Whoa. If this isnt an indication of whats going on, nothing is
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
They want to see more data. The FDA has had the same attitude on EUA for 5-11 too, as well as ful approval for 12-15 (Pfizer, or 12-17 for Moderna/J&J).
The media, political and public pressure on the FDA right now is immense. But they see it like it is ... there is no proof that we're going to remotely stop the pandemic by forcing kids to get it under EUA (5-11) or full approvah (12-15/17). But they won't approve something if it's not proven safe in the data, which has been lacking, especialy given ...
The lack of efficacy difference with placebo.
It's hard to justify shotgunning something for kids when the placebo is also 100% efficacy.
No, the US FDA just likes Pfizer/BioNTech's studies which have been the most extensive.
They cannot argue with the data Pfizer/BioNTech has given them, because it has been the most extensive ...
Except for kids, of course. 100% efficacy rates in Placebo groups are why they aren't moving on kids.
Except for kids, of course. 100% efficacy rates in Placebo groups are why they aren't moving on kids.
The actual problem is that the administration is mandating a vaccine, and the Pfizer/BioNTech is the only FDA approved for 16+. That's not really the FDA's fault, but the politicking.
That's why I don't blame the US FDA for this current situation ...
Especially amid not only all the resigncations, but the articles at The Lancet and others from them who are pointing out the administration is ignoring the data, especialy lackthereof, that show any benefit in a Booster ...
Or any significant advantage in the Pfizer/BioNTech over any others.
There are pros/cons to all the mRNA vectors, Moderna and even the J&J in duration too, beyond just initial efficacy. It's a crapshoot right now.
The FDA has repeatedly 'barked back' about it being a 'crapshoot' too.
Or any significant advantage in the Pfizer/BioNTech over any others.
There are pros/cons to all the mRNA vectors, Moderna and even the J&J in duration too, beyond just initial efficacy. It's a crapshoot right now.
The FDA has repeatedly 'barked back' about it being a 'crapshoot' too.
Last edited:
Moderna’s dose size was larger than Pfizer’s and the 4 week recommended time frame is probably why it is more of a debate
ironically the countries that had people wait 2 months in between Pfizer doses bc of supply limitations may have less need for boosters
ironically the countries that had people wait 2 months in between Pfizer doses bc of supply limitations may have less need for boosters
They voted not to approve the Pfizer booster and then were overruled by the bureaucrats. To me, this looks like they don't want anything to do with the process anymore since whatever they say is meaningless.No, the US FDA just likes Pfizer/BioNTech's studies which have been the most extensive. They cannot argue with the data Pfizer/BioNTech has given them, because it has been the most extensive ...
Except for kids, of course. 100% efficacy rates in Placebo groups are why they aren't moving on kids.
The actual problem is that the administration is mandating a vaccine, and the Pfizer/BioNTech is the only FDA approved for 16+. That's not really the FDA's fault, but the politicking.
That's why I don't blame the US FDA for this current situation ...
Especially amid not only all the resigncations, but the articles at The Lancet and others from them who are pointing out the administration is ignoring the data, especialy lackthereof, that show any benefit in a Booster ...
Or any significant advantage in the Pfizer/BioNTech over any others.
There are pros/cons to all the mRNA vectors, Moderna and even the J&J in duration too, beyond just initial efficacy. It's a crapshoot right now.
The FDA has repeatedly 'barked back' about it being a 'crapshoot' too.
I think that you're also seeing less pressure from the public on government as people are starting to accept the new reality.
I haven't seen that the US FDA approved any Pfizer 3rd shot except for the Elderly and Immunocompromised. That said ...
Because the US FDA approved the Pfizer 2nd shot, and the 3rd shot is the exact same, this is where things get murky.
Mandating something -- i.e., schedule -- the US FDA has not approved and utterly and publicly recommends against, but the shot itself -- not the schedule -- is approved.
Which is why we are seeing a pause outside the US too. The reactivity has been worse, statistically, according to those countries that have paused it.
The data is still a crapshoot at this point, but there is some correlation.
As I said, most everything is ancedotal at this point, with both peer reviewed affirmative (validated) as well as negative (conflicting).
The US NIH stuff has been really interesting, which is what the US FDA is pointing to ... as well as the Israelis and Brits, who have complete and utter statisitcs on their entire populace.
The fact that we've gone from saying US CDC VEARS has no supporting data to now claiming VEARS is not a valid reference in the US at all, now that there is all sorts of supporting data to showcase issues, is a great example of how useless our data in the US is.
The VEARS system relies on volunteering information, and 5 out of 6 doctor's offices have no such interest in providing such or being bothered by it, so most of the data we have is either not submitted, or submitted outside of them. The US NIH came to this conclusion earlier this year.
That VEARS is utterly useless, in both directions.
The leader of CDC just made a rare call to allow Covid booster shots for more people
Dr. Rochelle Walensky overruled a CDC advisory panel and cleared the distribution of Pfizer and BioNTech's Covid booster shots to a wide swath of Americans.
That's the US CDC, not the US FDA.The leader of CDC just made a rare call to allow Covid booster shots for more people
Dr. Rochelle Walensky overruled a CDC advisory panel and cleared the distribution of Pfizer and BioNTech's Covid booster shots to a wide swath of Americans.www.cnbc.com
But yes, the CDC usually sets vaccine schedules for all or groups of people, while the FDA approves individual vaccines. In this case, the FDA has not approved a 3rd shot, but since the 2nd shot exactly matches the 3rd shot, and the 2nd shot is FDA approved, it gets murky.
But yes ... agreed on 'leaders overriding' the expert panels that recommend for/against approval -- in this case the CDC overriding its own panel that sets schedules.
The same happened recent at the FDA too, with the Aduhelm (Alzheimer drug) approval, overriding the FDA's own expert panel that also strongly recommended against it.
This is why I'm taking serious issue with what we're doing, especially as resignations are happening with the associated accusations of complete interference that is not supported by the data.
Advisory Panel Says FDA Should Save COVID Boosters for the Most Vulnerable
An advisory panel has recommended that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) not give COVID-19 vaccine booster doses to the general population.
They know it doesn't matter what they say. Give the shots, don't give the shots......it's all up to a bureaucrat anyway so just stay out of it.
I read today that places with highest vaccination rates also experience high rates of infection and this was data from Israel and the UK. the article also cited in Vermont , the state with the highest rates of vaccine use also have 76 percent of their hospitalizations currently from the vaccinated. The article also went on reporting to say after 6 months the Pfizer efficacy plummets. The article is loaded with data and many won't read it simply because it's not from the most trusted name in cable news .
Something is going on here.
www.theblaze.com
Something is going on here.
Horowitz: The data is in, and we are now worse off than before the experimental shots | Blaze Media
In October 2018, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health published a report that, if one didn't know better, might make readers think the authors were involved in the gain-of-function research that likely created this virus. The report, titled "Technologies to Address Global...
www.theblaze.com
It's not worse. It's just linear, 1:1.I read today that places with highest vaccination rates also experience high rates of infection and this was data from Israel and the UK. the article also cited in Vermont , the state with the highest rates of vaccine use also have 76 percent of their hospitalizations currently from the vaccinated. The article also went on reporting to say after 6 months the Pfizer efficacy plummets. The article is loaded with data and many won't read it simply because it's not from the most trusted name in cable news .
Something is going on here.
Horowitz: The data is in, and we are now worse off than before the experimental shots | Blaze Media
In October 2018, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health published a report that, if one didn't know better, might make readers think the authors were involved in the gain-of-function research that likely created this virus. The report, titled "Technologies to Address Global...
I.e., infection/spread rates are the same for both with SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta)
E.g., the more people are vaccinated, the more infections -- yes, breakthrough -- are making up the vaccinated, versus the unvaccinated.
It's just linear, and it's not even questioned by the NIH, in either direction. However ...
The secondary transmissions are the same, as breakthrough infections just happen similarly too, but ...
Most of the new studies are about duration of infection/spread at this point.
I.e., There is growing evidence that even against Delta, the duration of the vaccinated is reduced to 1 week instead of 2 -- about a 50% reduction overall. That too would explain the 25-50% reduction in overall Secondary Transmission over the same, extended period of time.
E.g., if you study the vaccinated and unvaccinated over a month or two, the vaccinated have breakthrough infections and spread like the unvaccined, but it's only half as long. And that explains why, even if they spread just as much, and the Secondary Transmission rate is just as fast, the overall spread/transmission over time is 25-50% less, aggregate, even if when someone that is infected still spreads the same -- vaccinated or unvaccinated.
So that IS a BENEFIT of the current crop of mRNA vectors., beyond just prevening serious disease/death in 80-90% of cases. Furthermore ...
That wouldn't be unlike deactivated or live-attenuated influenza vaccines either, in that they reduce both the severity and length, while the infection efficacy is crap. The US CDC has repatedly had to admit, post-season, that it's only been a 16-25% reduction in 2016-2019 flu seasons (the 3 seasons prior to SARS-CoV-2). '15-'17 (2) were Flu-B heavy (more death), and '18-19 was Flu-C heavy (more infection/spread, but less death).
But it's just NOT significant at all. So, in both cases ...
Most of the new studies are about duration of infection/spread at this point.
I.e., There is growing evidence that even against Delta, the duration of the vaccinated is reduced to 1 week instead of 2 -- about a 50% reduction overall. That too would explain the 25-50% reduction in overall Secondary Transmission over the same, extended period of time.
E.g., if you study the vaccinated and unvaccinated over a month or two, the vaccinated have breakthrough infections and spread like the unvaccined, but it's only half as long. And that explains why, even if they spread just as much, and the Secondary Transmission rate is just as fast, the overall spread/transmission over time is 25-50% less, aggregate, even if when someone that is infected still spreads the same -- vaccinated or unvaccinated.
So that IS a BENEFIT of the current crop of mRNA vectors., beyond just prevening serious disease/death in 80-90% of cases. Furthermore ...
That wouldn't be unlike deactivated or live-attenuated influenza vaccines either, in that they reduce both the severity and length, while the infection efficacy is crap. The US CDC has repatedly had to admit, post-season, that it's only been a 16-25% reduction in 2016-2019 flu seasons (the 3 seasons prior to SARS-CoV-2). '15-'17 (2) were Flu-B heavy (more death), and '18-19 was Flu-C heavy (more infection/spread, but less death).
But it's just NOT significant at all. So, in both cases ...
Herd immunity has now been repeatedly proven to be utterly impossible with those absolutely poor numbers ... both with Influenza and now SARS ... even if everyone -- even kids -- were vaccinated with any of the current vectors.
We'll see if that changes if/when they not only update the spike protein away from SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan-1 to Delta, as well as rolling out an intra-nasal delivery instead of intra-muscular.
Last edited:
I read today that places with highest vaccination rates also experience high rates of infection and this was data from Israel and the UK. the article also cited in Vermont , the state with the highest rates of vaccine use also have 76 percent of their hospitalizations currently from the vaccinated. The article also went on reporting to say after 6 months the Pfizer efficacy plummets. The article is loaded with data and many won't read it simply because it's not from the most trusted name in cable news .
Something is going on here.
Horowitz: The data is in, and we are now worse off than before the experimental shots | Blaze Media
In October 2018, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health published a report that, if one didn't know better, might make readers think the authors were involved in the gain-of-function research that likely created this virus. The report, titled "Technologies to Address Global...
While the rest of us are going to football games without masks in packed stadiums and traveling the country, the rest of you losers have been left behind. Right ladies?
Nope. We're doing the same stuff you are.
While the rest of us are going to football games without masks in packed stadiums and traveling the country, the rest of you losers have been left behind. Right ladies?
And yet the vaccinated still being infected/spreading the same as the unvaccinated.
While the rest of us are going to football games without masks in packed stadiums and traveling the country, the rest of you losers have been left behind. Right ladies?
The Blaze isn't the most trusted name in news??!?
Yep, it's called the usual bullsh!t scare-mongering.
I shared a bunch of numbers about this in a thread on Saturday that are of this same stripe. They don't make sense. The UK numbers are basically the opposite of what we should have expected. Israel's numbers show essentially no difference from a year ago. Only Canada has numbers that actually make sense.I read today that places with highest vaccination rates also experience high rates of infection and this was data from Israel and the UK. the article also cited in Vermont , the state with the highest rates of vaccine use also have 76 percent of their hospitalizations currently from the vaccinated. The article also went on reporting to say after 6 months the Pfizer efficacy plummets. The article is loaded with data and many won't read it simply because it's not from the most trusted name in cable news .
Something is going on here.
Horowitz: The data is in, and we are now worse off than before the experimental shots | Blaze Media
In October 2018, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health published a report that, if one didn't know better, might make readers think the authors were involved in the gain-of-function research that likely created this virus. The report, titled "Technologies to Address Global...
According to a report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), unvaccinated individuals are 11 times more likely to die from Covid-19 than those who are fully inoculated, reports NPR’s Vanessa Romo. The study, published in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) on September 10, also found vaccinated individuals were almost five times less likely to get infected with the virus and ten times less likely to end up hospitalized due to complications from the virus.
This past week the CDC released another study in the MMWR showing that Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine was more effective at preventing hospitalizations than Pfizer-BioNTech and Johnson & Johnson’s vaccines, reports Helen Elfer for the Independent. The study evaluated data taken from nine states from June through August and found that across all ages, the Moderna vaccine’s effectiveness was at 95 percent, per NPR. Pfizer-BioNTech had 80 percent effectiveness, and Johnson and Johnson was 60 percent effective. On average, the three vaccines were 86 percent effective at preventing hospitalization and 82 percent effective at preventing emergency room or urgent care visits, Vox reports.
Pretend you do. Since you're so smart and sciencey, it should be easy to explain it instead of just post jack-off memes.
Same thing happening in several countries, including here. You must know something about why this is happening since you call everybody a retard that disagrees with you.
Loser
According to a report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), unvaccinated individuals are 11 times more likely to die from Covid-19 than those who are fully inoculated, reports NPR’s Vanessa Romo. The study, published in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) on September 10, also found vaccinated individuals were almost five times less likely to get infected with the virus and ten times less likely to end up hospitalized due to complications from the virus.
Loser
Four of the five most recent mid-Michigan COVID-19 deaths involve unvaccinated people, including a middle-aged Isabella County man. Since August, six of seven local COVID-19 people to die from the disease were not vaccinated.
Meanwhile, cases continue to increase the fastest in age groups involving children.
Four of the five deaths were reported in Isabella County, said Steve Hall, health officer for Central Michigan District Health Department. CMDHD covers Isabella, Clare, Roscommon, Gladwin, Osceola and Arenac counties.
Go rip the rectums apart of your friends over this data
Unvaccinated Californians were between 15 and 20 times more likely to die of COVID-19 than vaccinated ones when deaths from the disease most recently peaked at the start of September, according to state data.
The California Department of Public Health publishes data on the vaccination status of people who test positive for coronavirus as well as people who are hospitalized with, and die from, COVID-19. Their data shows that the death rate among unvaccinated Californians aged 16 and older soared in early September, reaching a peak of 13 average daily deaths per million on Sept. 6.
The really troublesome part is that we are creating incubators that don’t die. Therefore, if an extremely deadly variant mutates in a host, that host is more likely to transmit it than an unvaccinated host. Follow that through a couple of iterations and we could very well create our own nightmare scenario with the absolute best of intentions. And, sorry, no amount of gaslighting and spooge gifs will help solve that potential outcome.
It will be really interesting to see what happens in Italy this winter. They are over 80% vaccinated above the age of 12, and theoretically accomplished it at just about the right time.
All I know is Biden lied and people died. He said he could and would get Fauci's Wuhan Flu under control.
That is legitimately “all you know”. He has a free readily available vaccine that all but prevents death from Covid. Do you think he cares that chuds who boo Drumpf rallies at the mere mention of the vaccine are dying from something preventable?
He got the third dose 2 years ago?Reports are the 3rd shot is causing dementia, communication issues, and walking issues.
Exhibit A
A bigger comeback than the Boise game.
By the time it's all said and done, deaths will be commensurate with population. There's nothing more to it than that.
Similar threads
