"Pandemic of the unvaccinated" CONFIRMED

Grace Kelly wrote:

By the way, personal attacks are against Message Board policy. You have been reported. We need a higher level of civility on this board.

Did you stay on your high horse enough to report the hundreds of other posts in which people who share your viewpoint name-called? If you are calling for a higher level of civility, shouldn't that be from everyone? Or are you only interested when it self-serves?

It’s actually BS, which is why you need to authenticate. This video snippet was old so way out of context. Fauci was saying they need to make sure ADE doesn’t happen before the rollout.

Now, is it happening w Omicron? We’ll see.

Grace Kelly wrote:

And it was removed, but loving this idea of "free speech." You are free to post false and harmful information. I'm not free to call you what you are, Interesting. What's more harmful mods? Me calling him a name or him trying to sell people on a drug that does not do what he claims it does?

BTW Carmine, the opposite of truth is NOT a viewpoint. The opposite of facts is NOT a viewpoint.

I don't wanna hear anybody talk about supporting or wanting free speech on this board. The mods are incredibly biased and they show their true colors all over the forum. Pick and choose when to enforce their "rules" and spout off about how they want "free speech" while censoring or deleting viewpoints that don't match their agendas or beliefs.

When we post anything here, we play by the rules of the BroJos. They own the place. There is also freedom of assembly. Anyone can stay OR leave, as they wish.

let's think wrote:

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1470455120513142792

Appears this is a snippet from an old interview. Twitter sucks.

+1

Moderation on these forums is completely laughable. The blatant bias and preference for antivaxxer garbage misinformation and lies, as well as the numerous right winger troll threads complaining about masks 5+ times a day, is hilarious. What’s even funnier is that these threads almost invariably are far more offensive and disgusting in the discussion they generate than threads that point to actual facts (at least on COVID) and have opposing viewpoints

The free speech schtick is such hilariously nauseating BS; they’re only for it when it confirms their beliefs or fits with their biases

Covidiocy wrote:

let's think wrote:

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1470455120513142792

Appears this is a snippet from an old interview. Twitter sucks.

Unlike this deep fake, this is not BS. And it’s important. Someone should tell the CDC & NIH and the state of CA:

Covidiocy wrote:

let's think wrote:

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1470455120513142792

Appears this is a snippet from an old interview. Twitter sucks.

For anyone interested, the clip is take from a video conference between Zuckerberg and Fauci in March of 2020 about the outlook for Covid. The context of the clip in question is the necessity of phase 3 trial completion for a vaccine before a general rollout, a statement that was made days after the start of phase 1 trials.

Full video is available at following link with the exchange leading to the clip in question starting at about the 24 minute mark:

While on my hike this morning, I realized that the ban on Ivermectin was a fait accompli. While I believe it should be available for off-label use, it isn't and that is that. It's not constructive to get upset over things I can't control. It's not productive to debate it further. It's just a game of gotcha with no productive outcome.

Instead, I suggest that we focus on what we can control. I'm not vaccinated, but I could change that position overnight. I have the ability to control that one decision.

I really hope that my concerns about long-term adverse effects are unwarranted. I have a sinking feeling that they will not be unwarranted. We shall see.

fisky wrote:

While on my hike this morning, I realized that the ban on Ivermectin was a fait accompli. While I believe it should be available for off-label use, it isn't and that is that. It's not constructive to get upset over things I can't control. It's not productive to debate it further. It's just a game of gotcha with no productive outcome.

Instead, I suggest that we focus on what we can control. I'm not vaccinated, but I could change that position overnight. I have the ability to control that one decision.

I really hope that my concerns about long-term adverse effects are unwarranted. I have a sinking feeling that they will not be unwarranted. We shall see.

I agree with you.

It wasn't a fait accompli. A cheap, widely-available drug makes it really easy for doctors anywhere to carefully test its effectiveness against Covid. It also makes it easy to do sloppy tests. But people have done careful tests, and there's no evidence for any effect from IVM. It's a great anti-parasitic drug, but it has no effect on Covid, unless you're suffering from parasites.

Here's why I think your concerns about long-term adverse effects of vaccination are unwarranted.

Injecting someone with a vaccine doesn't start a kitchen timer in their cells set for 20 years in the future. Instead, it sets off a series of actions and consequences that will go more quickly in some people, more slowly in others. The delay between vaccination and a potential adverse effect will probably be distributed like a bell curve. So if there's something that hits most people 5 years out, it will hit a smaller group 1 year out.

There were a lot of people in the original trials, and we've administered billions of shots since then. That's enough so that if there were long-term adverse effects, we should see something in some group of people at this point. It's just not there.

It's not a 100% certainty, but the farther we get into this, the more and more likely it becomes.

Covidiocy wrote:

Covidiocy wrote:

Appears this is a snippet from an old interview. Twitter sucks.

Unlike this deep fake, this is not BS. And it’s important. Someone should tell the CDC & NIH and the state of CA:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.06.471446v1

Well it’s hardly a paper gotta say… but, it confirms that T cell reactivity is likely intact against the Omicron spike protein and thus the vaccines and prior infection should maintain strong efficacy against severe disease and death. It’s a good thing.

2600 bro wrote:

Covidiocy wrote:

Unlike this deep fake, this is not BS. And it’s important. Someone should tell the CDC & NIH and the state of CA:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.06.471446v1

Well it’s hardly a paper gotta say… but, it confirms that T cell reactivity is likely intact against the Omicron spike protein and thus the vaccines and prior infection should maintain strong efficacy against severe disease and death. It’s a good thing.

This is very good news. I was concerned with how poor 2-doses or prior infection was in antibody neutralization assays, but the broader recognition space of T-cell-mediated immunity will likely save the day here.

The key, of course, is still to get boosted if on 2 doses, or vaccinated even if you have already been infected. Neither 2 doses nor prior infection is looking great against Omicron.

COVID vaccines estimated to have saved 1 million lives in the US alone:

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2021/dec/us-covid-19-vaccination-program-one-year-how-many-deaths-and

This is what antivaxxers are upset about?

Harambe wrote:

2600 bro wrote:

Well it’s hardly a paper gotta say… but, it confirms that T cell reactivity is likely intact against the Omicron spike protein and thus the vaccines and prior infection should maintain strong efficacy against severe disease and death. It’s a good thing.

This is very good news. I was concerned with how poor 2-doses or prior infection was in antibody neutralization assays, but the broader recognition space of T-cell-mediated immunity will likely save the day here.

The key, of course, is still to get boosted if on 2 doses, or vaccinated even if you have already been infected. Neither 2 doses nor prior infection is looking great against Omicron.

You are far too focused on antibodies. Humoral, cell-mediated, and, even, cognate immunity is broad and complex. 2600 is correct, this is hardly a paper yet, and it is hardly definitive for vaccinees.

“There are several limitations for this analysis. The results are based on a relatively small samples size of individuals who were all from the United States. Additionally, we examined the CD8+ T-cell responses in previously infected but not vaccinated individuals, and it is possible that the T-cell responses in this later group are more limited and therefore more susceptible to escape. However, work examining T-cell responses from vaccinees has demonstrated a strong CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses in these individuals, suggesting that similar trends should be seen in this population as well[2,10].”

Very true. Those with infection only have seen only a single challenge of antigen. Thus we have some reason to believe the breadth of their T cell response may be weaker and thus more susceptible to new variants. I.e. omicron.

It’s extremely important for the prior infected to get vaccinated as it’s clear their are not protected against infection, if not worse, from Omicron.

Grace Kelly wrote:

Grace Kelly wrote:

By the way, personal attacks are against Message Board policy. You have been reported. We need a higher level of civility on this board.

Did you stay on your high horse enough to report the hundreds of other posts in which people who share your viewpoint name-called? If you are calling for a higher level of civility, shouldn't that be from everyone? Or are you only interested when it self-serves?

'The rantings of a crazy old man. Except this time there are people who believe the BS you keep posting.'

Come on. Grace ought to be able to say that without being reported.

[quote]Grace Kelly wrote:

ods? Me calling him a name or him trying to sell people on a drug that does not do what he claims it does?

BTW Carmine, the opposite of truth is NOT a viewpoint. The opposite of facts is NOT a viewpoint.

Now Grace calls his/her viewpoint the truth! Like Fauci is science I guess.

Boosting is generally though to be required for long-term, durable T cell response, usually with a significant time delay between vaccinations (months, not weeks).

I wouldn't be surprised if boosted people (3 dose vax, vaccine + infection, or infection + vaccine) see a remarkably robust T cell response for years to come.

On a board full of runners, why is anyone concerned about Covid ?

************

Dariush Mozaffarian, dean of the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, and a cardiologist, knew the United States was in trouble. He has spent a career watching Americans gain weight — nearly three quarters of us are now overweight or obese — and he knew that we needed to eat more unprocessed foods, and exercise regularly.

But his message mostly went unheard.

In fact, his own recent research, he says, suggests that “64% of all the hospitalizations from COVID could have been prevented, if we had a metabolically healthy population, without the rates of obesity and diabetes and hypertension that we have now.”

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/11/21/business/obesity-pandemic-has-made-covid-much-more-deadly/