It's not a slur.
No evidence I've noticed. Another anti-vaxx trope. It's easy for a reason.
Also no mucosal immunity with the injections - for a (at least partially) respiratory virus that is not good. (Covid is also affecting endothelial cells in smooth tissue in other body organs - wherever there are ACE2 receptors, so it is not wholly a respiratory virus, though inhalation is the way most people contract the virus, and the first place it replicates usually is in the mucosal passageways.)
In fairness it's the first time in ages there's actually been some debate or discussion on the thread. It's usually just Isha & Co dumping more and more anti-vax links.
Moderna is not being halted because it is highly dangerous Isha, it's currently halted becasue other options are deemed to be safer at the moment. It like if you give 50 million each of two vaccines and 5 people have a reaction to one of them... it doesn't meant that one is dangerous, it;s just not as safe. We've been through this already with AZ.
"Dangerous" is relative, although compared to other vaccines that were pulled in the past, the covid-19 vaccines certainly are more dangerous than those that were suspended indefinitely in the past, due to adverse reactions.
You do not agree with this
yet you fail miserably to explain why, except to say what we have is better than nothing.A non-sterilising vaccine will NEVER bring herd immunity.
What is the current risk that the healthcare system might be overwhelmed? I do remember 'flatten the curve' and we all bought in without much protest at a time when there were alot more unknowns.
I thought it was obvious. The vaccine reduces the risk of hospitalisation and death from covid. It's not perfect but it's enabled the rolling back of restrictions which is better than nothing.
So by the same logic then Isha, if driving down the M50 at 300mph is considered dangerous, would you consider doing so at 275mph to be safe? Or just less dangerous? Events can have different levels of safety before they can be regarded as dangerous, just like vaccines.
Indeed, but this isn't any other vaccine. This is an emergency vaccine produced in months instead of decades. All vaccines (there's only about 30) carry risks. But like all those other vaccines, the pro's outweigh the cons. You may be that really unlucky sod, that 1 in 50k, or 1 in 50M or whatever that things go wrong for but for the rest of us the vaccines are the path to getting back to normal.
Here's one ''what'' - there was an argument for a while there that the unvaccinated were enabling viral mutation by going around with loads of their dirty virus, and that this was endangering everyone. Then it became apparent that viral loads and transmission are just as much a problem for the vaccinated. Now if an Irish county with perhaps among one of the globe's highest vaccination rates also has one of the highest levels of Covid in Europe that means - using the old logic - there is a lot of (often asymptomatic) incubation of potential mutation going on.
You've way too much time on your hands.isha wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 10:40 am Here's one ''what'' - there was an argument for a while there that the unvaccinated were enabling viral mutation by going around with loads of their dirty virus, and that this was endangering everyone. Then it became apparent that viral loads and transmission are just as much a problem for the vaccinated. Now if an Irish county with perhaps among one of the globe's highest vaccination rates also has one of the highest levels of Covid in Europe that means - using the old logic - there is a lot of (often asymptomatic) incubation of potential mutation going on.
And the mutations that succeed will be those selectively directed by normal viral evolution processes at the narrow focus of the cell binding receptors of the virus's spike protein to effect vaccine escape, because that is the portion of the virus that the vaccine instructs RNA to replicate and thus people to make antibodies against - otherwise the escape mutations would not ''succeed''.
That's just one ''what''.
Here are the inventors of the Pfizer vaccine the day before yesterday, pretty much saying this is happening and will happen
But sure look it, chase the rainbow if you want. I am just observing that things are not at all as we were told they would be. New stories are having to be told all the time to cover up problems.
I know it is disappointing to many. But there have been good scientists calling this potential out for a long while. And ignored.
We went to battle with one implement, which is not as good as we hoped.
Lookit I hate this fecken thing with a passion, as I hate all diseases to be honest - but especially I hate this one as I think it is a result of human hubris and I think it will take a toll unless we wipe it out. Vaccination with these shots will NOT wipe it out. It just won't.
I think there are ways out. Thankfully the IFR of SARS COV 2 is not as high as advertised and is very low for young and healthy people. Most people will do fine. The fear being generated is very debilitating.
Natural immunity against the whole virus will build herd immunity. Children will (unfortunately) face this virus now for the whole of their lives and it is best they have good B Cell and T cell based broad immunity rather than a lifetime of mRNA injections. (I say unfortunately as I was a strong Zero Covid advocate - I think we should never have allowed this virus to spread at all, but we did for economic reasons.)
We can protect vulnerable people - we can direct vaccination only towards vulnerable cohorts, so that there is not this vaccine escape pressure being caused by mass vaccination during high viral occurrence. That is vaccinology 101. Never vaccinate mid pandemic.
We can use known and tested molecules to help people heal from infection, including prophylaxis eg with Vitamin D, aspirin even. There are lots of good potential early treatments. Mechanical ventilation has not been a good response to an inflammatory condition.
Mulprahnivir - the new Merck pill - is not great from what I can tell in that it is mutagenic and obviously has not had long term longitudinal studies - I think we should depend for now upon well-tested molecules.
If you go to page 12 and onwards of this recent UK data
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... eek_40.pdf
First of all, and more as an aside, you will see that rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated per 100,000 are paradoxical in that they are higher among vaccinated people as one goes up the age groups. If we ignore that though and look at the hospitalisations (page 14), they are higher in unvaccinated. Told ya so, says you. But look at the numbers per 100,000 cases - let's take a 50-59 year old = 35 admissions per 100,000 cases recorded. That is an admission rate of 0.04%. Look at deaths among unvaccinated - higher than vaccinated. But 11 out of 100,000 positive cases = 0.01%. Sure when you get to 80+ it is 133 per 100,000 or 0.13%. But the toll is not what is advertised in the media day in day out.
Why did Uttar Pradesh with 240 million incredibly densely-packed-in people have 20 cases yesterday? We need to ask questions and make observations. Or maybe my brain was made wrong and only I need to!
Conversely I actually think now we should not have locked down and should have aligned more closely with the Swedish approach.
I'm not the one comparing myself to Holocaust victims because I don't want a shot. If you don't want it, don't get it but the wailing adds nothing.