MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => COVID-19 => Topic started by: thomaskyle on January 22, 2022, 07:26:31 AM
-
Many older articles state the contrary. But this is a moving target and data/science keeps evolving on this topic. It will keep changing as more data comes in
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/cdc-report-natural-immunity-stronger-than-vaccines-alone-during-delta-wave/ar-AAT1mfC
-
Many older articles state the contrary. But this is a moving target and data/science keeps evolving on this topic. It will keep changing as more data comes in
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/cdc-report-natural-immunity-stronger-than-vaccines-alone-during-delta-wave/ar-AAT1mfC
It doesn’t state the other finding of this study, which is that getting vaccinated is still way more safe even with reduced efficacy than getting Covid and developing natural immunity.
-
It doesn’t state the other finding of this study, which is that getting vaccinated is still way more safe even with reduced efficacy than getting Covid and developing natural immunity.
You have to understand that morons can't grasp risk/benefit
-
I agree who the hell knows. The data on this link is the important point…the goal of endemic is that we don’t have to cancel normal healthcare every time an outbreak occurs. Get vaccinated everyone.
https://twitter.com/craig_a_spencer/status/1484555496837333002?s=21 (https://twitter.com/craig_a_spencer/status/1484555496837333002?s=21)
-
“Natural immunity” is a crapty term. There’s nothing “natural” about catching a disease that either jumped to humans at a wet market or was engineered by people to begin with. It’s used in contrast with vaccination to implicitly accuse vaccines as being somehow worse or more dangerous because they were the result of the most cutting edge science known to man. Don’t fall victim to the terminology trap of ceding the field before you’ve even begun debating the merits.
-
“Natural immunity” is a crapty term. There’s nothing “natural” about catching a disease that either jumped to humans at a wet market or was engineered by people to begin with. It’s used in contrast with vaccination to implicitly accuse vaccines as being somehow worse or more dangerous because they were the result of the most cutting edge science known to man. Don’t fall victim to the terminology trap of ceding the field before you’ve even begun debating the merits.
Good stuff here.
This is all very simple.... Risks associated with covid infection>risks associated with vaccination.
-
Great first post by the OP!
-
What an idiotic point. Just another way to attempt to throw shade on vaccines.
But sure, go get your "natural immunity". Don't take the vaccine. Don't take precautions. In fact, like the recent story of the singer who intentionally caught COVID, proactively see if you can catch COVID without the "unnatural immunity" of vaccines.
Please proceed.
-
The take-home message from this study remains the same. Get vaccinated. Save lives.
Regarding the overall data, I would like to see more fleshed out details on how this study was done, as it would appear to suffer from inherent flaws (similar flaws as the Israeli studies). The flaws would artificially increase the perceived protection of natural infection. I'll try to summarize them.
1. If you had a previous infection, then got re-infected during the study period, and as a result decided to get vaccinated. You would be excluded from the study, and the infection and/or hospitalization would not be added to the "prior infection" category.
2. If you were fully vaccinated, then got infected in June, and reinfected in Nov. You would count as 2 infections for the fully vaccinated category and 0 for the previously infected but vaccinated category. This artificially raises the perceived cases for fully vaccinated.
3. It doesn't take into consideration risk factors for the individual. For instance, first responders and medical professionals, are more at risk, and more likely to be vaccinated. It would be expected for them to have a higher incidence rate no matter what their vaccination/infection status was. Data should be corrected for these factors.
4. The data is dependent upon people getting tested. Some occupations (e.g. medical professionals, and others) have required mandatory testing. These occupations are required to be vaccinated in many cases. So there will be a bias to them having more asymptomatic positive cases that would not be observed in the prior infection cohort.
5. Related to 4, those reluctant to get the vaccine, are also most likely to be reluctant to get tested. So even mild asymptomatic cases are likely to go unrecorded. Many in this cohort will only be tested if the case is more severe.
Because of these, I wouldn't try to read too much into the exact data, besides the take home message that you should get vaccinated. I find it interesting that the only people pushing this study on this board are those that also believe that you are more likely to die from the vaccine than COVID. It is all quite mind numbing.
-
What an idiotic point. Just another way to attempt to throw shade on vaccines.
But sure, go get your "natural immunity". Don't take the vaccine. Don't take precautions. In fact, like the recent story of the singer who intentionally caught COVID, proactively see if you can catch COVID without the "unnatural immunity" of vaccines.
Please proceed.
There may be a market opportunity to bottle up the real thing and sell it as the "natural vaccine" to compete with the Pfizer and Moderna.
-
Great first post by the OP!
Not true. Short but illuminating post history.
-
Not true. Short but illuminating post history.
I didn’t think teal was necessary. Maybe I should have added “must be a dentist” to make the sarcasm clear. ;D
-
I didn’t think teal was necessary. Maybe I should have added “must be a dentist” to make the sarcasm clear. ;D
Speaking of which, did you see that the lady in Virginia who threatened to bring her guns to a school and shoot it up over mask mandates was a dental hygienist? LOL
-
“Was” being the key word?
-
Speaking of which, did you see that the lady in Virginia who threatened to bring her guns to a school and shoot it up over mask mandates was a dental hygienist? LOL
Except wasn't she in support of the mandate?
-
Except wasn't she in support of the mandate?
Um, no.
-
She probably just got two job offers.
-
Except wasn't she in support of the mandate?
Nope, ranted that her kids were not going to go to school with masks and that she would bring all her guns fully loaded. When the Board cut her off she said "See you on Monday".
-
What an idiotic point. Just another way to attempt to throw shade on vaccines.
But sure, go get your "natural immunity". Don't take the vaccine. Don't take precautions. In fact, like the recent story of the singer who intentionally caught COVID, proactively see if you can catch COVID without the "unnatural immunity" of vaccines.
Please proceed.
A small pct of those skeptical of the vaccine are actually trying to purposely catch the virus. It’s a dumb thing, I will certainly admit, and not indicative of the average vaccine skeptic.
-
Nope, ranted that her kids were not going to go to school with masks and that she would bring all her guns fully loaded. When the Board cut her off she said "See you on Monday".
Why didn't she just shoot Covid? Duh.
-
Hey but do masks work?
-
Not to steal Uncle Rico's line, but Yes
-
Hey but do masks work?
Yes.
Thanks for your question. Hope you take it to heart.
-
Hey but do masks work?
Cloth, which the majority of people use, do not.
https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/view/-stealth-omicron-starting-to-get-noticed-setting-off-some-alarms
And, don’t work if you’re sitting at a restaurant, coffee shop, or bar, table, but they do if you’re walking to the restroom.
-
Cloth, which the majority of people use, do not.
https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/view/-stealth-omicron-starting-to-get-noticed-setting-off-some-alarms
And, don’t work if you’re sitting at a restaurant, coffee shop, or bar, table, but they do if you’re walking to the restroom.
So wear a good mask. This is an odd talking point. Personal responsibility right?
-
So wear a good mask. This is an odd talking point. Personal responsibility right?
The point is that the kabookee covid theater of sitting down to eat is OK, but you better mask up to take a whiz dammit.
-
The point is that the kabookee covid theater of sitting down to eat is OK, but you better mask up to take a whiz dammit.
Ok. So make different choices or don’t. I don’t know when being a victim became a talking point but it’s kinda odd.
-
Ok. So make different choices or don’t. I don’t know when being a victim became a talking point but it’s kinda odd.
I didn't make up that policy. I barely leave the house. But it's nothing but feel good theater at this point.
-
Here is a study on boosters and the reduction of symptomatic infection.
https://twitter.com/erictopol/status/1484921049540005890?s=21 (https://twitter.com/erictopol/status/1484921049540005890?s=21)
-
Here is a study on boosters and the reduction of symptomatic infection.
https://twitter.com/erictopol/status/1484921049540005890?s=21 (https://twitter.com/erictopol/status/1484921049540005890?s=21)
Pretty consistent with the early data during Omicron which said a booster takes you up to ~70% protection from infection, and 11x-12x protection from death vs. unvaxxed.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/11/1d/wklb7IAC_o.png) (https://imgbox.com/wklb7IAC)
-
I didn't make up that policy. I barely leave the house. But it's nothing but feel good theater at this point.
So do you want to have stricter mandates because they would be more effective? Something tells me you’d whine about that too.
-
So do you want to have stricter mandates because they would be more effective? Something tells me you’d whine about that too.
No, just pointing out the inconsistencies in covid theater.
-
No, just pointing out the inconsistencies in covid theater.
The fact that you still call it "Covid theatre" tells me all I need to know about how seriously to take your points.
-
The restaurant mask rule did make *some* sense when restaurants also required 6ft spacing between tables and limited capacity.
The current restaurant mask rule is stupid, but it's also not that difficult to comply if you want to dine out. It would be better if individual restaurants required proof of vaccine (some do, but that also varies regionally). I would dine out more if that were the case. As is, I generally avoid any indoor place packed with potentially unvaccinated, and unmasked people.
-
The fact that you still call it "Covid theatre" tells me all I need to know about how seriously to take your points.
Do you disagree that there are plenty of Covid related rules that don't actually do what they intend to do? But rather are done to give the impression that places or groups "care" or are taking it seriously?
I dont think you have to be an anti-mask/anti-mandate whatever to agree with that. My wife's Pilates studio just instituted a mask rule...need to wear a mask when entering, changing into your socks or whatnot, and walking around...but not when you're on your reformer and actually working out :o I suppose you can hope everyone wears it at all times anyways, but from going to class yesterday, thats not the case.
Or when I was in Vegas and you needed to wear a mask indoors at all times...unless it was in a bar or restaurant. So you had an entire casino floor of masked people...and then the adjacent bar filled with maskless people, not to mention the clubs.
Some of it is very well intentioned. Some of it is very much "lets look like we're being tough on Covid"
-
Vegas permits maskless guests while smokin', also, hey?
#partoftheillogicallunacy
-
Do you disagree that there are plenty of Covid related rules that don't actually do what they intend to do? But rather are done to give the impression that places or groups "care" or are taking it seriously?
I dont think you have to be an anti-mask/anti-mandate whatever to agree with that. My wife's Pilates studio just instituted a mask rule...need to wear a mask when entering, changing into your socks or whatnot, and walking around...but not when you're on your reformer and actually working out :o I suppose you can hope everyone wears it at all times anyways, but from going to class yesterday, thats not the case.
Or when I was in Vegas and you needed to wear a mask indoors at all times...unless it was in a bar or restaurant. So you had an entire casino floor of masked people...and then the adjacent bar filled with maskless people, not to mention the clubs.
Some of it is very well intentioned. Some of it is very much "lets look like we're being tough on Covid"
I think a lot of institutions are trying to do the best they can do to keep people safe yet try to balance the competing factions of people who either take it way too seriously or not seriously enough.
-
And a lot of instuitutions are putting up rules just so they can say they're doing something to try to protect everyone. Even if they don't make much sense.
-
And a lot of instuitutions are putting up rules just so they can say they're doing something to try to protect everyone. Even if they don't make much sense.
Instead of making accusations, what would your solution be?
-
Some places are definitely putting in protocols to appease local/state requirements.
Question...where are all the "freedom" people when it comes to other "theater"? TSA, for example
-
And a lot of instuitutions are putting up rules just so they can say they're doing something to try to protect everyone. Even if they don't make much sense.
But I guess its just easier to bitch and moan like Ziggy and you are doing.
-
Some places are definitely putting in protocols to appease local/state requirements.
Question...where are all the "freedom" people when it comes to other "theater"? TSA, for example
First off, its disingenuous to automatically throw the mocking "freedom" label on anyone who doesn't blanket agree with any and all Covid protocol or precautions.
Second, are you implying that people don't complain and criticize TSA regularly? Cause I strongly beg to differ.
-
First off, its disingenuous to automatically throw the mocking "freedom" label on anyone who doesn't blanket agree with any and all Covid protocol or precautions.
Second, are you implying that people don't complain and criticize TSA regularly? Cause I strongly beg to differ.
So let's get rid of it, or bring it back to pre 9/11 levels of funding. It's a waste of time and money.
-
So let's get rid of it, or bring it back to pre 9/11 levels of funding. It's a waste of time and money.
The bureaucracy has gotten to big to eliminate.
-
So let's get rid of it, or bring it back to pre 9/11 levels of funding. It's a waste of time and money.
Listen, you don't have to pitch me on it. I nearly missed a flight to my sister's wedding last month because my wife had a container of plant preservative. ORD's own Paul Blart thought he had caught the next Shoe Bomber. She was kept at security for, no like, an hour and 15 minutes while he ran 5 tests and called for supervisors. She offered to throw it away at one point and he refused to allow her to leave. When his supervisor finally cleared everything, he looked like the Packers sideline after Gould hit the FG.
TLDR, nobody likes the TSA or thinks its effective, so its not a great comp.
-
Listen, you don't have to pitch me on it. I nearly missed a flight to my sister's wedding last month because my wife had a container of plant preservative. ORD's own Paul Blart thought he had caught the next Shoe Bomber. She was kept at security for, no like, an hour and 15 minutes while he ran 5 tests and called for supervisors. She offered to throw it away at one point and he refused to allow her to leave. When his supervisor finally cleared everything, he looked like the Packers sideline after Gould hit the FG.
TLDR, nobody likes the TSA or thinks its effective, so its not a great comp.
I have a weird TSA story is from Lincoln, NE. I visited one of my largest customers. I bought a small jar of sand plum jam because I figured it was somewhat unique to Nebraska. Definitely not something one would see in New England. I forgot I only had carry-on since it was a 1 night trip, so I packed in my small carry suitcase and forgot about. The airport has like 8 gates and TSA opened pretty much just for my flight to MSP. Of course TSA flagged it, said it was "probably a liquid" and I had a choice to check it in (with what luggage or just the jar?) or they would have to confiscate. It's been a running joke since with the two co-workers that were with me, that the TSA guy probably forgot to bring a lunch that day and was enjoying.
A friend of mine from the street I grew up is a TSA agent. Started off in Orlando and moved back to Connecticut when his mom got sick and now works at White Plains.
-
First off, its disingenuous to automatically throw the mocking "freedom" label on anyone who doesn't blanket agree with any and all Covid protocol or precautions.
Second, are you implying that people don't complain and criticize TSA regularly? Cause I strongly beg to differ.
I have not seen the same societal push back on TSA as masks
-
I have not seen the same societal push back on TSA as masks
Maybe cause most people fly once, maybe twice a year. Slightly different occurrence than a daily situation.
-
Maybe cause most people fly once, maybe twice a year. Slightly different occurrence than a daily situation.
So it's more whining vs a principled stand?
-
Maybe cause most people fly once, maybe twice a year. Slightly different occurrence than a daily situation.
It’s sheer inconvenience annoyance, got it.
-
So it's more whining vs a principled stand?
Do you take principled stands against things you rarely encounter? There are a couple ridiculous oversight issues where my parents live in St Pete, but they affect me twice a year so I complain a bit but whatever. If it was the same in my own complex I would have a much more impassioned complaint or gripe.
I fly enough to feel strongly about TSA, but the majority of my ire gets dissipated by Pre-Check. And honestly, if you want excessive intrusive security theater, travel to Asia or India.
It’s sheer inconvenience annoyance, got it.
Oh good, more of the “masks don’t bother me, so anyone who as an issue with them is a selfish whiner” ivory tower BS. Thanks for the valuable contribution.
-
No, they bother me. Masks bother me.
But wearing one to stop viral spread isn’t an inconvenience.
-
No, they bother me. Masks bother me.
But wearing one to stop viral spread isn’t an inconvenience.
But it isn’t helpful, so, why??
-
But it isn’t helpful, so, why??
Masks don't work?
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/MartyMakary/status/1489365806060236803
-
Which is exactly what would be expected based on the science. Prior infection is never brought into a mandated vaccine conversation, which is part of the smoke over the past two years, aina?
#fearandcontrol
-
The unvaccinated's daily cases of covid 2x as high as those that are vaxxed. The unvaccinated daily deaths are 20x as high those that are vaxxed. Weird that "natural immunity" isn't protecting the unvaccinated group. Good thing that the twitter doctors will provide palliative care in their time of need.
-
Oh good, more of the “masks don’t bother me, so anyone who as an issue with them is a selfish whiner” ivory tower BS. Thanks for the valuable contribution.
He's not wrong.
-
Which is exactly what would be expected based on the science. Prior infection is never brought into a mandated vaccine conversation, which is part of the smoke over the past two years, aina?
#fearandcontrol
As with most of these types of studies, there are serious flaws in their study. Very small sample sizes, and only has healthy young individuals in the data set. They acknowledge that another study indicated that up to 36% of those previously infected do not generate antibodies (likely in those less healthy that are not part of this data set). They also do not know if and how many of the individuals had multiple COVID infections.
The actual study also did not compare between those infected and those vaccinated. The second figure provided in the tweet is not in the published article. Likely because it would have been rejected with that figure due to the grossly different sample sizes.
Regardless, the authors note the actual take-home message, "Don't try and go get COVID," because the much safer route is vaccination. The take-home message is still go get vaccinated.
I don't understand the fascination with these studies. They never change the take-home message, and are very difficult to impossible to do robustly.
-
Which is exactly what would be expected based on the science. Prior infection is never brought into a mandated vaccine conversation, which is part of the smoke over the past two years, aina?
#fearandcontrol
How is vaccination "fear and control?" Really, your points are getting worse and worse with each post.
-
He's not wrong.
Expect this from you by this point.
I noticed the sun came up this morning like I expect it to each day. Look forward to your rebuttal on why thats incorrect.
-
I don't understand the fascination with these studies. They never change the take-home message, and are very difficult to impossible to do robustly.
It's perplexing, isn't it? Somehow they imagine it makes some point.
Does it mean you should try to catch COVID to protect yourself from catching COVID? Obviously not if you have two brain cells to rub together.
Does it mean you shouldn't get vaccinated if you have already had COVID? Obviously not, since getting the vaccine and boosters even after having COVID significantly increases your chances of not dying from COVID.
But apparently those pushing this line of "thinking" really don't have two brain cells to rub together.
-
How is vaccination "fear and control?" Really, your points are getting worse and worse with each post.
It's fear and control when Zeke Emanuel goes on MSNBC to say kids under 5 better get vaccinated or else they'll get a serious case of omicron, when studies show the opposite, and he receives no push back.
-
nm
-
How is vaccination "fear and control?" Really, your points are getting worse and worse with each post.
What’s scarier? “Fear and control” or urban settings? Tune into Scoop Fox News to find out next
-
It's fear and control when Zeke Emanuel goes on MSNBC to say kids under 5 better get vaccinated or else they'll get a serious case of omicron, when studies show the opposite, and he receives no push back.
I actually had to look this guy up to see who he is. OK...not sure what his statement has to do with "fear and control" by the government. But I guess being outraged about anything Covid related is the what some people want to do.
But why *not* get your children vaccinated? Seems like a pretty smart thing to do.
-
This limited study specifically recommends avoiding Covid, and the best way to do so is by getting vaccinated.
So thanks for confirming what's already been scientifically proven by study after study after study.
I believe the scientific term is "Duh!"
-
This limited study specifically recommends avoiding Covid, and the best way to do so is by getting vaccinated.
So thanks for confirming what's already been scientifically proven by study after study after study.
I believe the scientific term is "Duh!"
"Scientifically proven by study after study" that there are no long term effects from the Covid vaccine on children under 5?
I believe the scientific term is "Huh!"
-
It's fear and control when Zeke Emanuel goes on MSNBC to say kids under 5 better get vaccinated or else they'll get a serious case of omicron, when studies show the opposite, and he receives no push back.
That sounds bad, unless you put his comment in its full context.
If you watch the entire answer, it's pretty obvious he's saying that kids who get omicron are likely to face a serious case if they're unvaccinated relative to kids who are vaccinated.
That still might be wrong. I don't know, though I suspect it's probably true. But it's not quite the "fear and control" you make it out to be.
Here's the full interview.
https://www.msnbc.com/andrea-mitchell-reports/watch/dr-zeke-emanuel-vaccinating-children-5-and-above-seems-like-it-s-a-no-brainer-132282949889
That said, do you consider it "fear and control" when a doctor tells a patient to eat healthier or stop smoking? Is 4ever using #fearandcontrol every time he tells a patient to floss?
-
I actually had to look this guy up to see who he is. OK...not sure what his statement has to do with "fear and control" by the government. But I guess being outraged about anything Covid related is the what some people want to do.
But why *not* get your children vaccinated? Seems like a pretty smart thing to do.
Why not get your children under 5 vaccinated? Cause Pfizer’s own data says it doesn’t make a lick of difference, so I guess why should you?
They’re currently collecting data to see if a 3 shot regime for this age population will show some level of efficacy but their 2 shot data for this age group helped zippo.
-
"Scientifically proven by study after study" that there are no long term effects from the Covid vaccine on children under 5?
I believe the scientific term is "Huh!"
I was talking about the numerous studies on the general population, which you knew.
-
I was talking about the numerous studies on the general population, which you knew.
So use data from adult studies to justify pediatric use?? Scientific term remains, “huh”?
Not sure if that’s your argument or not for 5 and younger. Thread has jumped around a little so apologies if I’m misrepresenting.
-
Why not get your children under 5 vaccinated? Cause Pfizer’s own data says it doesn’t make a lick of difference, so I guess why should you?
They’re currently collecting data to see if a 3 shot regime for this age population will show some level of efficacy but their 2 shot data for this age group helped zippo.
Define "a lick of difference" because last I checked, that wasn't a scientific term.
-
I was talking about the numerous studies on the general population, which you knew.
Actually, I didn't know that's what you were talking about. You seemed to be replying to my post, which dealt specifically with studies on children showing that children aren't more likely to get a serious case of covid if not vaccinated so I had no reason to know you were talking about the general population. If you truly meant general population, then I don't disagree with you.
-
Define "a lick of difference" because last I checked, that wasn't a scientific term.
Below is part of Pfizers definition for "lick of difference". Too long, I prefer and stick with the previously stated phrase, not a lick of difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the study is ongoing and remains blinded, a pre-specified immunogenicity analysis was conducted on a subset of the study population one month following the second dose. Compared to the 16- to 25-year-old population in which high efficacy was demonstrated, non-inferiority was met for the 6- to 24-month-old population but not for the 2- to under 5-year-old population in this analysis. No safety concerns were identified and the 3 µg dose demonstrated a favorable safety profile in children 6 months to under 5 years of age.
The decision to evaluate a third dose of 3 µg for children 6 months to under 5 years of age reflects the companies’ commitment to carefully select the right dose to maximize the risk-
benefit profile. If the three-dose study is successful, Pfizer and BioNTech expect to submit data to regulators to support an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for children 6 months to under 5 years of age in the first half of 2022.
-
So nothing on the third shot yet. And no safety concerns identified.
No brainer to get them vaxxed. Stop implying there are issues when there aren't.
And this has nothing to do with "fear and control" so maybe people can put their tinfoil away now?
-
So nothing on the third shot yet. And no safety concerns identified.
No brainer to get them vaxxed. Stop implying there are issues when there aren't.
And this has nothing to do with "fear and control" so maybe people can put their tinfoil away now?
Never said there was a safety issue, you're making some pretty strange leaps and accusations. What my OP said was it didn't make a lick of difference in efficacy regarding protecting kids, which is true and stated as such on the Pfizer press release.
It is your right Fluffy to get your kids blindly vaccinated without knowing what a 3 dose regimen efficacy/safety profile looks like. It you do the 2 dose regimen you're just wasting you and your kids time.
I will choose to wait.
-
I have no kids that young. But if I did, I wouldn't hesitate because I am not an anti-science moron.
But you be you. You've been wrong repeatedly on this topic from the beginning, but apparently that doesn't stop you from continuing to be wrong.
-
I have no kids that young. But if I did, I wouldn't hesitate because I am not an anti-science moron.
But you be you. You've been wrong repeatedly on this topic from the beginning, but apparently that doesn't stop you from continuing to be wrong.
Ahhh no dog in the fight, that explains it. You always say I’m wrong but never back it up with anything other then you saying it. Start calling you Ned Price.
-
I have no kids that young. But if I did, I wouldn't hesitate because I am not an anti-science moron.
But you be you. You've been wrong repeatedly on this topic from the beginning, but apparently that doesn't stop you from continuing to be wrong.
Choosing to not blindly vaccinate a small child with a vaccine that hasn't been (a) long term tested on small children, and (b) proven to be of any benefit for small children, doesn't make someone an anti-science moron.
-
Choosing to not blindly vaccinate a small child with a vaccine that hasn't been (a) long term tested on small children, and (b) proven to be of any benefit for small children, doesn't make someone an anti-science moron.
"Blindly"
-
Nothing blind about it. 15 y/o has 3 shots on board.
-
People who still say “blindly” about this vaccine. 🤡🤡🤡
-
Nothing blind about it. 15 y/o has 3 shots on board.
I think the discussion is more about under 5. I don’t know if anything definitive has been decided on it yet.
-
I think the discussion is more about under 5. I don’t know if anything definitive has been decided on it yet.
It hasn't even been voted on by the FDA yet.
-
It hasn't even been voted on by the FDA yet.
Dont tell Fluffy that you science denying mouth breather!!
-
I think the discussion is more about under 5. I don’t know if anything definitive has been decided on it yet.
The Pfizer study of the vaccine in children under 5 began nearly 10 months ago and has involved 4,500 test subjects at 90 sites in four countries.
The results are then reviewed by an independent committee and then the vaccine would need FDA approval before being given on a widespread basis. And I'm sure I'm failing to mention numerous other steps along the way.
There's nothing "blind" about this.
-
The Pfizer study of the vaccine in children under 5 began nearly 10 months ago and has involved 4,500 test subjects at 90 sites in four countries.
The results are then reviewed by an independent committee and then the vaccine would need FDA approval before being given on a widespread basis. And I'm sure I'm failing to mention numerous other steps along the way.
There's nothing "blind" about this.
And that process has shown next to no efficacy with two shots which is why they are now looking at a 3rd shot. To start vaccinating your 2 year old now in hopes that the 3rd shot shows efficacy without knowing if it will or knowing if 3 shots is even safe would be in my estimation going at this blindly. The blind part being having no idea what that 3rd shot has in store as it relates to safety and effectiveness.
-
And that process has shown next to no efficacy with two shots which is why they are now looking at a 3rd shot. To start vaccinating your 2 year old now in hopes that the 3rd shot shows efficacy without knowing if it will or knowing if 3 shots is even safe would be in my estimation going at this blindly. The blind part being having no idea what that 3rd shot has in store as it relates to safety and effectiveness.
Keep backpedaling 🤡
-
And that process has shown next to no efficacy with two shots which is why they are now looking at a 3rd shot. To start vaccinating your 2 year old now in hopes that the 3rd shot shows efficacy without knowing if it will or knowing if 3 shots is even safe would be in my estimation going at this blindly. The blind part being having no idea what that 3rd shot has in store as it relates to safety and effectiveness.
So, not "blindly" then?
-
The Pfizer study of the vaccine in children under 5 began nearly 10 months ago and has involved 4,500 test subjects at 90 sites in four countries.
The results are then reviewed by an independent committee and then the vaccine would need FDA approval before being given on a widespread basis. And I'm sure I'm failing to mention numerous other steps along the way.
There's nothing "blind" about this.
and so far the results say it’s not making a difference on children under 5. And it’s not voted on yet by the FDA. And there certainly is no long term study on the effects on 5 and under. But if one doesn’t automatically get their small child vaccinated, they’re a moron or a clown? Nope.
-
So, not "blindly" then?
Fluffy said he’d have his young’s kids vaccinated already if he had them. Without knowing what the full regimen is or the efficacy associated with that, that’s pretty blind but call it visually impaired if you will.
-
My wife and I were discussing it the other day. We have two under 4. Both of us are vaxxed and boosted, so definitely not "anti science."
We don't know what we'll do yet. If there's little to no demonstrated effectiveness, and them being low-risk, I won't be in a rush to get them shots.
-
and so far the results say it’s not making a difference on children under 5. And it’s not voted on yet by the FDA. And there certainly is no long term study on the effects on 5 and under. But if one doesn’t automatically get their small child vaccinated, they’re a moron or a clown? Nope.
The fact that you know all this, as part of a lengthy process that's all out there for public consumption, proves how moronic and clownish it is to suggest that one would be taking the vaccine "blindly."
There literally is, and will continue to be, reams of research at your disposal (and not the Facebook kind so many anti-vaxxers prefer these days).
-
Fluffy said he’d have his young’s kids vaccinated already if he had them. Without knowing what the full regimen is or the efficacy associated with that, that’s pretty blind but call it visually impaired if you will.
(https://c.tenor.com/L71AdDBs0lAAAAAC/goal-post-moving.gif)
-
The fact that you know all this, as part of a lengthy process that's all out there for public consumption, proves how moronic and clownish it is to suggest that one would be taking the vaccine "blindly."
There literally is, and will continue to be, reams of research at your disposal (and not the Facebook kind so many anti-vaxxers prefer these days).
I don’t have young kids anymore so I don’t have to worry about it. It if I did to give your small child the vaccine, in spite of having all that information is moronic. And I agree, that when the reams of actual research is are available, views may change. But until then, a parent should make that decision for their youngun, hey?
-
The fact that you know all this, as part of a lengthy process that's all out there for public consumption, proves how moronic and clownish it is to suggest that one would be taking the vaccine "blindly."
There literally is, and will continue to be, reams of research at your disposal (and not the Facebook kind so many anti-vaxxers prefer these days).
Reams of research on 5 and under?
-
Reams of research on 5 and under?
10 months worth.
-
and so far the results say it’s not making a difference on children under 5. And it’s not voted on yet by the FDA. And there certainly is no long term study on the effects on 5 and under. But if one doesn’t automatically get their small child vaccinated, they’re a moron or a clown? Nope.
The data is clear for those under 2. It is an effective and safe vaccine.
-
and so far the results say it’s not making a difference on children under 5. And it’s not voted on yet by the FDA. And there certainly is no long term study on the effects on 5 and under. But if one doesn’t automatically get their small child vaccinated, they’re a moron or a clown? Nope.
This is wrong. Effectiveness was down to around 50%, which was disappointing compared to the adult mRNA results. 50% is still considered within the range of an effective vaccine.
My 5 and then 8 year old, were vaccinated 3 days after the vaccines were available in November. Everyone who works in the medical field with us, was the same. All of our colleagues with children under 5 are eagerly waiting for the next approval.
-
https://alethonews.com/2021/12/14/a-huge-israeli-study-shows-natural-covid-immunity-is-far-superior-to-the-vaccine-generated-kind/
"Israel has exclusively used the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, began mass vaccinations before almost any other country, and has an excellent health care database. As a result, it has among the best information on the effectiveness of the shots. It offers far more complete data than the United States."
"Finally, the study showed that people who had been vaccinated and then been infected and recovered were actually more likely to be infected again six months later than those who had only “pure” natural immunity."
i know, i know this is quackery.
commence the echo chamber of straw man replies in 1,2,3...
-
https://alethonews.com/2021/12/14/a-huge-israeli-study-shows-natural-covid-immunity-is-far-superior-to-the-vaccine-generated-kind/
"Israel has exclusively used the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, began mass vaccinations before almost any other country, and has an excellent health care database. As a result, it has among the best information on the effectiveness of the shots. It offers far more complete data than the United States."
"Finally, the study showed that people who had been vaccinated and then been infected and recovered were actually more likely to be infected again six months later than those who had only “pure” natural immunity."
i know, i know this is quackery.
commence the echo chamber of straw man replies in 1,2,3...
Alex Berenson 🤡
-
Try and reply to the data in the study. He didn’t perform the study
-
https://alethonews.com/2021/12/14/a-huge-israeli-study-shows-natural-covid-immunity-is-far-superior-to-the-vaccine-generated-kind/
"Israel has exclusively used the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, began mass vaccinations before almost any other country, and has an excellent health care database. As a result, it has among the best information on the effectiveness of the shots. It offers far more complete data than the United States."
"Finally, the study showed that people who had been vaccinated and then been infected and recovered were actually more likely to be infected again six months later than those who had only “pure” natural immunity."
i know, i know this is quackery.
commence the echo chamber of straw man replies in 1,2,3...
Here’s an article that says, vaccinated plus infection had antibodies against all of the variants, but only infection had antibodies against that specific variant.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.01.22270263v1
-
Try and reply to the data in the study. He didn’t perform the study
🤡
-
https://alethonews.com/2021/12/14/a-huge-israeli-study-shows-natural-covid-immunity-is-far-superior-to-the-vaccine-generated-kind/
"Israel has exclusively used the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, began mass vaccinations before almost any other country, and has an excellent health care database. As a result, it has among the best information on the effectiveness of the shots. It offers far more complete data than the United States."
"Finally, the study showed that people who had been vaccinated and then been infected and recovered were actually more likely to be infected again six months later than those who had only “pure” natural immunity."
i know, i know this is quackery.
commence the echo chamber of straw man replies in 1,2,3...
Shockingly, Cheeks, I mean WarriorDad, I mean pace, I mean stanik, I mean thomas has left out some key portions of the findings.
Such as:
"Furthermore, we found that a single dose of vaccine given to a previously infected individual or to an uninfected doubly vaccinated individual (i.e., a booster dose) restores the protection to the level in the early months following recovery or vaccination."
In other words, get the booster and you get the same or better protection without having to get sick.
-
Shockingly, Cheeks, I mean WarriorDad, I mean pace, I mean stanik, I mean thomas has left out some key portions of the findings.
Such as:
"Furthermore, we found that a single dose of vaccine given to a previously infected individual or to an uninfected doubly vaccinated individual (i.e., a booster dose) restores the protection to the level in the early months following recovery or vaccination."
In other words, get the booster and you get the same or better protection without having to get sick.
Hey am actual intelligent reply. Wow
I agree with this
But I also think if u have had the virus it should be a vaild decision in many cases to not get the jab.
-
'Some people' don't actually fully read the links they post.
-
Hey am actual intelligent reply. Wow
I agree with this
But I also think if u have had the virus it should be a vaild decision in many cases to not get the jab.
🤡
-
Hey am actual intelligent reply. Wow
I agree with this
But I also think if u have had the virus it should be a vaild decision in many cases to not get the jab.
Nope.
Having had the virus doesn't give one lifelong immunity. It just, maybe, gives you slightly longer immunity than two doses of the vaccine.
So, once that immunity wears off, the person is going to get it again and, as an unvaccinated person, more likely than the vaccinated to suffer a serious case, including hospitalization and death.
-
Nope.
Having had the virus doesn't give one lifelong immunity. It just, maybe, gives you slightly longer immunity than two doses of the vaccine.
So, once that immunity wears off, the person is going to get it again and, as an unvaccinated person, more likely than the vaccinated to suffer a serious case, including hospitalization and death.
Also agree
But in a year or 2 they will have better vaccines
Well they may actually have something to at is a real vaccine and not mostly a therapeutic
-
🤡
🐑, hey?
-
🐑, hey?
Nah, I’m living my life. Fully vaxxed but anyone posting an article from Alex Berenson is a 🤡
-
Iz it any wonder y Jim Jones wuz sew successful, doe, hey?
-
Iz it any wonder y Jim Jones wuz sew successful, doe, hey?
(https://cdn-www.mandatory.com/assets/uploads/gallery/roman-roy/giphy-1.gif)
The irony.
-
Missing the irony completely. Anti-vaxxers are the cult mindset that is leading to death.
-
Iz it any wonder y Jim Jones wuz sew successful, doe, hey?
Fantastic
-
Thanks Petrocelli, eye taught sew two, hey?
-
Nope.
Having had the virus doesn't give one lifelong immunity. It just, maybe, gives you slightly longer immunity than two doses of the vaccine.
So, once that immunity wears off, the person is going to get it again and, as an unvaccinated person, more likely than the vaccinated to suffer a serious case, including hospitalization and death.
That’s not true at all
-
Nah, I’m living my life. Fully vaxxed but anyone posting an article from Alex Berenson is a 🤡
Anyone who can’t have an honest back and forth about the data from a study but rather only focuses on the author/poster is a 🤡🤡
-
Anyone who can’t have an honest back and forth about the data from a study but rather only focuses on the author/poster is a 🤡🤡
You haven't had an honest anything since you started posting on the covid board.
-
Ironies continue to both abound and be missed.
-
You haven't had an honest anything since you started posting on the covid board.
Can you give me an example?
-
This is wrong. Effectiveness was down to around 50%, which was disappointing compared to the adult mRNA results. 50% is still considered within the range of an effective vaccine.
My 5 and then 8 year old, were vaccinated 3 days after the vaccines were available in November. Everyone who works in the medical field with us, was the same. All of our colleagues with children under 5 are eagerly waiting for the next approval.
This is a key aspect of these studies the average person doesn't understand. The typical threshold for a successful child vaccine is that they are as effective as the equivalent dosage for adults and teens. Failing that threshold does not mean it isn't effective.
-
That’s not true at all
Citation, please.
To save us both some time, here's mine.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19vaccine/95344
-
https://fortune.com/2022/01/27/omicron-cases-england-uk-reinfection-covid/ (https://fortune.com/2022/01/27/omicron-cases-england-uk-reinfection-covid/)
-
And FD Joe has over 500,000 deaths on his watch. Fantastic job of controllin' da virus, aina?
-
This is a key aspect of these studies the average person doesn't understand. The typical threshold for a successful child vaccine is that they are as effective as the equivalent dosage for adults and teens. Failing that threshold does not mean it isn't effective.
That 50% efficacy compared to adult dosage was for 5-12 years old? I didn’t see any actual % compared to teens or adults in the under 5 crowd which was what I was talking about yesterday.
-
Citation, please.
To save us both some time, here's mine.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19vaccine/95344
Read your link and you’ll see one of my citations. Interesting last paragraph in your link as well.
-
Read your link and you’ll see one of my citations. Interesting last paragraph in your link as well.
So, you have no citations?
Thanks
-
So, you have no citations?
Thanks
You were the guy in college who would put his name on a group project and contribute nothing to the work weren’t you.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/94258
Yes I know the expert said while natural immunity was stronger against reinfection then vaccination it isn’t a reason to go out and try to get Covid, I agree. I’m talking about the millions of people who have already gotten Covid accidentally and that those people should not be mandated to get poked to keep their job, go to a show, or participate in normal life activities.
-
You were the guy in college who would put his name on a group project and contribute nothing to the work weren’t you.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/94258
Yes I know the expert said while natural immunity was stronger against reinfection then vaccination it isn’t a reason to go out and try to get Covid, I agree. I’m talking about the millions of people who have already gotten Covid accidentally and that those people should not be mandated to get poked to keep their job, go to a show, or participate in normal life activities.
What’s better contribute nothing to the group or only contribute wrong answers?
-
And FD Joe has over 500,000 deaths on his watch. Fantastic job of controllin' da virus, aina?
thankfully, they are mostly stupid anti vaxxers.
-
What’s better contribute nothing to the group or only contribute wrong answers?
Haha, good point!
-
And FD Joe has over 500,000 deaths on his watch. Fantastic job of controllin' da virus, aina?
The anti-vaxx death cult chose those results.
-
Anyone who can’t have an honest back and forth about the data from a study but rather only focuses on the author/poster is a 🤡🤡
(https://images2.imgbox.com/9e/87/QySCURsW_o.jpg) (https://imgbox.com/QySCURsW)
-
And FD Joe has over 500,000 deaths on his watch. Fantastic job of controllin' da virus, aina?
Arsonist sets fire, blames Fire Department.
-
And FD Joe has over 500,000 deaths on his watch. Fantastic job of controllin' da virus, aina?
Obviously it's his plan to kill off the unvaccinated people that didn't vote for him. Duh. Thought you were an independent thinker.
-
Shockingly, Cheeks, I mean WarriorDad, I mean pace, I mean stanik, I mean thomas has left out some key portions of the findings.
Such as:
"Furthermore, we found that a single dose of vaccine given to a previously infected individual or to an uninfected doubly vaccinated individual (i.e., a booster dose) restores the protection to the level in the early months following recovery or vaccination."
In other words, get the booster and you get the same or better protection without having to get sick.
Showing them for the 17th time that they are wrong will unfortunately yield no better results that it did the first 16 times.
Teaching your dog calculus would be time better spent.
-
That 50% efficacy compared to adult dosage was for 5-12 years old? I didn’t see any actual % compared to teens or adults in the under 5 crowd which was what I was talking about yesterday.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/01/us/politics/pfizer-vaccine-kids.html
-
The anti-vaxx death cult chose those results.
Interestingly, we had a pandemic plan of action set forth by the W administration. It was a well-thought out, pragmatic approach to a pandemic and was still in place under the Obama administration. The Trump administration tossed it because it was designed by W and recommended to be continued by Obama.
Whether it would have worked is hard to say but the plans proposed in it, would have been less restrictive on a national scale but more restrictive on local levels as outbreaks occurred. It would have taken discipline to implement and would have required courage from the Oval Office to do so, not political considerations or concerns about approval ratings.
The opinion anyone in the Oval Office would have ignored a plan in place for the pandemic is valid. Political considerations almost always trump the correct course of action but when you have no plan over petty jealousy, well, it doesn’t matter, I reckon
-
The anti-vaxx death cult chose those results.
Yeah, butt now FD Joe iz gonna kut cancer deaths bi 50%, hey?
-
Yeah, butt now FD Joe iz gonna kut cancer deaths bi 50%, hey?
People need to stop taking the human papillomavirus vaccine. #fearandcontrol
Oh, that's right, you are still working your way through chapter 1 of Vaccines 101.
-
Yeah, butt now FD Joe iz gonna kut cancer deaths bi 50%, hey?
If only Biden had promised that Mexico would pay for it, you'da been for it, nu?
-
If only Biden had promised that Mexico would pay for it, you'da been for it, nu?
Personally, I think he should have bought Greenland, and sent all the unvaxxed there.
-
If only Biden had promised that Mexico would pay for it, you'da been for it, nu?
We'd all be better off if he'd just secure the Mexican border. That's a little much to ask considering how he fooked up Afghanistan and such, aina?
-
We'd all be better off if he'd just secure the Mexican border. That's a little much to ask considering how he fooked up Afghanistan and such, aina?
It has never been, nor will it ever be, completely secure. Common sense immigration laws would be 100% better.
But of course some people don’t like brown people who speak a non-English language, so they are easily swayed by “secure the border” nonsense.
-
We'd all be better off if he'd just secure the Mexican border.
Yeah, especially if Mexico will pay for it!
-
Yeah, especially if Mexico will pay for it!
Nuclear bombs. Works for hurricanes, will definitely stop border crossings.
-
I REFUSE TO PUT ON WINTER TIRES BECAUSE:
• It’s my car, my choice, my freedom.
• The effectiveness of winter tires is not proven, except by studies carried out by the manufacturers (like I’m supposed to trust them).
• My neighbor Bob had an accident even after putting on winter tires.
• Some drivers are already on their 3rd set of tires, which proves their ineffectiveness.
• We do not know what the tires are made of.
• The tire manufacturers scare us with winter just to enrich themselves.
• In fact, I read on the internet that the tire giants invented snow and spread it at night when you sleep.
• If I have winter tires, the government can track me in the snow.
Educate yourself, open your eyes, stop being sheep!
This year, I say no to winter tires!
-
It has never been, nor will it ever be, completely secure. Common sense immigration laws would be 100% better.
But of course some people don’t like brown people who speak a non-English language, so they are easily swayed by “secure the border” nonsense.
I've known several illegal immigrants and none of them spoke Spanish and none of them ever crossed the border with Mexico.
"Securing the border" would have done jack.
-
Yeah, butt now FD Joe iz gonna kut cancer deaths bi 50%, hey?
4 out of 5 dentists recommend you die from cancer or COVID.
-
I REFUSE TO PUT ON WINTER TIRES BECAUSE:
• It’s my car, my choice, my freedom.
• The effectiveness of winter tires is not proven, except by studies carried out by the manufacturers (like I’m supposed to trust them).
• My neighbor Bob had an accident even after putting on winter tires.
• Some drivers are already on their 3rd set of tires, which proves their ineffectiveness.
• We do not know what the tires are made of.
• The tire manufacturers scare us with winter just to enrich themselves.
• In fact, I read on the internet that the tire giants invented snow and spread it at night when you sleep.
• If I have winter tires, the government can track me in the snow.
Educate yourself, open your eyes, stop being sheep!
This year, I say no to winter tires!
Do people really use the equivalent for the COVID vaccines? It's not exactly hard to find what is in the vaccines.
-
You were the guy in college who would put his name on a group project and contribute nothing to the work weren’t you.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/94258
Yes I know the expert said while natural immunity was stronger against reinfection then vaccination it isn’t a reason to go out and try to get Covid, I agree. I’m talking about the millions of people who have already gotten Covid accidentally and that those people should not be mandated to get poked to keep their job, go to a show, or participate in normal life activities.
As always, your wit and charm are off the charts.
Anyhow, what you've written above has nothing to do with my post you labeled "not true at all."
I know you're not always so good at this, but could you try to tell me what was "not true at all," with actual evidence to support it.
Thanks
-
I REFUSE TO PUT ON WINTER TIRES BECAUSE:
• It’s my car, my choice, my freedom.
• The effectiveness of winter tires is not proven, except by studies carried out by the manufacturers (like I’m supposed to trust them).
• My neighbor Bob had an accident even after putting on winter tires.
• Some drivers are already on their 3rd set of tires, which proves their ineffectiveness.
• We do not know what the tires are made of.
• The tire manufacturers scare us with winter just to enrich themselves.
• In fact, I read on the internet that the tire giants invented snow and spread it at night when you sleep.
• If I have winter tires, the government can track me in the snow.
Educate yourself, open your eyes, stop being sheep!
This year, I say no to winter tires!
Ugh....are you not allowed to drive on the roads in winter time unless you have winter tires?
-
Actually there are areas of the west where you are required to have chains ( not sure if actual snow tires are allowed also) when the roads get bad.
-
A better metaphor would be wearing seat belts.
I refuse to wear a seat belt because I've seen studies that you're more likely to die if you wear one.
I refuse to make my 11-year-old kid wear a seat belt because "people say" seat belts can make a kid sterile.
Etc.
-
A better metaphor would be wearing seat belts.
I refuse to wear a seat belt because I've seen studies that you're more likely to die if you wear one.
I refuse to make my 11-year-old kid wear a seat belt because "people say" seat belts can make a kid sterile.
Etc.
If you dont wear a seat belt, its just a ticket, you dont lose your job.
-
Ironies continue to both abound and be missed.
This from the guy who probably still want Wojo as coach.
-
If you dont wear a seat belt, its just a ticket, you dont lose your job.
Nope, but if you get a DUI you could lose your job. If you refuse to be drug tested, you might not get a job. Toughen up, snowflake
-
If you dont wear a seat belt, its just a ticket, you dont lose your job.
Then they should get vaccinated. It is safe and effective.
This isn't rocket science.
-
Then they should get vaccinated. It is safe and effective.
This isn't rocket science.
I can go along with MOST people SHOULD.
But far from EVERYONE MUST.
-
I can go along with MOST people SHOULD.
But far from EVERYONE MUST.
I really don't care what you can go along with. If an employer finds it in their best interests to require vaccination, like medical centers for instance, that is their choice.
There are other employers out there for people who, for whatever weird reasons they have, don't want to get vaccinated.
-
This from the guy who probably still want Wojo as coach.
You simply can't get a single thing right.
-
You simply can't get a single thing right.
your 5 year history was and is clear
-
Your 20 post history is much clearer.
I was a meh-Jo. For the record.....
I worried about the Wojo hiring, saying he could only succeed if he grew past his Duke roots.
I criticized his pick and roll defense frequently, writing a treatise on why it couldn't work with two tiny guards.
I called his game coaching paint-by-numbers.
I did a dissertation about the holes in his recruiting.
I called his coaching Crean without Wade. I still haven't figured how that can be construed as a compliment.
I criticized his handling if the Hauser situation, but arrived at a different conclusion than the then popular zeitgeist.
I got labeled a Pro-jo at that point. For that and for saying that a coach averaging 20 wins a year over a 5 year stretch doesn't get fired. I included in my 20-21 prediction that that year might give the no-jos what they wanted. I never called for his firing, but I never called him a great coach.
I wrongly assumed that MU's money issues and the COVID season would get him a mulligan. Oops.
But, no, I don't miss Wojo at all.
But thanks for proving my point about how wrong you are.
-
thomas is angry because he is usually very, very wrong. So he's lashing out. Sad.
-
Brought basketball into a COVID thread. That's new.
-
For those who criticized and said there was nothing wrong with what Dr. Zeke Emmanuel said about unvaccinated kids getting a serious case of COVID,
There’s this.
MSNBC
@MSNBC
Editor’s note: A post that quoted Dr. Zeke Emanuel discussing the omicron variant and children has been removed after it was discovered to include a misstatement.
But go ahead and tell the rest of us his misstatement was a misstatement.
-
Pretty sure no one here defended what he said, but keep building that strawman!!!
-
Some on here said, it’s a no brainer to get very small children vaxxed and that others on here were implying there are issues when in fact there aren't any.
Announced yesterday, Pfizer has postponed potential EUA-approval from the FDA, as European nations like Sweden are forgoing recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for young children, saying the risks of COVID-19 do not outweigh the benefits of the vaccine.
Now, it may ultimately get approved for use for very small children, but “no brainer” and “no issues”? Waiting a while for a toddler doesn’t seem to be such an unreasonable approach, hey?
-
Some on here said, it’s a no brainer to get very small children vaxxed and that others on here were implying there are issues when in fact there aren't any.
Announced yesterday, Pfizer has postponed potential EUA-approval from the FDA, as European nations like Sweden are forgoing recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for young children, saying the risks of COVID-19 do not outweigh the benefits of the vaccine.
Now, it may ultimately get approved for use for very small children, but “no brainer” and “no issues”? Waiting a while for a toddler doesn’t seem to be such an unreasonable approach, hey?
Why are they postponing the request?
-
Some on here said, it’s a no brainer to get very small children vaxxed and that others on here were implying there are issues when in fact there aren't any.
Announced yesterday, Pfizer has postponed potential EUA-approval from the FDA, as European nations like Sweden are forgoing recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for young children, saying the risks of COVID-19 do not outweigh the benefits of the vaccine.
Now, it may ultimately get approved for use for very small children, but “no brainer” and “no issues”? Waiting a while for a toddler doesn’t seem to be such an unreasonable approach, hey?
It’s a no brainer when it’s approved.
-
Why are they postponing the request?
https://mobile.twitter.com/rfsquared/status/1492951410597584899
Cause current dosage still isn’t working.
-
The threat of getting covid and the consequences thereof are statistically insignificant for children, aina?
-
It’s a no brainer when it’s approved.
But it’s not approved. So how is it a no brainer?
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/rfsquared/status/1492951410597584899
Cause current dosage still isn’t working.
No, but you're getting warmer.
Keep trying.
-
But it’s not approved. So how is it a no brainer?
When it is approved, it’s a no brainer. Why is this so hard?
-
When it is approved, it’s a no brainer. Why is this so hard?
Disruptor.
-
COVID-19: We need to vaccinate more young people and kids, doctor urges
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/covid-vaccinate-kids-172307779.html
Only about 20% of children between the ages of 5-11 in the U.S. are fully vaccinated despite COVID-19 vaccines being approved for this age group three months ago.
For kids between the ages of 12-17, roughly half are vaccinated while just 20% are boosted. In other words, there are still millions of children vulnerable to COVID-19.
“I think more of us need to be really frank with the American people … that [vaccines] are safe, they are effective, that COVID is massively affecting kids, especially during this Omicron surge,” Dr. Anand Swaminathan, a New Jersey-based emergency medicine physician, said on Yahoo Finance Live (video above). “And these [cases] are preventable. These are preventable hospitalizations. They are preventable deaths in kids.”
COVID cases among children have risen steadily over the last several months, largely due to the virulence of the Omicron variant. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), there have been nearly 4.2 million cases reported since the beginning of January and nearly 632,000 cases for the week ending Feb. 3. That more than doubles the Delta variant peak in 2021.
“The American Academy of Pediatrics and really every pediatrician that I’ve had the good fortune to meet has been very strong on the side of vaccinating children,” Fairbrother said. “It is true that COVID is not a huge risk to children. There are very few children who got super sick with COVID, and an even smaller percentage of them who died of COVID.”
Since COVID first hit the U.S., over 12 million children have tested positive for the virus, according to AAP. Less than 1% of the COVID cases among children have resulted in death.
“It’s not a huge number but still, seven died in January from COVID,” Swaminathan said. “Those are preventable deaths. We don’t need to have any kids dying of this. Vaccines can help to protect the group where they’re approved.”
At the same time, children infected with the coronavirus are at risk for developing multi-system inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C), which the CDC defines as "a condition where different body parts can become inflamed, including the heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, skin, eyes, or gastrointestinal organs." There have been more than 6,800 cases of MIS-C in the U.S. and 59 deaths tied to the issue.
“Their lives are being affected by their long-term symptoms,” Dr. Hilary Fairbrother, a Houston-based emergency medicine physician, said recently on Yahoo Finance Live. “And that’s 10-15% of children who get COVID. All of these things are mitigated by the vaccine. MIS-C is essentially gone. 95% reduction of MIS-C. The long-term COVID symptoms, essentially gone, and essentially zero ability to have COVID kill a child who is vaccinated."
-
COVID-19: We need to vaccinate more young people and kids, doctor urges
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/covid-vaccinate-kids-172307779.html
Meh ... I'm going to wait and see what my dentist thinks.
-
When it is approved, it’s a no brainer. Why is this so hard?
Wrong. The virus and its consequences to young children is minimal and insignificant to make a blanket statement like this, hey?
-
When it is approved, it’s a no brainer. Why is this so hard?
Is it a no brainer only when it’s approved? You said before it was a no brainer. Period. There wasn’t any qualification about it needing to be approved first. You said there were no issues.
Why don’t you admit you jumped the gun and it’s not so cut and dried for small children yet?
-
Is it a no brainer only when it’s approved? You said before it was a no brainer. Period. There wasn’t any qualification about it needing to be approved first. You said there were no issues.
Why don’t you admit you jumped the gun and it’s not so cut and dried for small children yet?
🙄🙄🙄
I would have volunteered my kids to participate in trials. I’m not anti-science.
-
Wrong. The virus and its consequences to young children is minimal and insignificant to make a blanket statement like this, hey?
You’ve been wrong so consistently for two years now. You’d think you’d have the self awareness to sit this out and stop making Covid statements. But I guess not.
-
Sometimes the absurdity and stupidity of others on this board is too great to ignore, hey?
-
🙄🙄🙄
I would have volunteered my kids to participate in trials. I’m not anti-science.
. Sultan. Often wrong. Never in doubt.
-
. Sultan. Often wrong. Never in doubt.
So what exactly was I wrong about.
-
So what exactly was I wrong about.
9 days ago, you said it was a no brainer to get very young children vaxxed and to stop implying there were issues when there aren't any. You called anyone who would hesitate to vax a small child an "anti-science moron." Now, they've pulled approval on the vax for very young children. Sounds like an issue to me.
If you would want your kids to be part of a science trial, you be you. But it's not an unreasonable position, and doesn't make someone an "anti-science moron", if they chose to wait until the vaccine has received approval.
Today, you say it's a no brainer once approved. But 9 days ago, it was a no brainer. Period. That's what you were wrong about. It'd be nice to see you own it for once and admit when you're wrong, but I don't think anyone's going to hold their breath on that one.
-
9 days ago, you said it was a no brainer to get very young children vaxxed and to stop implying there were issues when there aren't any. You called anyone who would hesitate to vax a small child an "anti-science moron." Now, they've pulled approval on the vax for very young children. Sounds like an issue to me.
If you would want your kids to be part of a science trial, you be you. But it's not an unreasonable position, and doesn't make someone an "anti-science moron", if they chose to wait until the vaccine has received approval.
Today, you say it's a no brainer once approved. But 9 days ago, it was a no brainer. Period. That's what you were wrong about. It'd be nice to see you own it for once and admit when you're wrong, but I don't think anyone's going to hold their breath on that one.
You’re right…cause nothing I said was wrong. Nice try though.
-
You’re right…cause nothing I said was wrong. Nice try though.
To borrow from someone else, but it's entirely a correct use of it,
(https://c.tenor.com/L71AdDBs0lAAAAAC/goal-post-moving.gif)
-
To borrow from someone else, but it's entirely a correct use of it,
(https://c.tenor.com/L71AdDBs0lAAAAAC/goal-post-moving.gif)
You are trying really hard.
-
You are trying really hard.
And you’re being extremely obtuse.
-
And you’re being extremely obtuse.
It’s the closest he comes to having a gift.
-
🙄🙄🙄
I would have volunteered my kids to participate in trials. I’m not anti-science.
What does not wanting your children being used as lab rats have to do with being anti-science, FFS?
-
What does not wanting your children being used as lab rats have to do with being anti-science, FFS?
Calling children who have been volunteered by their parents to take a vaccine that has been safe and effective in all other populations “lab rats” is something an anti-science moron would say.
-
Check back in 20 years and see how it all turned out before judgin'. That's the way science experiments work, aina?
-
Pre-COVID, every so often, there would be a story about a family, generally but not always extremely religious, that would have a sick child that they would choose to not treat. Either their faith and God would save them, or they didn't want to put anything artificial into them.
These stories would come out and most people would shake their heads and tsk, windering what kind of parent wouldn't do everything in their power to save their child.
Those days are gone. People like that are being held up as heroes.
-
Pre-COVID, every so often, there would be a story about a family, generally but not always extremely religious, that would have a sick child that they would choose to not treat. Either their faith and God would save them, or they didn't want to put anything artificial into them.
These stories would come out and most people would shake their heads and tsk, windering what kind of parent wouldn't do everything in their power to save their child.
Those days are gone. People like that are being held up as heroes.
Because waiting to see if a vaccine is proven safe for small children (who are at very low risk of getting very sick anyway) rather than “volunteering” them and hoping they’ll be safe is the same as watching your child suffer and die untreated.
Your post is despicable, disgusting and total BS.
-
Because waiting to see if a vaccine is proven safe for small children (who are at very low risk of getting very sick anyway) rather than “volunteering” them and hoping they’ll be safe is the same as watching your child suffer and die untreated.
Your post is despicable, disgusting and total BS.
Why are you putting volunteering in quotes? Do you feel that parents are putting their children at risk? Cause that’s “despicable, disgusting and total BS.”
Oh and something that an anti-science moron would say.
-
Because waiting to see if a vaccine is proven safe for small children (who are at very low risk of getting very sick anyway) rather than “volunteering” them and hoping they’ll be safe is the same as watching your child suffer and die untreated.
Your post is despicable, disgusting and total BS.
Are the children in Tower’s scenario not also being “volunteered”? Seems equally despicable to me.
-
Because waiting to see if a vaccine is proven safe for small children (who are at very low risk of getting very sick anyway) rather than “volunteering” them and hoping they’ll be safe is the same as watching your child suffer and die untreated.
Your post is despicable, disgusting and total BS.
Exact same argument made about polio, smallpox, measles. Your argument is despicable, disgusting, child hating, virus pimping, and ignores history.
-
Because waiting to see if a vaccine is proven safe for small children (who are at very low risk of getting very sick anyway) rather than “volunteering” them and hoping they’ll be safe is the same as watching your child suffer and die untreated.
Your post is despicable, disgusting and total BS.
We should be like Sweden.
-
Pre-COVID, every so often, there would be a story about a family, generally but not always extremely religious, that would have a sick child that they would choose to not treat. Either their faith and God would save them, or they didn't want to put anything artificial into them.
These stories would come out and most people would shake their heads and tsk, windering what kind of parent wouldn't do everything in their power to save their child.
Those days are gone. People like that are being held up as heroes.
Not being willing to volunteer your kid for a vaccine trial, when very young children are not dying (or even getting very sick) from it in the first place, and refusing medical treatment when your child is actually dying are two completely different scenarios. Do what you want with your own kid, but it's not an unreasonable position for a parent to take in deciding to wait until FDA approval before putting their kids in line for shot after shot after shot.
-
Not being willing to volunteer your kid for a vaccine trial, when very young children are not dying (or even getting very sick) from it in the first place, and refusing medical treatment when your child is actually dying are two completely different scenarios. Do what you want with your own kid, but it's not an unreasonable position for a parent to take in deciding to wait until FDA approval before putting their kids in line for shot after shot after shot.
Stop with all this science and logic! Who cares is kids aren’t dying or not even getting very sick? Who cares if the most vulnerable for diseases like polio are the least vulnerable from Covid? If you don’t sign your kid up for a trial with a vaccine unapproved for children (by the scientists at the FDA) you are a child abuser who hates his kid and would let him or her go untreated if he or she was lying in the street bleeding to death.
Could people who claim to “follow the science” become any more hysterical, illogical and unscientific? I can’t see how.
-
Exact same argument made about polio, smallpox, measles. Your argument is despicable, disgusting, child hating, virus pimping, and ignores history.
It is none of the above if a parent chooses to make sure the wrinkles are ironed out before getting their child vaccinated for a virus that poses no where near the threat as polio or smallpox. Unlike those diseases hundreds of thousands of kids (maybe millions) have already gotten Covid and have natural antibodies and are totally fine so until there is a better understanding to how long those natural antibodies remain protective and what the risk/reward profile of getting a child vaccinated who has already gotten Covid naturally looks like I can understand the hesitancy.
If you know the full history of the vaccine story/timeline for those above illnesses (Cutter incident as an example) I would hope you could at least understand why some parents just want to wait a bit. My kids have all their recommended vaccines but none of those use this new mRNA technology so we have just decided to pump the brakes a bit and that’s ok. No judgement to those that want to do it right away but there should be a little more understanding towards those that want to wait and see. Plenty of families don’t do the flu shot every year for their kids without being labeled despicable, disgusting, child hating people, how is this any different?
-
Stop with all this science and logic! Who cares is kids aren’t dying or not even getting very sick? Who cares if the most vulnerable for diseases like polio are the least vulnerable from Covid? If you don’t sign your kid up for a trial with a vaccine unapproved for children (by the scientists at the FDA) you are a child abuser who hates his kid and would let him or her go untreated if he or she was lying in the street bleeding to death.
Of course you are being hyperbolic because no one said any of this.
Could people who claim to “follow the science” become any more hysterical, illogical and unscientific? I can’t see how.
Ironic considering you just used hysterics and hyperbole above.
-
Lots of anger, Lenny. I am sending you a hug.
-
Exact same argument made about polio, smallpox, measles. Your argument is despicable, disgusting, child hating, virus pimping, and ignores history.
This comment is the most anti science post and arguably the biggest misinformation post on this topic yet. The experts, real life data, and the science are now all aligned that this vaccine will not eradicate Covid. Covid is here to stay, for the above illnesses the vaccine was effective in preventing transmission, this one does not but the Covid vaccine is however pretty good at limiting severe symptoms. Severe symptoms in children is incredibly rare, so if a new vaccine that has been proven to not prevent transmission but pretty good at preventing severe disease why do you feel it is so critical and urgent to vaccinate a group of people who very very rarely get severe symptoms from this virus. I don’t care that you do just trying to better understand why.
-
It is none of the above if a parent chooses to make sure the wrinkles are ironed out before getting their child vaccinated for a virus that poses no where near the threat as polio or smallpox. Unlike those diseases hundreds of thousands of kids (maybe millions) have already gotten Covid and have natural antibodies and are totally fine so until there is a better understanding to how long those natural antibodies remain protective and what the risk/reward profile of getting a child vaccinated who has already gotten Covid naturally looks like I can understand the hesitancy.
If you know the full history of the vaccine story/timeline for those above illnesses (Cutter incident as an example) I would hope you could at least understand why some parents just want to wait a bit. My kids have all their recommended vaccines but none of those use this new mRNA technology so we have just decided to pump the brakes a bit and that’s ok. No judgement to those that want to do it right away but there should be a little more understanding towards those that want to wait and see. Plenty of families don’t do the flu shot every year for their kids without being labeled despicable, disgusting, child hating people, how is this any different?
So your kids have the J&J covid vaccine?
-
So your kids have the J&J covid vaccine?
As a PA I would think you’d be aware that J&J is not approved for kids, so no it’s not an option.
-
As a PA I would think you’d be aware that J&J is not approved for kids, so no it’s not an option.
Recked. 😂😂😂
-
As a PA I would think you’d be aware that J&J is not approved for kids, so no it’s not an option.
If approved, you'd have no problem though, since it's not mRNA?
-
If approved, you'd have no problem though, since it's not mRNA?
Yes if approved it would be on the top of the list for our kids.
-
If you're going to follow the science, then follow the science. And it's indisputable that the science currently says that the Covid vaccine for very young children isn't approved. Therefore, it's not unreasonable and not anti-vaccine, nor does it make someone an anti-science moron, to suggest waiting to vaccinate a 2 year old, when (a) the vaccine isn't approved, or (2) very young children don't typically get very ill or die from Covid.
-
Here's the thing. The vaccine isn't dangerous for children. So stop the nonsense about them being experimented on, 'long term effects', etc.
The fact of the matter is that it doesn't appear to drastically help young children against severe covid. I'm fine with whatever people decide, but plenty of kids will 'age out' into a population where the vaccine IS effective against severe covid. And they should for sure get it at that point.
If the vaccine doesn't stop the spread in kids, and it isn't effective, don't get it when they're under 5. This all makes perfect sense.
But let's not pretend that the vaccine isn't safe.
-
Here's the thing. The vaccine isn't dangerous for children. So stop the nonsense about them being experimented on, 'long term effects', etc.
The fact of the matter is that it doesn't appear to drastically help young children against severe covid. I'm fine with whatever people decide, but plenty of kids will 'age out' into a population where the vaccine IS effective against severe covid. And they should for sure get it at that point.
If the vaccine doesn't stop the spread in kids, and it isn't effective, don't get it when they're under 5. This all makes perfect sense. AGREED
But let's not pretend that the vaccine isn't safe.
I agree to an extent, but the argument against it has been that it's not FDA approved and isn't effective for kids under 5, so why get it. The argument in favor of it, by some on this board, has been that it's not FDA approved and isn't effective for kids under 5, so get it anyway. But if it wasn't dangerous for children, the FDA would have approved it. Like you, whatever a person decides for his or her own children is fine, but until it's approved and/or they have a vaccine that will be beneficial to children, there's nothing anti-science about pumping the brakes and those advocating the position of "get it anyway" (not saying you Hards) are as bad or worse than those who say they'd never get a vaccine.
-
The argument in favor of it, by some on this board, has been that it's not FDA approved and isn't effective for kids under 5, so get it anyway.
Could you please link to the posts stating this?
Thanks
-
I agree to an extent, but the argument against it has been that it's not FDA approved and isn't effective for kids under 5, so why get it. The argument in favor of it, by some on this board, has been that it's not FDA approved and isn't effective for kids under 5, so get it anyway. But if it wasn't dangerous for children, the FDA would have approved it. Like you, whatever a person decides for his or her own children is fine, but until it's approved and/or they have a vaccine that will be beneficial to children, there's nothing anti-science about pumping the brakes and those advocating the position of "get it anyway" (not saying you Hards) are as bad or worse than those who say they'd never get a vaccine.
My "no brainer to get them vaxxed" statement implied approval. Did you seriously think otherwise?
-
Here's the thing. The vaccine isn't dangerous for children. So stop the nonsense about them being experimented on, 'long term effects', etc.
The fact of the matter is that it doesn't appear to drastically help young children against severe covid. I'm fine with whatever people decide, but plenty of kids will 'age out' into a population where the vaccine IS effective against severe covid. And they should for sure get it at that point.
If the vaccine doesn't stop the spread in kids, and it isn't effective, don't get it when they're under 5. This all makes perfect sense.
But let's not pretend that the vaccine isn't safe.
This is where I'm at. My view on the vaccine is I think its very safe for adults but minimally effective after about 3 months at doing much of anything. Wait and see on our kiddos for reasons we've beaten to death.
Little reluctant to going in every 3-4 months for a booster as i dont have a high risk profile when it comes to severe disease but not at all against the idea of getting a once per year shot like i do for influenza.
-
Could you please link to the posts stating this?
Thanks
So nothing on the third shot yet. And no safety concerns identified.
No brainer to get them vaxxed. Stop implying there are issues when there aren't.
And this has nothing to do with "fear and control" so maybe people can put their tinfoil away now?
I have no kids that young. But if I did, I wouldn't hesitate because I am not an anti-science moron.
But you be you. You've been wrong repeatedly on this topic from the beginning, but apparently that doesn't stop you from continuing to be wrong.
The data is clear for those under 2. It is an effective and safe vaccine.
Then they should get vaccinated. It is safe and effective.
This isn't rocket science.
Those are a few. And yes Sultan. To say now that you meant no brainer implied approval is the biggest crock o' shyte I've heard in a long time.
-
Those are a few. And yes Sultan. To say now that you meant no brainer implied approval is the biggest crock o' shyte I've heard in a long time.
I also didn't say that your kids shouldn't have underlying health conditions that would make getting the vaccine problematic. Are you saying I didn't imply that as well?
You are trying so hard. It's kind of sad to see you fail so spectacularly.
-
I also didn't say that your kids shouldn't have underlying health conditions that would make getting the vaccine problematic. Are you saying I didn't imply that as well?
You are trying so hard. It's kind of sad to see you fail so spectacularly.
It's not that hard to show you're wrong. You keep doing if for me.
-
It's not that hard to show you're wrong. You keep doing if for me.
I also didn't say that people should actually be alive when getting vaccinated. I guess I should let you know that I implied that as well.
-
Those are a few. And yes Sultan. To say now that you meant no brainer implied approval is the biggest crock o' shyte I've heard in a long time.
I'm pretty sure you're taking several of these out of context, but no matter, really. I was looking for the posts that say "It's not FDA approved and isn't effective for kids under 5, so get it anyway."
That's what you told us was the argument from several posters here. I haven't seen that and was hoping you could point those out for me.
Thanks again.
-
I agree to an extent, but the argument against it has been that it's not FDA approved and isn't effective for kids under 5, so why get it. The argument in favor of it, by some on this board, has been that it's not FDA approved and isn't effective for kids under 5, so get it anyway. But if it wasn't dangerous for children, the FDA would have approved it. Like you, whatever a person decides for his or her own children is fine, but until it's approved and/or they have a vaccine that will be beneficial to children, there's nothing anti-science about pumping the brakes and those advocating the position of "get it anyway" (not saying you Hards) are as bad or worse than those who say they'd never get a vaccine.
Nope, that isn't how this works.
It needs to be safe AND effective.
It's only safe. It needs to be both, and under the current submission, it isn't.
-
Nope, that isn't how this works.
It needs to be safe AND effective.
It's only safe. It needs to be both, and under the current submission, it isn't.
Thank you. It also killed 300 children last flu season, when flu killed 1. It isn't the flu. If your child got COVID, they would probably be fine. But it's still way more dangerous then the flu.
-
Thank you. It also killed 300 children last flu season, when flu killed 1. It isn't the flu. If your child got COVID, they would probably be fine. But it's still way more dangerous then the flu.
“While any death in a child from a vaccine preventable illness is a tragedy, the number of pediatric flu deaths reported to CDC each season is likely an undercount. Even though the reported number of flu-related deaths in children during the 2019-20 flu season was 199, CDC estimates the actual number of flu-related deaths in children that season was 434 when accounting for rates of influenza testing among children and deaths outside of a hospital that may be even less likely to be recognized as flu.”
Taken from CDC website. Somehow flu has magically disappeared the last 2 years during the pandemic but pre pandemic it was similar numbers to Covid mortality in kids the last couple years.
-
“While any death in a child from a vaccine preventable illness is a tragedy, the number of pediatric flu deaths reported to CDC each season is likely an undercount. Even though the reported number of flu-related deaths in children during the 2019-20 flu season was 199, CDC estimates the actual number of flu-related deaths in children that season was 434 when accounting for rates of influenza testing among children and deaths outside of a hospital that may be even less likely to be recognized as flu.”
Taken from CDC website. Somehow flu has magically disappeared the last 2 years during the pandemic but pre pandemic it was similar numbers to Covid mortality in kids the last couple years.
1281 kids have died from COVID. The worse flu year (H1N1) 2009-2010, 358 kids died .
-
(https://images2.imgbox.com/82/25/FJHFsTgA_o.jpg) (https://imgbox.com/FJHFsTgA)
-
1281 kids have died from COVID. The worse flu year (H1N1) 2009-2010, 358 kids died .
Just for clarity’s sake, wouldn’t COVID technically encompass 2 flu seasons not just one? It’s still far under COVID but it’s better to either compare 20-21 flu season and that period for COVID and 21-22 separately, not just COVID all encompassing, IMO
-
Just for clarity’s sake, wouldn’t COVID technically encompass 2 flu seasons not just one? It’s still far under COVID but it’s better to either compare 20-21 flu season and that period for COVID and 21-22 separately, not just COVID all encompassing, IMO
Sure. In July of last year, 490 children had died from COVID. One had died from the flu. And I have to revise my post, the CDC went back to 2009-2010 and upped the H1N1 deaths to 1090. Besides the H1N1 year, COVID is more deadly then every other year.
-
“While any death in a child from a vaccine preventable illness is a tragedy, the number of pediatric flu deaths reported to CDC each season is likely an undercount. Even though the reported number of flu-related deaths in children during the 2019-20 flu season was 199, CDC estimates the actual number of flu-related deaths in children that season was 434 when accounting for rates of influenza testing among children and deaths outside of a hospital that may be even less likely to be recognized as flu.”
Taken from CDC website. Somehow flu has magically disappeared the last 2 years during the pandemic but pre pandemic it was similar numbers to Covid mortality in kids the last couple years.
This just proves your are constantly trolling. It is well known, that flu deaths are an overcount, that is because what we call flu-deaths are actually flu- and influenza like illnesses.
You reject actual data on COVID confirmed deaths, because they must be an overcount, yet argue that estimates based on projecting reported deaths for the flu to the entire population is more accurate.
What a joke.
If we calculated COVID deaths like they do the flu, you would find the number to be substantially higher
-
This just proves your are constantly trolling. It is well known, that flu deaths are an overcount, that is because what we call flu-deaths are actually flu- and influenza like illnesses.
You reject actual data on COVID confirmed deaths, because they must be an overcount, yet argue that estimates based on projecting reported deaths for the flu to the entire population is more accurate.
What a joke.
If we calculated COVID deaths like they do the flu, you would find the number to be substantially higher
Take it up with the CDC amigo.
-
This just proves your are constantly trolling. It is well known, that flu deaths are an overcount, that is because what we call flu-deaths are actually flu- and influenza like illnesses.
You reject actual data on COVID confirmed deaths, because they must be an overcount, yet argue that estimates based on projecting reported deaths for the flu to the entire population is more accurate.
What a joke.
If we calculated COVID deaths like they do the flu, you would find the number to be substantially higher
Funny how Zigs is nowhere to be seen with his “recked” comment now. 🤡🤡🤡
-
Funny how Zigs is nowhere to be seen with his “recked” comment now. 🤡🤡🤡
Sorry, I'm not here 24/7 like some people. I have a life outside of being a message board overlord.
-
Funny how Zigs is nowhere to be seen with his “recked” comment now. 🤡🤡🤡
How was I “recked”? Because forgetful no longer trusts the CDC and much like our friend Ned Price he likes to just say things and treat his word as the evidence of truth?
And Clarissa why chime in now with this comment but not yesterday? Maybe it is you who is the quadruple 🤡
-
Iz it Clarissa or iz it Clarabell, hey?
-
Sorry, I'm not here 24/7 like some people. I have a life outside of being a message board overlord.
Yet you responded in just over 20 minutes. 🤡🤡🤡
-
How was I “recked”? Because forgetful no longer trusts the CDC and much like our friend Ned Price he likes to just say things and treat his word as the evidence of truth?
Never said I didn't trust the CDC. I'm just aware of the actual methods they use. You though, do ignore the CDC when it is convenient for you (COVID), but are now touting it as gospel.
It's not even good trolling, just ignorance.
Now, back to ignoring your posts.
-
Yet you responded in just over 20 minutes. 🤡🤡🤡
I read your posts to make my morning wood go away, so I can take a leak. Good morning, sunshine.
-
I read your posts to make my morning wood go away, so I can take a leak. Good morning, sunshine.
I believe this, but pretty sure you skipped a step.
Not that there's anything wrong with it.
-
He's never skipped that step.
-
I believe this, but pretty sure you skipped a step.
Not that there's anything wrong with it.
Your old lady never skips a step with me. Hey-o.
-
Your old lady never skips a step with me. Hey-o.
Not even the one when your implant needs inflating?
A gentleman would handle that himself.
-
Not even the one when your implant needs inflating?
A gentleman would handle that himself.
Lets not shame that. Sciene is still not settled on the best type and method of penile implant
-
Not even the one when your implant needs inflating?
A gentleman would handle that himself.
Not something I need, but you seem to be the board expert on them.
-
Not something I need, but you seem to be the board expert on them.
Oh, Ziggy. You were doing pretty well there for a while, but now this all you've got?
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/7XmgreV9azxTwAkjO4/giphy.gif?cid=790b7611945ab72abb3ff55f56126437b436beb8eb163f1e&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
-
Oh, Ziggy. You were doing pretty well there for a while, but now this all you've got?
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/7XmgreV9azxTwAkjO4/giphy.gif?cid=790b7611945ab72abb3ff55f56126437b436beb8eb163f1e&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
Considering your lack of any kind of humor, I'll take this as a compliment.
Last word is yours, as usual.
-
Why are you putting volunteering in quotes? Do you feel that parents are putting their children at risk? Cause that’s “despicable, disgusting and total BS.”
Oh and something that an anti-science moron would say.
https://wsau.com/2021/10/27/healthy-12-year-old-suffers-severe-debilitating-effects-from-the-covid-shot/
Maddie De Garay and her family feel different, from personal experience.
-
And you knew these guys would be right behind.
https://www.rheingoldlaw.com/dangerous-drugs/covid-19-vaccine-injuries/ (https://www.rheingoldlaw.com/dangerous-drugs/covid-19-vaccine-injuries/)
-
https://wsau.com/2021/10/27/healthy-12-year-old-suffers-severe-debilitating-effects-from-the-covid-shot/
Maddie De Garay and her family feel different, from personal experience.
Morons always use the outliers as examples too. Statistics are ironically not your thing.
-
https://wsau.com/2021/10/27/healthy-12-year-old-suffers-severe-debilitating-effects-from-the-covid-shot/
Maddie De Garay and her family feel different, from personal experience.
And now the rest of the story...
The cause of the girl’s condition is unclear. Her mother said on a panel held Tuesday in Washington, D.C., hosted by Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., that she was injured by a Covid vaccine administered as part of a Pfizer trial at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital. (Johnson has been widely criticized for spreading misleading claims about the vaccines.) The family’s lawyer, Aaron Siri — who also represents the country’s largest anti-vaccine organization, the Informed Consent Action Network — claims the doctors investigating the case misdiagnosed her myriad injuries as unrelated to the vaccine then downplayed them as abdominal pain. In the meantime, anti-vaccine activists have made the girl a poster child for their cause.
The mother of the girl and the group behind the ad have not provided any evidence that the girl was diagnosed as harmed by a Covid-19 vaccine.
The ad was paid for by the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, an anti-vaccine group founded last month by veteran Silicon Valley entrepreneur Steve Kirsch, known for inventing the optical mouse, and more recently for advocating unproven Covid cures and against vaccines, which he calls “toxic.”
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/vaccine-misinformation-poised-spike-covid-shots-kids-roll-rcna4360
Now, I have no idea what made this girl sick. Apparently her doctors don't believe it was the vaccine, and there's been no evidence provided showing it was the vaccine.
But even if it were the vaccine, it would make her very much an outlier here, so I'm not quite sure what point you think you're making.
-
Morons always use the outliers as examples too. Statistics are ironically not your thing.
but... his name is literally statnik.
-
Morons always use the outliers as examples too. Statistics are ironically not your thing.
Well deaths from COVID for minors are also outliers, so where is your no-brainer or slam dunk when both are outliers?
-
Well deaths from COVID for minors are also outliers, so where is your no-brainer or slam dunk when both are outliers?
Deaths from chickenpox, tetanus and mumps also were outliers pre-vaccine.
We should stop vaccinating against those.
#cheeklogic
-
Well deaths from COVID for minors are also outliers, so where is your no-brainer or slam dunk when both are outliers?
There have been 1000 deaths of minors due to COVID. There have been no verified reports of deaths due to the vaccine. Two children (ages 5 and 6) with severe deadly medical conditions did die after vaccination, but there was no causal relationship to the vaccine.
So even if you grant the 2-deaths, for children, you are 500 times more likely to die from COVID, than the vaccine.
-
There have been 1000 deaths of minors due to COVID. There have been no verified reports of deaths due to the vaccine. Two children (ages 5 and 6) with severe deadly medical conditions did die after vaccination, but there was no causal relationship to the vaccine.
So even if you grant the 2-deaths, for children, you are 500 times more likely to die from COVID, than the vaccine.
And this is during widespread masking + remote learning, where we reduced flu deaths to 1 or some crazy crap
-
Well deaths from COVID for minors are also outliers, so where is your no-brainer or slam dunk when both are outliers?
It's right here....
There have been 1000 deaths of minors due to COVID. There have been no verified reports of deaths due to the vaccine. Two children (ages 5 and 6) with severe deadly medical conditions did die after vaccination, but there was no causal relationship to the vaccine.
So even if you grant the 2-deaths, for children, you are 500 times more likely to die from COVID, than the vaccine.
-
Well deaths from COVID for minors are also outliers, so where is your no-brainer or slam dunk when both are outliers?
Oof.
Numbers. How do they work?
-
They are real science-y. Not facebook science-y.
-
Now, I have no idea what made this girl sick. Apparently her doctors don't believe it was the vaccine, and there's been no evidence provided showing it was the vaccine.
But even if it were the vaccine, it would make her very much an outlier here, so I'm not quite sure what point you think you're making.
Doctors. Schmoctors.
I need to hear what Tucker says.
-
Spectrum channel 48, hey?
-
There have been 1000 deaths of minors due to COVID. There have been no verified reports of deaths due to the vaccine. Two children (ages 5 and 6) with severe deadly medical conditions did die after vaccination, but there was no causal relationship to the vaccine.
So even if you grant the 2-deaths, for children, you are 500 times more likely to die from COVID, than the vaccine.
The majority of 5-12 year olds haven’t even taken the vaccine yet so it’s not exactly an ideal quantitative comparison.
-
Doctors. Schmoctors.
I need to hear what Tucker says.
You watch more tucker than 99% of this board.
-
You watch more tucker than 99% of this board.
I'm not sure that's true. Some days all the scoop boomers get aligned on a weird talking point. It's pretty easy to trace back to their daytime talkshows.
-
the science is likely settled now: both are better. https://www.medscape.co.uk/viewarticle/covid-19-why-are-we-ignoring-infection-acquired-immunity-2022a1000ifd?faf=1&src=soc_tw_220301_mscpedt_news_mdscp_immunity
Antibodies derived from natural infection with COVID-19 are more abundant and more potent – at least 10 times more potent – than immunity generated by vaccination alone, according to a study from Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) in Portland, US, published on January 25.
-
the science is likely settled now: both are better. https://www.medscape.co.uk/viewarticle/covid-19-why-are-we-ignoring-infection-acquired-immunity-2022a1000ifd?faf=1&src=soc_tw_220301_mscpedt_news_mdscp_immunity
Antibodies derived from natural infection with COVID-19 are more abundant and more potent – at least 10 times more potent – than immunity generated by vaccination alone, according to a study from Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) in Portland, US, published on January 25.
The actual study says this: “ Because vaccination protects against severe disease and death (19), it is safer for individuals to be vaccinated before rather than after natural infection.”