Vaccine/Antibody updates

[Jockey]

naginiF,

Do we know that unvaccinated people present a danger to others? If and when we do, restrictions on those folks would make sense. But unless a direct link of the type you mention is established, I'll stick with the idea that the idiots who won't get vaxxed are only endangering themselves.

We know unvaccinated people can get Covid. We know people with Covid spread it to others. We know a small percentage of those people will die.

Hardly just endangering themselves.

[naginiF]

naginiF,

Do we know that unvaccinated people present a danger to others? If and when we do, restrictions on those folks would make sense. But unless a direct link of the type you mention is established, I'll stick with the idea that the idiots who won't get vaxxed are only endangering themselves.

My understanding is that unvaccinated people do present a danger to others, not with the existing COVID virus but for the next one (variant):

- variants are caused by mutations that 'take hold'
- the majority of mutations don't take hold
- the more mutations there are the higher the likelihood one takes hold
- the more mutations that take hold the more likely one is a variant that existing vaccines are not effective against
- therefore, the more unvaccinated people = more opportunity for a mutation = higher chance existing vaccine is not effective

If we don't get enough people vaccinated the likely ongoing scenario is the rest of us will need to get yearly boosters (I'm throwing out the "full blown lockdown for another year" and "it'll just go away" extremes). I for one think that if we have to go through anything close to the 24hrs after the second shot on a yearly basis because people choose not to get vaccinated it would definitely a) be a negative impact on others and b) be a situation where those not vaccinated have restrictions.

As far as what those restrictions are? This is a rabbit hole, but call me Alice......On the local level I'm OK with the CDC publishing guidelines, individual venues deciding what to enforce, and people choosing where to go depending on their comfort level. For travel, the gov would have to establish the rules, just add it to the existing TSA list of rules.

[Lennys Tap]

We know unvaccinated people can get Covid. We know people with Covid spread it to others. We know a small percentage of those people will die.

Hardly just endangering themselves.

In your world we'll never get back to normal. As long as there is ANY risk, stay hidden in your closet. Guess what, there will always be SOME risk in everything you do. And someday, you're going to die from SOMETHING.

The vast majority of the people put at risk by the unvaxxed will be others who are unvaxxed. And you're on record that you don't even care about them anyway. You hope they get sick and die. I don't, but it's a dumb risk they're taking. For them, it's que sera, sera.

[jesmu84]

naginiF,

Do we know that unvaccinated people present a danger to others? If and when we do, restrictions on those folks would make sense. But unless a direct link of the type you mention is established, I'll stick with the idea that the idiots who won't get vaxxed are only endangering themselves.

Yes. We do.

There is a certain segment of the population that cannot take the vaccine.

Unvaccinated folks who become infected can spread to those who cannot take the vaccine.

There's your present danger.

[pbiflyer]

The day it is OK'd, my 14 year old will get his first shot.

15 year old scheduled for next Tuesday. Would have been sooner, but Pfizer is hard to get here.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I get the discussion about variants/spread etc but it's just not feasible to prevent that.  Too much global travel and too many countries in worse situations. 

Honestly the best carrot will be when states with high vaccination rates start doing normal things.  We're getting to the point in many states (and world with UK and Israel) that the spread has been absolutely crushed by the vaccine. Time to get back to normal and get your annual booster. 

By the way I am all for employers/businesses and schools putting whatever vaccine requirement they want in place to keep their environments safe.  But it's unrealistic to think broad based anything is feasible sans an absolute breakout mutation that sets us back to square one. 

All my opinion of course. 

[Lennys Tap]

My understanding is that unvaccinated people do present a danger to others, not with the existing COVID virus but for the next one (variant):

- variants are caused by mutations that 'take hold'
- the majority of mutations don't take hold
- the more mutations there are the higher the likelihood one takes hold
- the more mutations that take hold the more likely one is a variant that existing vaccines are not effective against
- therefore, the more unvaccinated people = more opportunity for a mutation = higher chance existing vaccine is not effective

If we don't get enough people vaccinated the likely ongoing scenario is the rest of us will need to get yearly boosters (I'm throwing out the "full blown lockdown for another year" and "it'll just go away" extremes). I for one think that if we have to go through anything close to the 24hrs after the second shot on a yearly basis because people choose not to get vaccinated it would definitely a) be a negative impact on others and b) be a situation where those not vaccinated have restrictions.

As far as what those restrictions are? This is a rabbit hole, but call me Alice......On the local level I'm OK with the CDC publishing guidelines, individual venues deciding what to enforce, and people choosing where to go depending on their comfort level. For travel, the gov would have to establish the rules, just add it to the existing TSA list of rules.

There are consequences of bad behavior that we legislate against (drunk driving) and those that we live with. All of us who take care of ourselves, eat right, stay in shape, etc, pay for those who choose to drink, smoke and eat themselves into medical problems. Rather than legislate against the bad behavior, the healthy (with higher insurance premiums, for examples) subsidize it. Responsible people will always take care of the irresponsible. So, if necessary, we'll get the boosters and put up with it. It's the price of a free society. IMO it's worth it.

[JWags85]

Yes. We do.

There is a certain segment of the population that cannot take the vaccine.

Unvaccinated folks who become infected can spread to those who cannot take the vaccine.

There's your present danger.

So what do you propose for those who cannot take the vaccine?  COVID will never be eradicated, so we cant just say "oh everyone hold the line until it's gone and those unvaccinated are protected"

[rocket surgeon]

So what do you propose for those who cannot take the vaccine?  COVID will never be eradicated, so we cant just say "oh everyone hold the line until it's gone and those unvaccinated are protected"

plasma antibodies

[ZiggysFryBoy]

How much heroin should I be allowed to buy at once?

Probably just stick to your usual amount.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Wow we are at the point in the pandemic where vaccine puns are being thrown about

Ha, totally unintentional.

[rocket surgeon]

seems doc fettucine could have played a major role in preventing covid from getting out of lab?  from a very well written article, i'll cut to the chase-he exploited a funding "loophole" allowing the research to move forward because it was necessary to "protect public health"???

but if we aren't open and honest about where the hell this virus came from and how, get ready for another one, more masks, vaccines and $pending.  and this from a country who can't seem to control the re-entry of their rocket parts?  good thing they don't fill that thing with contagious bugs err anything

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/

"The responsibility of the NIAID and NIH is even more acute because for the first three years of the grant to EcoHealth Alliance, there was a moratorium on funding gain-of-function research. Why didn't the two agencies therefore halt the federal funding, as apparently required to do so by law? Because someone wrote a loophole into the moratorium.

The moratorium specifically barred funding any gain-of-function research that increased the pathogenicity of the flu, MERS, or SARS viruses. But then a footnote on page 2 of the moratorium document states that "[a]n exception from the research pause may be obtained if the head of the USG funding agency determines that the research is urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security."

This seems to mean that either the director of the NIAID, Anthony Fauci, or the director of the NIH, Francis Collins, or maybe both, would have invoked the footnote in order to keep the money flowing to Shi's gain-of-function research.

"Unfortunately, the NIAID director and the NIH director exploited this loophole to issue exemptions to projects subject to the Pause—preposterously asserting the exempted research was 'urgently necessary to protect public health or national security' — thereby nullifying the Pause," Ebright said in an interview with Independent Science News."

[jesmu84]

So what do you propose for those who cannot take the vaccine?  COVID will never be eradicated, so we cant just say "oh everyone hold the line until it's gone and those unvaccinated are protected"

I don't have a good answer to your question.

I was merely pointing out to Lenny that there is a current danger posed to others by the anti vaxx folks.

[forgetful]

seems doc fettucine could have played a major role in preventing covid from getting out of lab?  from a very well written article, i'll cut to the chase-he exploited a funding "loophole" allowing the research to move forward because it was necessary to "protect public health"???

but if we aren't open and honest about where the hell this virus came from and how, get ready for another one, more masks, vaccines and $pending.  and this from a country who can't seem to control the re-entry of their rocket parts?  good thing they don't fill that thing with contagious bugs err anything

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/

"The responsibility of the NIAID and NIH is even more acute because for the first three years of the grant to EcoHealth Alliance, there was a moratorium on funding gain-of-function research. Why didn't the two agencies therefore halt the federal funding, as apparently required to do so by law? Because someone wrote a loophole into the moratorium.

The moratorium specifically barred funding any gain-of-function research that increased the pathogenicity of the flu, MERS, or SARS viruses. But then a footnote on page 2 of the moratorium document states that "[a]n exception from the research pause may be obtained if the head of the USG funding agency determines that the research is urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security."

This seems to mean that either the director of the NIAID, Anthony Fauci, or the director of the NIH, Francis Collins, or maybe both, would have invoked the footnote in order to keep the money flowing to Shi's gain-of-function research.

"Unfortunately, the NIAID director and the NIH director exploited this loophole to issue exemptions to projects subject to the Pause—preposterously asserting the exempted research was 'urgently necessary to protect public health or national security' — thereby nullifying the Pause," Ebright said in an interview with Independent Science News."

You really should stop watching Tucker Carlson.

[Hards Alumni]

Probably just stick to your usual amount.

It's really strange that you keep buying from me when you could be buying wholesale from my guy.

Thanks for the dono!

[Spotcheck Billy]

.  and this from a country who can't seem to control the re-entry of their rocket parts?

jeez, your handle includes rocket lol, you think we've never had space junk crash back to earth? Skylab anyone?

[naginiF]

jeez, your handle includes rocket lol, you think we've never had space junk crash back to earth? Skylab anyone?

You don't remember all the investigations into the total incompetence of the CDC and FDA after Challenger blew up?

[rocket surgeon]

You really should stop watching Tucker Carlson.

you guys really hate opposition research eyn'a?  just toe the line and shut up?  that's scary thinking.  btw, did you even bother reading the article? how about commenting on the substance rather than the person who's popularizing an opposing view.  you still watching don lemon or jake tapper?  well stop it

[reinko]

LFG America, keep getting those 💉's.

https://twitter.com/aslavitt46/status/1392166129712381954?s=21

[Hards Alumni]

you guys really hate opposition research eyn'a?  just toe the line and shut up?  that's scary thinking.  btw, did you even bother reading the article? how about commenting on the substance rather than the person who's popularizing an opposing view.  you still watching don lemon or jake tapper?  well stop it

lmao

[The Sultan]

you guys really hate opposition research eyn'a?  just toe the line and shut up?  that's scary thinking.  btw, did you even bother reading the article? how about commenting on the substance rather than the person who's popularizing an opposing view.  you still watching don lemon or jake tapper?  well stop it

I read the first few pages before it got too complex for my brain.  I thought it was interesting and made some good points.  I would like to see it validated by other sources.

[forgetful]

you guys really hate opposition research eyn'a?  just toe the line and shut up?  that's scary thinking.  btw, did you even bother reading the article? how about commenting on the substance rather than the person who's popularizing an opposing view.  you still watching don lemon or jake tapper?  well stop it

I did, there was no substance to it, just like the space between Tucker Carlson's ears.

And, actually I don't watch either of those. I like my news in print, where I can read and think for myself.

edit: decided to at least give the original link's argument a moments effort to refute. Since the origin debate has been addressed extensively previously, I'll address the latter part, that somehow Fauci and/or Collins share some blame. It is a moronic idea, that anyone with even a modicum of interest in the idea can disprove in minutes.

1. The original grant was approved for funding before the moratorium on gain of function research. So no extra approvals needed.

2. The grant doing the recent research was re-reviewed in 2019, after the moratorium ended.

3. The moratorium ended in 2017, at the direction of Donald J. Trump and his HHS secretary, who said it was no longer needed because they created a special secret panel that would review any grants conducting such research. The members of that secret panel are unknown.

Now, quick question. If this information is readily available, why didn't Tucker or your article bring up this information. Especially that last tidbit?

[rocket surgeon]

I did, there was no substance to it, just like the space between Tucker Carlson's ears.

And, actually I don't watch either of those. I like my news in print, where I can read and think for myself.

edit: decided to at least give the original link's argument a moments effort to refute. Since the origin debate has been addressed extensively previously, I'll address the latter part, that somehow Fauci and/or Collins share some blame. It is a moronic idea, that anyone with even a modicum of interest in the idea can disprove in minutes.

1. The original grant was approved for funding before the moratorium on gain of function research. So no extra approvals needed.

2. The grant doing the recent research was re-reviewed in 2019, after the moratorium ended.

3. The moratorium ended in 2017, at the direction of Donald J. Trump and his HHS secretary, who said it was no longer needed because they created a special secret panel that would review any grants conducting such research. The members of that secret panel are unknown.

Now, quick question. If this information is readily available, why didn't Tucker or your article bring up this information. Especially that last tidbit?

ok, this is not from tucker-

  "And now we know that Dr. Tony Fauci and the NIH funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2015"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/breaking-dr-fauci-obama-admin-gave-wuhan-lab-3-7-million-top-dr-shi-zhengli-us-project-shut-sent-back-china/

and btw, dr shi lists uncle tony as one of the money donors to the project

"At least some of the U.S. tax subsidies that went to the Wuhan Institute of Virology came from Dr. Anthony Fauci's National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases."


https://thenewamerican.com/newsweek-fauci-s-virus-outfit-subsidized-wuhan-virus-lab-famed-virus-fighter-backs-controversial-research/


you guys better keep up.  you ain't gonna see this on CNN tonight, nor msnbc, abc, cbs, nbc, twitter, facebook, faceplant, nopanties, xyz...guess ya'll just have to watch tucker

listen, if we do not get to the bottom of this, the next one will be worse.  history my friend

[The Sultan]

ok, this is not from tucker-

  "And now we know that Dr. Tony Fauci and the NIH funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2015"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/breaking-dr-fauci-obama-admin-gave-wuhan-lab-3-7-million-top-dr-shi-zhengli-us-project-shut-sent-back-china/

and btw, dr shi lists uncle tony as one of the money donors to the project

"At least some of the U.S. tax subsidies that went to the Wuhan Institute of Virology came from Dr. Anthony Fauci's National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases."


https://thenewamerican.com/newsweek-fauci-s-virus-outfit-subsidized-wuhan-virus-lab-famed-virus-fighter-backs-controversial-research/


you guys better keep up.  you ain't gonna see this on CNN tonight, nor msnbc, abc, cbs, nbc, twitter, facebook, faceplant, nopanties, xyz...guess ya'll just have to watch tucker

listen, if we do not get to the bottom of this, the next one will be worse.  history my friend

Pretty sure that was well known a year ago.

[forgetful]

ok, this is not from tucker-

  "And now we know that Dr. Tony Fauci and the NIH funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2015"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/breaking-dr-fauci-obama-admin-gave-wuhan-lab-3-7-million-top-dr-shi-zhengli-us-project-shut-sent-back-china/

and btw, dr shi lists uncle tony as one of the money donors to the project

"At least some of the U.S. tax subsidies that went to the Wuhan Institute of Virology came from Dr. Anthony Fauci's National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases."


https://thenewamerican.com/newsweek-fauci-s-virus-outfit-subsidized-wuhan-virus-lab-famed-virus-fighter-backs-controversial-research/


you guys better keep up.  you ain't gonna see this on CNN tonight, nor msnbc, abc, cbs, nbc, twitter, facebook, faceplant, nopanties, xyz...guess ya'll just have to watch tucker

listen, if we do not get to the bottom of this, the next one will be worse.  history my friend

Quit reading crap news sources that don't even spend 2-minutes trying to get the facts. None of what you say above is new, but it is crap news that reiterates false talking points.

1. The entire grant was $3.7M. You can find details of the grant and $ amounts, here.

https://grantome.com/search?q=Peter%20Daszak

2. It was awarded to Eco Health Alliance and Peter Daszak, with Erik Stemmy as the program officer in charge of reviewing the grant. Of that total amount only $199,000 was subcontracted to the Wuhan Virology institute. This was all awarded before the moratorium on gain of function research.

3. In July of 2019, the grant was re-approved under the Trump administration. At that point, the Wuhan institute was budgeted an additional $76,000.

4. In 2020 (awarded), but reviewed in 2019, again under the Trump administration, Eco Health Alliance with Wuhan institute as a subcontractor was awarded an additional massive grant amounting to $1.55M in the first year alone, of a 5-year grant.

These latter two aspects were after, at the direction of the Trump administration and his secretary of HHS, they reversed the moratorium on gain of function research.

All of this is despite the fact that the current evidence indicates the virus is of natural origin, and ignores the fact that the research that came from the 2014 grant was helpful in developing improved vaccines.