• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

News Pfizer says it's time for a Covid vaccine booster; FDA and CDC waiting for more data

Status
Not open for further replies.

vpance

Member
Jun 20, 2005
9,170
3,483
1,650
As a student of history, no question.

Millions die yearly from various preventable and non-preventable disease. But hegemonic power with the ability to silence all dissent... that is the real killer of man.

Never ends well!

Take Australia for instance, they've had a handful of death (I believe its just double digits?), but their entire society was turned upside down. Bizarre stuff.

Less people died in 2020 than 2019 I believe.... another "first" for a pandemic. Less people dying in a pandemic year than a non-pandemic year. Very odd.

And now a corporate global hegemon is bribing and using fear to try and get me to join an experiment, which is being promoted by vocal depopulationists? :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Really can't make this stuff up.

The number of worldwide excess deaths that covid sparked only lasted about 2 months from the start of the pandemic. Many countries still stayed roughly in line with average deaths, and that was before all the vaccines.

Since then the number of all cause deaths has roughly been in line with normal yearly averages. So basically it replaced all the flu deaths? None of it is being put into context for the public though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Singular7

Dr.Guru of Peru

played the long game
Jun 10, 2004
6,490
1,158
1,690
The number of worldwide excess deaths that covid sparked only lasted about 2 months from the start of the pandemic. Many countries still stayed roughly in line with average deaths, and that was before all the vaccines.

Since then the number of all cause deaths has roughly been in line with normal yearly averages. So basically it replaced all the flu deaths? None of it is being put into context for the public though.
Probably because it isn't true. Where are you getting that from?
All cause deaths in most countries affected by COVID are higher in 2020. This is the USA for example. I have a hard time believing that the world wide numbers are any different.




The WHO estimates 3 million excess deaths in 2020.
The true death toll of COVID-19: estimating global excess mortality (who.int)
 

The Pleasure

Member
Jan 8, 2019
4,670
6,649
575
Are they? 99.99999% survivability for my age / health.

I'll take my chances and be in the control group for this mass gene therapy experiment!

Wish everyone well no matter their choice to participate in the experiment or not.

This pandemic sure is setting history in a number of ways though, particularly, the first pandemic where one of the symptoms is no symptoms at all!
 

Davey Cakes

Member
Dec 5, 2008
14,866
989
1,310
Quincy, Massachusetts
Still unvaccinated because I'm a monster. Feel awkward anytime someone asks me and I tell them the truth.

That said, I'm just going to continue on. All this talk of boosters is just to prey on the hyper paranoid and to take advantage of people suffering from "cave syndrome."

Zero problems so far, and my work is still mandating masks so I'm still protected in the space where I spend the most time around people. Maybe I'll change gears if I feel truly threatened by the virus at some point in the future.

I've never had a flu shot, and can't remember the last time I had the flu. My friends/family that get the yearly flu shot get the flu every year.
Same. Never had a flu shot. The only time I ever experienced flu-like symptoms was in 2010, when I was in college. I've never had full-blown flu in my entire life.

I guess I'm just not particularly alarmist. That said, it's not like I don't care about others. I've fully respected COVID restrictions and mask mandates during the pandemic up until this very point.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Singular7
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member

We're not rolling dice in real life, though. Risks are calculated based on after the fact rates from similar populations and do not actually represent your individual "chance" (if there is such a thing) to succumb to COVID-19.
 

poppabk

Member
Jan 21, 2008
13,383
2,356
1,610
USA
Of course it is a big and ambiguous "if," we simply cannot know what hasn't come to pass, and in the case of the currently available vaccines in the west, they are using technologies that have no historical precedent to use for comparison. I certainly don't like the idea of having my cells produce toxic proteins that are targeted by my immune system. It doesn't sit right with me. If it turns out to be a miracle technology with virtually no downsides, then great, I'll change my mind on it and cast my fears aside, but for now? In the face of a disease that statistically barely affects people in my age, sex, and health bracket and appears to be getting less deadly as it evolves? No thanks, I choose not to participate in that experiment, even if it supposedly reduces my risk of death and hospitalization by 90% (taking it from 0.0009% to 0.00009%, and 0.0236% to 0.00236% respectively).
You just literally described a virus - this is exactly what COVID does. The difference is that the virus includes all the instructions to produce the proteins needed to create new capsid proteins and to induce replication of the viral genome allowing for massive unregulated production of protein encapsulated mRNA (or RNA/DNA).
 

Loki

Count of Concision
Jun 6, 2004
7,559
628
1,670
your body doesn't create anti-bodies forever.

It's my understanding that though circulating levels of antibodies decrease as time passes from the time of infection/vaccination, the T-cells retain the blueprint/memory for how to recognize the antigen and produce the necessary antibodies for at a minimum several years. I've heard as many as 10 years claimed. Can anyone more familiar with immunology chime in on this? As I understand it, this is why they generally want to test you for your antibody titer X weeks after vaccination - because it has always been known that the circulating antobody levels will decrease with time. That doesn't mean immunity disappears, however.
 
Oct 26, 2018
23,481
33,045
885
Still unvaccinated because I'm a monster. Feel awkward anytime someone asks me and I tell them the truth.

That said, I'm just going to continue on. All this talk of boosters is just to prey on the hyper paranoid and to take advantage of people suffering from "cave syndrome."

Zero problems so far, and my work is still mandating masks so I'm still protected in the space where I spend the most time around people. Maybe I'll change gears if I feel truly threatened by the virus at some point in the future.


Same. Never had a flu shot. The only time I ever experienced flu-like symptoms was in 2010, when I was in college. I've never had full-blown flu in my entire life.

I guess I'm just not particularly alarmist. That said, it's not like I don't care about others. I've fully respected COVID restrictions and mask mandates during the pandemic up until this very point.
Thats totally fine in my books. Every person knows and is responsible for themselves. If someone doesnt want to get it, I'm not going to be one of those assholes trying to classify you as a contagious monster.

I only did covid shots because everyone kept bugging me to do it. I rarely get sick. Maybe once every 3-4 years I get this horrible 24-48 hours worth of shitting every 40 minutes. I actually feel fine, but got to hit the can to flush something out. I don't know if thats flu or food poisoning, but thats as far as it goes. I remember getting a true flu bug back in public school where I got a fever and I was kind of hallucinating where my vision was zooming in and out. I remember it due to that and my mom blaming one my cheap aunts for infecting people because she came to a family dinner with a flu bug and many people got sick. LOL

I find it funnier just how black and white people think about the virus. Here in Ontario there's been many on and off shut downs of various degrees based on region or sometimes blanket province wide lockdowns. For a while every non essential was on lockdown, then patios were allowed to be open. Just recently, dine in is finally allowed with some limitations on capacity.

So you had some people who were on full lockdown mode as per the government like the apocalypse is floating in the air. Then the second dine in is allowed, I'm suddenly getting dinner invites as if that day (July 16) is Cinderella and as soon as midnight hit the virus disappeared from Earth and it's now party time for eating out.

lol
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kev Kev
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
You just literally described a virus - this is exactly what COVID does. The difference is that the virus includes all the instructions to produce the proteins needed to create new capsid proteins and to induce replication of the viral genome allowing for massive unregulated production of protein encapsulated mRNA (or RNA/DNA).

Yeah, I totally get this. Part of the reason the mRNA and viral vector solutions are thought to be better than traditional vaccination is exactly because they sort of mimic the replication process of a virus and the hope is that this will trigger a more robust immunity similar to "natural" infection. I hope this pans out, but at the same time, I'm always going to be weary of new shit when it comes to injecting it into my body. It's probably just an irrational worry and I hope that turns out to be the case, but considering my individual risk profile, I think I would rather just fight off an infection normally and gain what increasingly appears to be broad and durable immunity.
 

poppabk

Member
Jan 21, 2008
13,383
2,356
1,610
USA
Yeah, I totally get this. Part of the reason the mRNA and viral vector solutions are thought to be better than traditional vaccination is exactly because they sort of mimic the replication process of a virus and the hope is that this will trigger a more robust immunity similar to "natural" infection. I hope this pans out, but at the same time, I'm always going to be weary of new shit when it comes to injecting it into my body. It's probably just an irrational worry and I hope that turns out to be the case, but considering my individual risk profile, I think I would rather just fight off an infection normally and gain what increasingly appears to be broad and durable immunity.
Is is an interesting take:
I don't want mRNA produced under regulated conditions in the west and specifically designed to be as safe as possible injected into me, I'd prefer someone cough their Chinese designed RNA infested mucus droplets directly into my lungs like nature intended.
I'm being sarcastic obviously but that is what it boils down to.
 

poppabk

Member
Jan 21, 2008
13,383
2,356
1,610
USA
It's my understanding that though circulating levels of antibodies decrease as time passes from the time of infection/vaccination, the T-cells retain the blueprint/memory for how to recognize the antigen and produce the necessary antibodies for at a minimum several years. I've heard as many as 10 years claimed. Can anyone more familiar with immunology chime in on this? As I understand it, this is why they generally want to test you for your antibody titer X weeks after vaccination - because it has always been known that the circulating antobody levels will decrease with time. That doesn't mean immunity disappears, however.
B-cells produce antibodies, T-cells have T-cell receptors that bind to MHC molecules which in turn bind protein fragments. Memory B-cells and T-cells are extremely long lived versions of these cells that survive long after an infection and from which a clonal population can be created if infection is re-encountered. B-cells are the kinda frontline defense attacking circulating virus particles, while T-cells which come later in an infection target and destroy any infected cells, cutting the infection off at the source. This is a very simplified view - what we know of the immune system is incredibly complex and we are still in the dark about a lot of it.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Is is an interesting take:
I don't want mRNA produced under regulated conditions in the west and specifically designed to be as safe as possible injected into me, I'd prefer someone cough their Chinese designed RNA infested mucus droplets directly into my lungs like nature intended.
I'm being sarcastic obviously but that is what it boils down to.

Fair enough. You trust the designs and infallibility of pharmaceutical giants. I do not. That's really what it boils down to.

With my risk profile, I would prefer to get what is likely superior immunity by simply encountering the virus in the wild.

If I were over 60, or obese, or otherwise had a high risk profile, I would probably have gotten one of the vaccines as soon as I was able.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Singular7

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,722
19,801
1,910
Best Coast
It's one of the factors. Is it not common sense that the more times a virus replicates, the more chances a virus has of developing a mutation?

Maybe maybe not. There's a lot of variables at play. At a basic level we can confidently say that the more chances an organism has to replicate the more chances it has to evolve. Therefore, the less chances we give the virus to spread and replicate, the less ability it has to evolve.
@Zefah What did you think of this? That the more times an organism reproduces the more opportunities it has to evolve, and that vaccinations restrict a virus' ability to reproduce and spread, therefore reducing its ability to evolve.

Do you accept this explanation or are you still unconvinced?
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
@Zefah What did you think of this? That the more times an organism reproduces the more opportunities it has to evolve, and that vaccinations restrict a virus' ability to reproduce and spread, therefore reducing its ability to evolve.

Do you accept this explanation or are you still unconvinced?

Sure, few opportunities means decreased likelihood. I don't think there's any debating that.

To what degree do these currently available COVID-19 vaccines reduce those opportunities, though, is the question.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,722
19,801
1,910
Best Coast
Sure, few opportunities means decreased likelihood. I don't think there's any debating that.

To what degree do these currently available COVID-19 vaccines reduce those opportunities, though, is the question.

Beyond their substantial protection of individual vaccinees, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines might reduce viral load in breakthrough infection and thereby further suppress onward transmission. In this analysis of a real-world dataset of positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test results after inoculation with the BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine, we found that the viral load was substantially reduced for infections occurring 12–37 d after the first dose of vaccine. These reduced viral loads hint at a potentially lower infectiousness, further contributing to vaccine effect on virus spread.

The results show that infections occurring 12 d or longer after vaccination have significantly reduced viral loads at the time of testing, potentially affecting viral shedding and contagiousness as well as the severity of the disease13. This report is based on an observational study, not a randomized controlled trial, and has several associated limitations. First, the group of vaccinees might differ from the demographically matched control group in ways that could affect the observed viral load, such as behavior, tendency to get tested and general health status. Second, the different viral variants, which could be associated with different viral loads, might affect different parts of the population. Third, by including only the first positive test for each patient, we attempted to minimize the effect of long-term, low-viral-load infections, but it is still possible that the association we observed, especially in the early post-vaccination days, reflects infections lasting from pre-immunization transmission events9,10,11,12. The average viral load might, therefore, continue to change in longer post-vaccination times, when infections are more strongly enriched for post-immunization transmissions, or due to change in vaccinee behavior, especially upon obtaining a vaccination certificate. Fourth, given that vaccines prevent symptomatic disease, post-vaccination tests might be enriched for cases of asymptomatic carriage characterized by lower viral load, although we note that the association of vaccination with low viral load remains even when adjusting for symptomatic disease (Extended Data Fig. 7). Finally, the oro-nasopharyngeal test does not distinguish the viral load in the nose from the one in the oral cavity and does not account for virus viability, which would be a better measure of potential infectiousness. Moreover, the infectious dose of SARS-CoV-2 in humans is presently unknown. The accumulation of wider and longer-term datasets, including contact tracing data as well as virus viability and genomics, will allow better quantification of the vaccine effect on infectiousness and its dependence on viral variants and vaccinee behavior. Nevertheless, at least for the conditions tested here, the lower viral loads that we observed could help fine-tune epidemiological models of vaccine effect on the spread of the virus.


Researchers found that study participants who were partially or fully vaccinated with the Pfizer and Moderna messenger RNA vaccines at the time of infection had a viral load that was 40% less than that of unvaccinated participants. Viral load – the amount of SARS-CoV-2 virus found in a test sample – is not an indicator of how contagious an individual is, though early COVID-19 research suggests viral load could play a role in disease severity and secondary transmission.

 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member

I already commented on the claim about the Pfizer vaccine's 95% figure here. If you think that's a legitimate claim, well, I don't know what to tell you.

Meanwhile in the real world,


New unpublished data showing that vaccinated people infected with the Delta coronavirus variant can have as much virus as those who are unvaccinated is the primary driver for the CDC's latest mask guidance change, a source involved with the decision process told CNN. Overall, vaccinated people still play a small role in transmission and breakthrough infections are rare.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,722
19,801
1,910
Best Coast
I already commented on the claim about the Pfizer vaccine's 95% figure here. If you think that's a legitimate claim, well, I don't know what to tell you.
I'm talking about the data on viral load of vaccinated people vs. unvaccinated. I put in multiple sources so you have a diverse dataset to choose from in case you have issues with one in particular.

Based on what I showed you, are you convinced that the vaccines help to reduce viral load and the ability for the virus to replicate itself and spread amongst humans?

Also, you bolded the first part of that paragraph, but it's the second part that matters since that is speaking to the results.

"Overall, vaccinated people still play a small role in transmission and breakthrough infections are rare"

The virus can reproduce all it wants, but if it doesn't escape to other hosts, it dies when the first host recovers. (unless it's a virus like herpes, but COVID isn't like that)
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Also, you bolded the first part of that paragraph, but it's the second part that matters since that is speaking to the results.

"Overall, vaccinated people still play a small role in transmission and breakthrough infections are rare"

The virus can reproduce all it wants, but if it doesn't escape to other hosts, it dies when the first host recovers. (unless it's a virus like herpes, but COVID isn't like that)

What? Why would you take the propagandaeditorialization from the article as the most important piece?
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,722
19,801
1,910
Best Coast
What? Why would you take the propagandaeditorialization from the article as the most important piece?
It's important to understand the big picture. You have to acknowledge both aspects and not cherry pick.

I put in multiple sources so you have a diverse dataset to choose from in case you have issues with one in particular.

Based on what I showed you, are you convinced that the vaccines help to reduce viral load and the ability for the virus to replicate itself and spread amongst humans?
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
It's important to understand the big picture. You have to acknowledge both aspects and not cherry pick.

I put in multiple sources so you have a diverse dataset to choose from in case you have issues with one in particular.

Based on what I showed you, are you convinced that the vaccines help to reduce viral load and the ability for the virus to replicate itself and spread amongst humans?

The "sources" you linked were all speculation based on assumptions, largely from data not even looking at the currently dominant variant.

Regardless, this is what the American CDC Director is saying today.


CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said recent studies had shown that those vaccinated individuals who do become infected with Covid have just as much viral load as the unvaccinated, making it possible for them to spread the virus to others. Based on that finding, Walensky said the CDC is also recommending that all school children wear masks in the fall.

So, with that established, the only question is if vaccinated people get infected less. It certainly doesn't look very likely.
 
Oct 26, 2018
23,481
33,045
885
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said recent studies had shown that those vaccinated individuals who do become infected with Covid have just as much viral load as the unvaccinated, making it possible for them to spread the virus to others. Based on that finding, Walensky said the CDC is also recommending that all school children wear masks in the fall.
I'm no doctor, so I dont know what to believe. There's people who say vaccinated people are good to go as they are protected as the vaccine kills covid, then there's people who say it's still in your blood but youre protected.

So if the viral load is still swimming in vaccinated people's veins, but they should wear masks to help protect unvaccinated people, then:

1. Unvaccinated people get off your ass and get vaxxed so governments can get rid of masks
2. Let vaxxed people be free, and the unvaxxed people bear the brunt of illness as they are holding up vaxxed people
 

poppabk

Member
Jan 21, 2008
13,383
2,356
1,610
USA
I'm no doctor, so I dont know what to believe. There's people who say vaccinated people are good to go as they are protected as the vaccine kills covid, then there's people who say it's still in your blood but youre protected.

So if the viral load is still swimming in vaccinated people's veins, but they should wear masks to help protect unvaccinated people, then:

1. Unvaccinated people get off your ass and get vaxxed so governments can get rid of masks
2. Let vaxxed people be free, and the unvaxxed people bear the brunt of illness as they are holding up vaxxed people
The vaccine doesn't kill COVID, the immune system kills COVID. The vaccine (or previous infection) mean that it will be more rapidly detected by immune surveillance and the response will be quicker. That more rapid response results in much less severe (often to the point of being unnoticed) disease. The ability to spread the disease depends on the amount of virus you shed and for how long.
So yes, fully vaccinated and previously exposed people are a lot less likely to get severe disease and most likely a lot less likely to be able to spread the disease while infected, but we will have to see exactly how much less with this Delta variant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StreetsofBeige
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Wow, Delta variant running wild and peeps are still talking anti-vaxxer nonsense? Couldn't be me 😂

Yeah, man, we're really getting bent over with this one. Bring back the lockdowns, please. Safety first!





Or, just maybe, it's a far more transmissible but less lethal variant like the data coming out of the India and the UK indicate, and we should probably be rejoicing that it's rapidly replacing other more deadly variants.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sgt.Asher

Member
Jul 18, 2020
348
575
275
Not doing, i only had to get the first one due to my second job. Stupid since i already had covid, which hardly effected me.
 

Sacred

Member
Aug 22, 2018
1,255
2,219
480
So I hope this doesn't come off as political but here is my thoughts/research.


I have been following the director of VARECO for a while who has over 30 years in virology and based on my understanding of spike proteins and antibodies what he is saying is correct.

The vaccine introduces articial antibodies that work a single signature protein blocker, if it doesn't detect the protein then it allows the pathogen through.

The problem with this is that these antibodies are know as dominate antibodies that actually block out and suppress your natural antibodies from blocking pathogens that they would otherwise combat including variants of COVID because the signature has mutated and is actually showing a different spike protein thus bypassing the dominate antibodies which are suppressing your innane immune system from fighting the virus/infection.

We have seen evidence of this through the promise of boosters which will mutate these antibodies to fight the next string and so on. We have also seen an increase in hospitalizations from vaccinated individuals for various illnesses including new COVID variants.

So the ultimate solution imo currently is to wait and achieve herd immunity and use live attenuated vaccines. Instead of continuing to inject people with artificial antibodies that were a rushed unproven technique that could lead to way more serious issues down the line.

 
  • Like
Reactions: ShirAhava

Dr.Guru of Peru

played the long game
Jun 10, 2004
6,490
1,158
1,690
So I hope this doesn't come off as political but here is my thoughts/research.


I have been following the director of VARECO for a while who has over 30 years in virology and based on my understanding of spike proteins and antibodies what he is saying is correct.

The vaccine introduces articial antibodies that work a single signature protein blocker, if it doesn't detect the protein then it allows the pathogen through.

The problem with this is that these antibodies are know as dominate antibodies that actually block out and suppress your natural antibodies from blocking pathogens that they would otherwise combat including variants of COVID because the signature has mutated and is actually showing a different spike protein thus bypassing the dominate antibodies which are suppressing your innane immune system from fighting the virus/infection.

We have seen evidence of this through the promise of boosters which will mutate these antibodies to fight the next string and so on. We have also seen an increase in hospitalizations from vaccinated individuals for various illnesses including new COVID variants.

So the ultimate solution imo currently is to wait and achieve herd immunity and use live attenuated vaccines. Instead of continuing to inject people with artificial antibodies that were a rushed unproven technique that could lead to way more serious issues down the line.


None of this is true.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Kev Kev and Sacred

Dr.Guru of Peru

played the long game
Jun 10, 2004
6,490
1,158
1,690
I'm sorry just saying it is not true does absolutely nothing to convince me otherwise. Especially since this is how we handled Polio, Measles, Influenza, ect..

You're basically arguing that original antigenic sin is responsible for the increase in variants, which is of course garbage because these variants all arose before mass vaccination campaigns were in place. Even the basic theory doesn't make any sense since we're exposed to coronaviruses all the time.
Also, unless you meant "1 is greater than 0", its not true that we have "seen an increase in hospitalizations from vaccinated individuals for various illnesses including new COVID variants". This is a complete fabrication.
 
Last edited:

Sacred

Member
Aug 22, 2018
1,255
2,219
480
Do you have proof of this assertion or you going off championed material. I have plenty of other virologists backing up this study. Also, the variants didn't arise as an issue till May when vaccination rates were around 45%.

As for hospitalization rates lookinto India and Israel's updated hospitalizations for vaccinated individuals.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Do you have proof of this assertion or you going off championed material. I have plenty of other virologists backing up this study. Also, the variants didn't arise as an issue till May when vaccination rates were around 45%.

To be fair, the Delta wave in India began in earnest in April when their vaccination rate was extremely low (it still is).

Variants that specifically respond to vaccine-induced antibodies are a fear, but have not yet been detected, I believe.
 

Sacred

Member
Aug 22, 2018
1,255
2,219
480
To be fair, the Delta wave in India began in earnest in April when their vaccination rate was extremely low (it still is).

Variants that specifically respond to vaccine-induced antibodies are a fear, but have not yet been detected, I believe.
It was late April into early May when it started to become a concern in India.
 

poppabk

Member
Jan 21, 2008
13,383
2,356
1,610
USA
So I hope this doesn't come off as political but here is my thoughts/research.


I have been following the director of VARECO for a while who has over 30 years in virology and based on my understanding of spike proteins and antibodies what he is saying is correct.

The vaccine introduces articial antibodies that work a single signature protein blocker, if it doesn't detect the protein then it allows the pathogen through.

The problem with this is that these antibodies are know as dominate antibodies that actually block out and suppress your natural antibodies from blocking pathogens that they would otherwise combat including variants of COVID because the signature has mutated and is actually showing a different spike protein thus bypassing the dominate antibodies which are suppressing your innane immune system from fighting the virus/infection.

We have seen evidence of this through the promise of boosters which will mutate these antibodies to fight the next string and so on. We have also seen an increase in hospitalizations from vaccinated individuals for various illnesses including new COVID variants.

So the ultimate solution imo currently is to wait and achieve herd immunity and use live attenuated vaccines. Instead of continuing to inject people with artificial antibodies that were a rushed unproven technique that could lead to way more serious issues down the line.

I'm sorry but this post is incoherent for someone with a passing understanding of immunology.
It doesn't really pass the test of common sense - if the B-cell doesn't bind to the spike protein then how would it suppress the immune system anymore than the B-cells you have that produce antibodies to for example measles or the exact same antibodies produced in response to a live infection?
I'm pretty sure the actual argument put forward by this guy is at least coherent but I don't see any reason to give it any more weight than the hundreds of arguments supported by unprecedented amounts of data that contradict it.
 
Last edited:

Dr.Guru of Peru

played the long game
Jun 10, 2004
6,490
1,158
1,690
Do you have proof of this assertion or you going off championed material. I have plenty of other virologists backing up this study. Also, the variants didn't arise as an issue till May when vaccination rates were around 45%.

As for hospitalization rates lookinto India and Israel's updated hospitalizations for vaccinated individuals.
You need to check your facts. The Kent variant arose in October 2020. The South Africa variant arose in December 2020. The Delta variant arose in October 2020. India's outbreak occurred in late February/March, when they had less than 1% of their population vaccinated.

You did not link to a study. You linked to on opinion. Feel free to post any studies if you wish.

As vaccine rates go above 50%, you're going to see a rise in vaccinated people being hospitalized. This is a basic correlation fallacy. It's the same reason you see a rise in people who recently ate ice cream hospitalized in the summer months. This not a safety signal. Overall hospitalizations are way down as are deaths.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
It was late April into early May when it started to become a concern in India.


India is currently at 18.3% with 1 shot and 7.02% fully vaccinated.

On May 10, that was 7.18% and 2.6%.

On April 20 that was 6.68% and 1.3%.

So again, very low vaccination rates. Regardless, I think the Delta first appeared in the country near the end of 2020 before anyone was vaccinated.

Antibody Dependent Enhancement is a concern that many knowledgable people seem to have, but I don't think we currently have any evidence that it's occurring at this moment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sacred

Member
Aug 22, 2018
1,255
2,219
480
To be fair, the Delta wave in India began in earnest in April when their vaccination rate was extremely low (it still is).

Variants that specifically respond to vaccine-induced antibodies are a fear, but have not yet been detected, I believe.
Top virologists around the country are trying to warn the population of this virus-chasing method that world leaders seem to be hell-bent on right now.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Top virologists around the country are trying to warn the population of this virus-chasing method that world leaders seem to be hell-bent on right now.

Who knows, they may end up being vindicated, but I'm just saying that I don't think there is any evidence for it at the moment.
 

DragoonKain

Neighbours from Hell
Nov 13, 2013
8,365
17,566
1,415
About 3 weeks after I got my 2nd vaccine shot, I started experiencing chronic dizziness and balance issues. Severe at times. I went to the ENT and they said I tested negative for chronic vertigo. I booked a neurologist appointment, but the wait time is several months. I saw Rogan the other day and Jimmy Dore said he had brain fog and brain inflammation, and now I'm wonder if my dizziness issues are related to the shots. His was immediately after and mine wasn't. I doubt it because I figured it wouldn't develop at random 3 weeks after my shot, but I want to rule it out to be safe.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kev Kev

FinalxBoss

Member
May 4, 2011
95
10
710
Yeah, man, we're really getting bent over with this one. Bring back the lockdowns, please. Safety first!





Or, just maybe, it's a far more transmissible but less lethal variant like the data coming out of the India and the UK indicate, and we should probably be rejoicing that it's rapidly replacing other more deadly variants.

Uhhh, you just posted a chart showing the number of cases skyrocketing since last month...

Anybody still questioning the vaccines at this this point should just be honest and say they don't care about anyone else.

Stop trying to use faux science to make claims that have been disproven repeatedly.
 
  • LOL
  • Triggered
Reactions: GymWolf and Kev Kev

FinalxBoss

Member
May 4, 2011
95
10
710
im so fucking tired of hearing this shit.

It's the truth. If you refuse to get the vaccine while living in an area where the vaccine is easily available to you and you don't have a medical condition preventing you from getting it then you're either selfish, cowardly or both.

No need to mince words at this point.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: V4skunk
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Uhhh, you just posted a chart showing the number of cases skyrocketing since last month...

Anybody still questioning the vaccines at this this point should just be honest and say they don't care about anyone else.

Stop trying to use faux science to make claims that have been disproven repeatedly.

Compare it to last year. Similar cases, much fewer deaths. We saw the same thing play out in the UK, who is ahead of us when it comes to the Delta wave. The point is that even if the Delta variant is accelerating the spread, we can see that the vaccines are working for those who are at high risk *and* that the Delta variant is far less deadly. If you're old and/or fat, get the jab. If not, decide for yourself. Actually, decide for yourself either way. The risks are extremely clear at this point to anyone who is willing to look at the actual numbers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dr.Guru of Peru

played the long game
Jun 10, 2004
6,490
1,158
1,690
Compare it to last year. Similar cases, much fewer deaths. We saw the same thing play out in the UK, who is ahead of us when it comes to the Delta wave. The point is that even if the Delta variant is accelerating the spread, we can see that the vaccines are working for those who are at high risk *and* that the Delta variant is far less deadly. If you're old and/or fat, get the jab. If not, decide for yourself. Actually, decide for yourself either way. The risks are extremely clear at this point to anyone who is willing to look at the actual numbers.
The issue is the *and*. What do you have to support this claim?

Top virologists around the country are trying to warn the population of this virus-chasing method that world leaders seem to be hell-bent on right now.
Uh, no. They aren't. Post receipts.
 
Last edited:

FinalxBoss

Member
May 4, 2011
95
10
710
Compare it to last year. Similar cases, much fewer deaths. We saw the same thing play out in the UK, who is ahead of us when it comes to the Delta wave. The point is that even if the Delta variant is accelerating the spread, we can see that the vaccines are working for those who are at high risk *and* that the Delta variant is far less deadly. If you're old and/or fat, get the jab. If not, decide for yourself. Actually, decide for yourself either way. The risks are extremely clear at this point to anyone who is willing to look at the actual numbers.

Sorry, but no. The reason cases have come down to a manageable level is literally because of the vaccine. Now there's a new variant spreading among the unvaccinated getting ready to put us in another lockdown because we still have idiots spreading misinformation and causing vaccine hesitancy. Enough is enough, no more excuses or "decide for yourself" bullshit. Grow up and get the damn shot.
 

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
3,816
4,253
515
*Coooooof*
Basically I'm just not get the it's science mRNA gene editing "vaccine".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.