COVID-19

[GATTACA!]

Unfortunately there were people in the media, the CDC, and infectious disease experts that made claims the vaccine prevented transmission.








And a mashup of Biden, Fauci, and a bunch of people making incorrect claims about the jab's capabilities

What are you arguing against? The studies they're referencing? These are all claims being made after the vaccines were distributed and don't have anything to do with ndfanatic78s idea that the vaccines didn't receive proper testing.

 

[TorontoGold]

Anyone have experience with long covid? If so, is there anything that helps? I love how the Canadian government made getting vaccinated almost mandatory, but now won't cover people that are still suffering. I lost my job because of it, and now I get the runaround telling me there are no tests. And I love that you can't sue them. Because it was an "emergency". I worked at a car dealership, and the amount of people on disability that "needed" new cars was disgusting. I can't even get that because I have previous mental health issues. They blame that. I could cope with meds before. Now I'm useless. Sorry for ranting.

I had a bad case of long covid and I added a scoop or two of pre-work amino acids in the morning to help get over the fatigue for a bit. My doctor recommended mixing in some GABA for any of the mood side effects. I cut back on my coffee intake to reduce the hunger suppression. For whatever reason I found it easy to eat fish? Hope it passes.

 

[sixstar]

I'm not rewriting history. Those are true statement. You just don't understand why they are true.

There is more than one way to stop the transmissibility of a virus. No one ever claimed the vaccines stopped a vaccinated person that contracted the virus from being able to be transmit it. You're claiming it didn't go through a full set of trials because they never tested this claim ^. But they never made this claim.

What they claimed, and what bore out in the trials, was that they reduced the half life of the virus. They reduced your chances of catching Covid. And reduced symptoms (coughing, sneezing, blowing your nose, etc). If you don't see how that translates to reducing the spread idk what to tell you.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what you're arguing about.

The entire EUA is based off the false claims of sterilization. And that is largely because the vaccine showed no reduction in mortality. So they couldn't use reduction of severe symptoms as an endpoint. Look it up. It is clearly documented in pfizers trial results.

And then all of the mandates were based again off of this same false assumption. Despite what the data said. I've posted about this extensively in this thread. Go ahead and search my old posts.

The crazy thing is that they use the 14-day window as a discriminator. And this had never been done before. Imagine how much more the results would have been skewed poorly if they didn't use the 14-day window and assign infections to unvaccinated within that window. Especially given the immunosuppressive nature of the shot.

This has been documented extensively. The data backs this up. Now it's just up to you whether or not you choose to believe it.

 

[RDU Irish]

Good to see more people seeing the light on this fiasco.

 

[MrNimbus]

If I'm a lunatic. At least I'm with fellow Irish fan lunatics. I like this place.

 

[PerthDomer]

The entire EUA is based off the false claims of sterilization. And that is largely because the vaccine showed no reduction in mortality. So they couldn't use reduction of severe symptoms as an endpoint. Look it up. It is clearly documented in pfizers trial results.

And then all of the mandates were based again off of this same false assumption. Despite what the data said. I've posted about this extensively in this thread. Go ahead and search my old posts.

The crazy thing is that they use the 14-day window as a discriminator. And this had never been done before. Imagine how much more the results would have been skewed poorly if they didn't use the 14-day window and assign infections to unvaccinated within that window. Especially given the immunosuppressive nature of the shot.

This has been documented extensively. The data backs this up. Now it's just up to you whether or not you choose to believe it.

That's not true. The vaccine was validated based off of reduction of all symptomatic disease. It was planned that way because seeing a mortality difference early would require a lot more patients to be infected. Initially the guidance was we didn't know how much it disrupted transmission. Over time it became clear for pre delta/omicron strains in the first months to year it was damn near sterilizing. That changed with more data around time from immunization and more immunologically evasive variants.

 

[GrangerIrish24]

People still argue about this shit?

 

[sixstar]

That's not true. The vaccine was validated based off of reduction of all symptomatic disease. It was planned that way because seeing a mortality difference early would require a lot more patients to be infected. Initially the guidance was we didn't know how much it disrupted transmission. Over time it became clear for pre delta/omicron strains in the first months to year it was damn near sterilizing. That changed with more data around time from immunization and more immunologically evasive variants.

You are wrong. Stop spreading misinformation.

You can read the EUA for yourself right here:

Federal Register :: Request Access

www.federalregister.gov

And here, these attachments should help. The EUA only mentions prevention. Nothing of severity reduction.

Why are you so quick to defend something without facts?

 

[SeekNDestroy]

You are wrong. Stop spreading misinformation.

You can read the EUA for yourself right here:

Federal Register :: Request Access

www.federalregister.gov

And here, these attachments should help.

Why are you so quick to defend something without facts?

Dude, stay in your lane.

 

[sixstar]

Dude, stay in your lane.

Read the EUA and tell me where I'm wrong.

 

[GrangerIrish24]

People still argue about this shit?

Apparently so.

 

[SeekNDestroy]

Read the EUA and tell me where I'm wrong.

I’m going to make the assumption that you’re pretty smart. As with many, many very smart people, they tend to overestimate their own intelligence. Like the prophet Harold Callahan once said, “A man’s got to know his own limitations.”

You’re not a physician, stop arguing with physicians over COVID-19.

 

[ndfanatic78]

I’m going to make the assumption that you’re pretty smart. As with many, many very smart people, they tend to overestimate their own intelligence. Like the prophet Harold Callahan once said, “A man’s got to know his own limitations.”

You’re not a physician, stop arguing with physicians over COVID-19.

There are plenty of physicians who agree with Sixstar and are actively speaking out against how the pandemic was handled how the “vaccine” was rolled out and mandated, and how people like you are telling others they shouldn’t do their own research. Thank god my physician was one of them and not the ones on this board. Who are you to tell us which doctors to listen to. Sure as hell shouldn’t listen to Fauci.

 

[SeekNDestroy]

There are plenty of physicians who agree with Sixstar and are actively speaking out against how the pandemic was handled how the “vaccine” was rolled out and mandated, and how people like you are telling others they shouldn’t do their own research. Thank god my physician was one of them and not the ones on this board. Who are you to tell us which doctors to listen to. Sure as hell shouldn’t listen to Fauci.

Define “plenty.” 98% of U.S. doctors received the vaccine.
Hindsight is always 20/20. It’s easy to criticize after the fact….
Very few people should be doing their “own research.” Research is a long, involved process, not simply watching YouTube videos.
Fauci wrote the manual that other doctors refer to. I think l’ll put my trust in his opinions over some MD who graduated last in his class at the Dominican Republic School of Medicine.

 

[ulukinatme]

I’m going to make the assumption that you’re pretty smart. As with many, many very smart people, they tend to overestimate their own intelligence. Like the prophet Harold Callahan once said, “A man’s got to know his own limitations.”

You’re not a physician, stop arguing with physicians over COVID-19.

I totally agree with your point about smart people overestimating their own intelligence. I also want to say I trust Perth's judgement and expertise. That said, there were a lot of physicians and infectious disease experts that were regurgitating bad info about the virus and the jab at the start of the pandemic, like in the videos I posted on the previous page. There's other examples, but specifically I'm talking about them pushing the idea that the jab prevents transmission of the virus. Obviously we know a bit more over time as things have settled and further testing occurred, and some things that were thought to be truths in the beginning ended up being incorrect. Just playing devil's advocate.

 

[RDU Irish]

I totally agree with your point about smart people overestimating their own intelligence. I also want to say I trust Perth's judgement and expertise. That said, there were a lot of physicians and infectious disease experts that were regurgitating bad info about the virus and the jab at the start of the pandemic, like in the videos I posted on the previous page. There's other examples, but specifically I'm talking about them pushing the idea that the jab prevents transmission of the virus. Obviously we know a bit more over time as things have settled and further testing occurred, and some things that were thought to be truths in the beginning ended up being incorrect. Just playing devil's advocate.

Natural immunity and young people had no need for the vax yet it was still forced. My wife had to get the shot or lose her job, no surprise most doctors got the shot as they would be unemployable if they didn't. I'm sure I'm not alone in knowing piles of people who faked vax cards - had to for travel, work and school that only gave up b/c booster guidelines got impossible to triangulate into functional policy.

I'll stand by my early claims that most covid deaths were from those already infirm. This will show as below average mortality for 2023-2026 type timeframe. Then again, suicide, drug overdose and delayed detection of cancer and other diseases could just lower life expectancy and make any dip undetectable.

 

[irishnd31]

 

[MrNimbus]

I think of myself like this though.

 

[GoIrish41]

I think of myself like this though.
View attachment 3055923

You fumbled.

 

[irishnd31]

You fumbled.

If you look closely, that wasn't the football. I believe that was his liver.

 

[Rockin’Irish]

If you look closely, that wasn't the football. I believe that was his liver.

I coulda sworn that was a colon ejection……..

 

[MrNimbus]

You fumbled.

I never said who I was in that clip. Honestly I feel like all three. The guy who get knocked tf out, the guy that did it, or the teammate thats like wtf?

 

[PerthDomer]

I totally agree with your point about smart people overestimating their own intelligence. I also want to say I trust Perth's judgement and expertise. That said, there were a lot of physicians and infectious disease experts that were regurgitating bad info about the virus and the jab at the start of the pandemic, like in the videos I posted on the previous page. There's other examples, but specifically I'm talking about them pushing the idea that the jab prevents transmission of the virus. Obviously we know a bit more over time as things have settled and further testing occurred, and some things that were thought to be truths in the beginning ended up being incorrect. Just playing devil's advocate.

I'll post the initial Pfizer trial.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577

"The first primary end point was the efficacy of BNT162b2 against confirmed Covid-19 with onset at least 7 days after the second dose in participants who had been without serologic or virologic evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection up to 7 days after the second dose; the second primary end point was efficacy in participants with and participants without evidence of prior infection."

Basically, did you have symptoms and swab positive?

The unanswered question is what does this mean for transmission? Some vaccines don't impact transmission very much. Some totally shut transmission down. Additionally, earlier after vaccine administration you're going to see better disease and transmission efficacy.

Early on data looked like it came pretty close to eliminating transmission. Even with delta, it blocked transmission really well. The issue was that with a more transmissible virus you needed a higher proportion of people vaccinated to get herd immunity/stop transmission.

Then Omicron came. Vaccination had some, but a really inadequate effect on transmission. That's really the story. We were unlucky in getting Omicron, but with Delta you were probably never going to get the vaccination/boosting rate to eliminate the virus' spread.

 

[sixstar]

a coronavirus mutating around a preventative measure is not unlucky. it is inevitable.

there has never been a vaccine that sterilized a coronavirus. never. claims that the mRNA shots were going to provide herd immunity were unfounded by science. there was no precedent for herd immunity for a coronavirus. there was precedent for attenuation, and we have seen that. there was no precedent for herd immunity, which again, makes the vax mandates illogical.

it was illogical to believe that the vax could provide protection in perpetuity given that coronaviruses are positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses whose polymerases lack proofreading mechanisms and therefore mutate more quickly than other types of viruses. it is the exact reason why we have never seen a sterilizing vaccine for any other coronavirus.

and this doesn't even address the results skewing of assigning "injected but not 'fully vaccinated'" cases as "unvaccinated" during the trial and during subsequent ongoing data reports.

 

[PerthDomer]

a coronavirus mutating around a preventative measure is not unlucky. it is inevitable.

there has never been a vaccine that sterilized a coronavirus. never. claims that the mRNA shots were going to provide herd immunity were unfounded by science. there was no precedent for herd immunity for a coronavirus. there was precedent for attenuation, and we have seen that. there was no precedent for herd immunity, which again, makes the vax mandates illogical.

it was illogical to believe that the vax could provide protection in perpetuity given that coronaviruses are positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses whose polymerases lack proofreading mechanisms and therefore mutate more quickly than other types of viruses. it is the exact reason why we have never seen a sterilizing vaccine for any other coronavirus.

and this doesn't even address the results skewing of assigning "injected but not 'fully vaccinated'" cases as "unvaccinated" during the trial and during subsequent ongoing data reports.

Here's the number of coronavirus vaccines we've rolled out in people prior to COVID. Zero. The data you're referencing is from animal vaccines, none of which are using mRNA tech. Additionally, even with a lot of mutation the vaccines held up vs. Variant transmission prior to Omicron.

But even granted all of that, having been vaccinated really dropped disease severity. The end game we're now coming to (and scientists hoped for far earlier) was something similar to the flu. A few waves a year, much much lower morbidity to the point no one cares.

Had we rolled out the vaccine and not run into weirdo anti vaxxers we'd be here but with lower spread in summer 2021.

 

[sixstar]

Additionally, even with a lot of mutation the vaccines held up vs. Variant transmission prior to Omicron.

If the shot was holding up so well, why did the Government EUA boosters less than a year after the shots first rolled out?
If it was holding up so well, why were the boosters released prior to Omicron?

We were told that 2 shots made you fully vaccinated. we were told that 2 shots stopped the spread.
vax mandates were based on the transmission prevention of 2 shots.
Governments never planned on boosters, yet boosters came out less than a year later. why?

Here's the number of coronavirus vaccines we've rolled out in people prior to COVID. Zero.

exactly. why? because we didn't have anything that worked.

The data you're referencing is from animal vaccines, none of which are using mRNA tech.

what data?

the point is that humans didn't have a coronavirus vaccine because we couldn't develop one that worked due to coronavirus rapid mutation.

are you trying to say that previous coronavirus vaccines were ineffective because they didn't use mRNA? in that case, what data did we have to prove that the mRNA vaccines would be effective? Trial data? That only looked at case prevention, and not severity of issues?

But even granted all of that, having been vaccinated really dropped disease severity.

Disease severity only dropped in Ages > 60.
The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) of hospitalization and death were effectively zero for ages under 60. And this is before considering potential adverse reaction risks.

And then when Omicron took over, case rates, hospitalization rates, and death rates were higher in vaxxed cohorts than unvaxxed cohorts, likely due to Original Antigenic Sin (OAS) / immunological imprinting from the spike-based vaxxes.

Again - all of this data is in this thread. You can read it again for yourself.

Regardless, even if severity reduction was the shot benefit, then the benefit is purely personal, not communal, so vax mandates on disease severity risk would be illogical.

The end game we're now coming to (and scientists hoped for far earlier) was something similar to the flu. A few waves a year, much much lower morbidity to the point no one cares.

that's called attenuation. it's natural virus evolution, independent of vax intervention, unless you have data that proves the vax contributed to this attenuation.

Had we rolled out the vaccine and not run into weirdo anti vaxxers we'd be here but with lower spread in summer 2021.

opinion and conjecture that contradicts the data

 

[yankeehater]

Here's the number of coronavirus vaccines we've rolled out in people prior to COVID. Zero. The data you're referencing is from animal vaccines, none of which are using mRNA tech. Additionally, even with a lot of mutation the vaccines held up vs. Variant transmission prior to Omicron.

But even granted all of that, having been vaccinated really dropped disease severity. The end game we're now coming to (and scientists hoped for far earlier) was something similar to the flu. A few waves a year, much much lower morbidity to the point no one cares.

Had we rolled out the vaccine and not run into weirdo anti vaxxers we'd be here but with lower spread in summer 2021.

You lose all your credibility with comments like this. Not very professional!

 

[GrangerIrish24]

Apparently so.

They are still arguing

 

[Junkhead]

They are still arguing

Welcome back to 2021, apparently.

 

[irishnd31]

They are still arguing

They are still arguing