day or two after receiving the vaccine. These symptoms are normal and are signs that the body is building immunity. Some people have no side effects. Others have reported common side effects after COVID-19 vaccination,such as:- Swelling, redness, and pain at the injection site
- Fever
- Headache
- Tiredness
- Muscle pain
- Chills
- Nausea
Serious Safety Problems Are Rare
In rare cases, people have experienced serious health events after COVID-19 vaccination. Any health problem that happens after vaccination is considered an adverse event. An adverse event can be caused by the vaccine or can be caused by a coincidental event not related to the vaccine.
Horse paste currently trading at 250 tubes per ounce of gold.
IT
Stands for "Information Technology," and is pronounced "I.T." It refers to anything related to computing technology, such as networking, hardware, software, the Internet, or the people that work with these technologies. Many companies now have IT departments for managing the computers, networks, and other technical areas of their businesses. IT jobs include computer programming, network administration, computer engineering, Web development, technical support, and many other related occupations. Since we live in the "information age," information technology has become a part of our everyday lives. That means the term "IT," already highly overused, is here to stay.
Looks like more proof coming from the journals on poor vaccine efficacy, this time citing OAS all way back to common cold virus.
You have to learn to read between the lines with these guys. They will NEVER say something "bad" against vaccine without something "good" to soften the blow. The "good" is often BS. @UCFBS
You have to learn to read between the lines with these guys. They will NEVER say something "bad" against vaccine without something "good" to soften the blow. The "good" is often BS. @UCFBS
Looks like more proof coming from the journals on poor vaccine efficacy, this time citing OAS all way back to common cold virus.
You have to learn to read between the lines with these guys. They will NEVER say something "bad" against vaccine without something "good" to soften the blow. The "good" is often BS. @UCFBS
Yep. I just fear we're making all CoVs more of an attack vector and weakness in our innate immune system of an issue because of it.
Oh the irony if in ... say ... 5-10 years ... we end up admitting that just injecting everyone with an Adenovirus might have been better than any 'payload.' Of course, even an Adenovirus may still trigger an 'adverse event' on its own though.
I had one with my eyes 3 weeks after getting the Adenovirus Type 6 (Ad6) from the Janssen (J&J), basically the body's reaction to Pink Eye, even if I didn't get Pink Eye itself. It was my body's own, innate immune system have an adverse reaction, which required anti-biotics as bacterial infections were a complication after a good week of it ... even after I fended off Ad6 itself -- with the SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan-1 spike protien generated by the Ad6 vector.
That's the risk v. reward of any vaccine vector, especially poor, IgG-predominant intra-musclar vectors for an airbourne disease that actually requires IgA antibodies to fight, let alone reduce the spread.
There's no public benefit when a vaccine doesn't reduce the spread, other than preventing hospitalizations, and with Omicron there is no benefit in that regard at all. Even against Delta, they had limited benefit.
Glad you are realizing that now. When I first broke the news vax only really protective 1-2 months for most vulnerable, people balked. Now it’s common knowledge
