Dangers of a Half-Vaccinated Public:

[Tobra]

Nice random chart there Roadrunner, very convincing.

Originally Posted by cabmando

I think that saying natural is better than vaccinated or equating the two is short sighted because I think the unknowns are greater with the virus than the vaccine.

Natural immunity is known to be superior though, unless this virus and inoculation are completely different

Gordo, higher profits if more people are jabbed. Just like Fauci's stocks in vaccine companies. It is not rocket science

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

Do you think the current wave of the Delta variant justifies a maximum number of vaccinations ASAP, regardless of accurate percentages?

No, that would be yet another blunder. It will be mandatory for everyone in the country before the end of next month.

The jab gives you antibodies to the spike protein, in theory

Having it gives you antibodies to the spike protein and the nucleo capsid, or what the spike sticks out of. It is not likely that the jab gives the level of protection provided by having natural immunity.

The way this has been handled from the jump has been horrible, Keystone Cops meet the department of public health.

For example, how many countries mandated that everyone get remdesivir? Which countries saw a significant problem with renal failure secondary to SARS 2?

We are counting absolutely healthy, asymptomatic cases as cases. We are counting people who died of something else as cases. Post jab, a case is only a case if they are sick as hell or dead.

We are using coercion to force people to get this inoculation. That is not only inconsistent with the values that created this nation, it violates our Constitution and international law.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

Of course they do. Check up on it. What studies say it doesn't- I'd be extremely curious.

How they know is based on tons of data. Honestly, I don't have time to research and confirm the obvious. If someone says no, I'd like to see the links.

"Tons" of data means exactly nothing...

Check this out:

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-how-well-covid-19-vaccines-work-against-the-delta-variant

Read the headlines. If this doesn't jump out, nothing will: Data so far suggests efficacy rates of more than 67 percent for the J&J vaccine, 72 to 95 percent for the Moderna vaccine, and 42 to 96 percent for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

Huh?

I can cherry pick all day, but the following is highlighted from this link: https://www.freepressjournal.in/india/current-vaccines-may-be-ineffective-against-delta-variant-mutations-experts

When mutation changes, it can possibly breach vaccine protection.

"There's no doubt about it. We hope the vaccine will work. But with mutation, the virus changes its structure to become a new virus, while the vaccine remains the same. As bacteria develops resistance, so can the virus change mutation," emphasised Dr S.P. Byotra, Chairman of Department of Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital (SGRH), New Delhi.

A recent study by the SGRH revealed that the Delta variant of Covid-19 virus shows eight-fold approximately reduced sensitivity to vaccine elicited antibodies compared to the Wuhan strain.

The study, available online as a non-peer reviewed preprint version in Research Square, noted that the Delta variant (B16172), first identified from India, not only dominates vaccine-breakthrough infections with higher respiratory viral loads compared to non-Delta infections, but also generates greater transmission between fully vaccinated people as compared to the other variants -- Alpha (B117), or Kappa (B16171).

One more:

Martin Kuldorff, another highly respected epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School, also critiqued Dr.Collins on this point.

The CDC has ignored at least 3 studies that have shown that natural immunity is equivalent (if not superior to vaccinated immunity).

1. An Oxford University study (~11,000 people) showed 90% and 85% effectiveness of the vaccine and natural immunity, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant, and differed by only one patient.

2. A study of the entire Israeli population (6.3M people) showed 92.8% vs. 94.8 effectiveness of vaccine and natural immunity, respectively. The superiority of natural immunity held for every age group, and for all severities of illness.

3. A Cleveland Clinic Study of (~52,000 people), demonstrated 99.3%% and 100% effectiveness of vaccine and natural immunity, respectively. No individual in this study who previously got COVID, got reinfected.

These last two studies, though methodologically robust, have been inexplicably held up in the peer-review process for political reasons, but the CDC publishes this minor but yet substantially flawed study simply to promote its narrative. MMWR is not externally peer reviewed, only internally cleared. The CDCs use of this study has given corporations, universities, and other institutions justification to coerce vaccinations on the naturally immune. So many of us physicians and scientists are so frustrated and disgusted by how critical thought and medical evidence has been thrown out the door in order to achieve political gain.

I hope the data helps solve the problems.

Again, get the vaccine and I sincerely hope it works. BTW, I will not PARF this up, I promise.

[cabmandone]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

Again, I am pro vaccine, happily so but just not for me.

Where I think the data is lacking is the fact that we did not have large scale blood test for immunity, or, more specifically, people who had CV but were asymptomatic.

Without knowing that percentage of the population, it is hard to assign absolute numbers to CV measures expressed in terms of percentage of known cases and deaths.

Get the vaccine, please, but just don't continue to tell me the "numbers" are tax audit ready.

I hope you didn't take my comment as implying you were against vaccines. It wasn't meant that way.

On mutations: From what I've read, the virus would have to radically change the spike protein in order for the vaccine to become ineffective.

[cabmandone]

From the Cleveland Clinic study: It’s important to note that this study was conducted in late 2020 and early 2021, before the emergence of the Delta variant.

More:
More research is needed. We do not know how long the immune system will protect itself against re-infection after COVID-19, as our study only looked at individuals over a five-month period, or how well-protected previously infected individuals are against variants. It is also important to keep in mind that this study was conducted in a population that was younger and healthier than the general population.

The above might be why it is being held up in the peer review process. It's not a good sampling.

[Steve Carlton]

Seahawk, I have nothing but enormous respect for you on this forum. Maybe someone else can post myriads of links to what I'm referring to. If I get some time, I'll do it. I follow CNN, MSNBC, and regular network TV and I'm certain I'm not getting bad information.

Your first link doesn't work and the second link is from some Indian website. Can you post something from the CDC, or respected medical organization?

How do you define efficacy rates? Are you looking at rates at which people do not get infected at all? Have you looked at the consequences to those who get infected, vaccinated vs unvaccinated? What's your estimate of the percentage of people recently hospitalized or dead (predominantly by the Delta strain) as vaccinated vs unvaccinated?

[speeder]

Physicians can get in trouble from their licensing boards for spreading misinformation about Covid-19 vaccines and other subjects online. You'd think that this type of regulatory or disciplinary action would be completely unnecessary but it's not, unfortunately. Plenty of Foghorn Footsniffers out there in the Quniverse:

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-08-16/doctors-coronavirus-misinformation-license

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by cabmando

I hope you didn't take my comment as implying you were against vaccines. It wasn't meant that way.

On mutations: From what I've read, the virus would have to radically change the spike protein in order for the vaccine to become ineffective.

Of course not, Nick. No issues at all.

Originally Posted by cabmando

More research is needed. We do not know how long the immune system will protect itself against re-infection after COVID-19, as our study only looked at individuals over a five-month period, or how well-protected previously infected individuals are against variants. It is also important to keep in mind that this study was conducted in a population that was younger and healthier than the general population. .

That is one of the reasons Johns Hopkins approached me after my primary care Dr. reached out to them. I am 64, in good health with 27 years of military medicine poking me every six months...all on record with an immune system that apparently needs Valium.

If, however, I feel the risks warrant getting the vaccine, I will. My lifestyle can support being a part of this study for now.

Eyes wide open.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

Seahawk, I have nothing but enormous respect for you on this forum.

All good. I'll wave-off for now.

Best.

[Chocaholic]

Well, this statement is interesting...

“Due to their specialized knowledge and training, licensed physicians possess a high degree of public trust and therefore have a powerful platform in society, whether they recognize it or not.”

So, if those with extensive knowledge and training suggest something that disagrees with government dogma, they are not to be believed and will be punished.

For decades mustard gas was used to kill people...so it was presumed poisonous. Yet it was discovered by a few researchers (Dana Farber as I recall) that in a controlled dose, it’s an effective chemotherapeutic agent.

So...lock them up!

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

This thread has been good so far so I will endeavor to persevere in that.

“So many of us physicians and scientists are so frustrated and disgusted by how critical thought and medical evidence has been thrown out the door in order to achieve political gain.”

What is the political gain they hope to achieve?

[Rikao4]

so the Lady and I did the antigen test..
zip..
nicht zu finden..
she's been in it since day one....
like IN it day in and out..
went to see her crew..
2 out of 10..
they are ready to walk..
and good luck after they go..
cause they really cared..


Rika

[Rikao4]

????..
have they offered a bounty for us yet..

ya can drag us in like some dog..
and go here..
found one..

Rika

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

Where I think the data is lacking is the fact that we did not have large scale blood test for immunity, or, more specifically, people who had CV but were asymptomatic..

The data is indeed lacking, no question.
It took months to make testing for any version of the virus widely available. It will take more time to make widely available tests to check for levels of natural immunity to variants. Meanwhile we have a vaccine whose efficacy is already fairly well known, mainly because we know exactly who got it and when.
We can spend time testing everyone who hasn’t been vaccinated to see if they should have the jab (while those who should get sick) or just tell everyone to get vaccinated now.

[Steve Carlton]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

Do(es) the current vaccine(s) protect or inhibit Delta CV? Some of the studies I posted earlier suggest otherwise.

Some quick links. I interpret efficacy as results under ideal lab/study circumstances and effectiveness as real world results, as I understand are nearly the same numbers these days and effectively interchangeable. Beyond effectiveness (not getting COVID) is the consequences of getting it. If you're much less likely to get hospitalized or die, that's a huge win. These are links to top search results:

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/568461-new-research-finds-vaccines-losing-effectiveness

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/coronavirus/unvaccinated-covid-19-survivors-twice-as-likely-to-get-reinfected-study-shows/2764326/

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-variant.html

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/08/04/covid-mask-mandates-delta-variant-vaccine-cdc-who/5477581001/

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

[I]Martin Kuldorff, another highly respected epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School, also critiqued Dr.Collins on this point.

Googled, watched this video. Clearly he is an intelligent person and at one time must have been normal enough to get to where he is. But watching this video, there is something very wrong with him mentally. His tweets are childlike off kilter. I wouldn't trust him on anything.

[wdfifteen]

^^
I stopped watching in the first minute. I am so tired of the talk about individual rights without a concomitant comment about individual responsibilities.

[Tobra]

^Good lord^

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

What is the political gain they hope to achieve?

Seriously?

[thor66]

Originally Posted by speeder

Physicians can get in trouble from their licensing boards for spreading misinformation about Covid-19 vaccines and other subjects online. You'd think that this type of regulatory or disciplinary action would be completely unnecessary but it's not, unfortunately. Plenty of Foghorn Footsniffers out there in the Quniverse:

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-08-16/doctors-coronavirus-misinformation-license

...

[cabmandone]

I was having a conversation with a good friend this evening. He lost his wife to covid earlier this year. We both knew a guy who recently died from complications related to covid. He asked me what my take is on the vaccines. I told him me, my wife and 3 kids have all gotten the vaccine. He was somewhat surprised. You can imagine my surprise when he told me he's waiting. We talked for a while. His brother's wife had covid. I was discussing the knowns vs unknowns with him. We talked about how the virus can make the blood thicker, cause liver issues and cause the loss of taste and smell. I asked him, what do you suppose the long term effect of any of those three things could be? I wasn't pushy. I just pointed out things that hopefully would make him consider both sides. I told him I weighed the pros and cons and decided I was safer with being vaccinated and reducing my chance for severe infection. I wanted to be careful what I said since he had lost his wife this year but I wanted to make him think a bit more about the decision. Don't know if it made a difference or not and probably won't because it probably won't come back up.

To lose your wife and still not get vaccinated speaks to the fear that is out there. I think we need a better, more consistent message.

[1990C4S]

Originally Posted by cabmando

I think we need a better, more consistent message.

That ship sailed so long ago it has circumnavigated the world multiple times.