This thread was deleted by a volunteer moderator. I certainly don't want a thread this big deleted so I've restored. THat being said, this thread has served it's purpose. I've closed it to new posts.
We have a new 2024 vaccine thread here. New people don't need to try to wade through 20,000 posts to figure out what is going on.
look, nobody intends to convince you or thinks they ever could.
what we 'anti-vaxxers' can do is highlight the increasing avalanche of evidence and help sway minds in the middle. You either can't see the writing on the wall or choose not to look.
Do realize that Twitter is blowing the lid on a lot of this because the censored are no longer censored. It's coming into the media, slowly but surely, govts and people across the world are opening the can of worms...
but hey I get it, you've invested so many hours, so much of your identify into this, so of course you can't change course now lol
go down with the titanic all you want, keep injecting yourself, what do I care?
Just don't be surprised with what happens
A list of patents, bro. You wanna tell me what that proves? Are you a patent attorney? Wanna school me in the novelty and non-obviousness?
Banal arguments are refuted by banal responses. Malone is a grifter crybaby.
Topol is all over the place sometimes, but his assessment of the Bivalent booster matches mine. It's a big advance for severe disease -- mild disease is limited (but, hey, we don't care about that, do we?)
Topol is all over the place sometimes, but his assessment of the Bivalent booster matches mine. It's a big advance for severe disease -- mild disease is limited (but, hey, we don't care about that, do we?)
Nope, we don’t. Nor does your recently and oft-cited Offit:
“But COVID-19, and the population’s ability to combat it, has changed since then. For one, the variant of the virus now infecting people—XBB.1.5—is different from the original. Through a combination of the fact that many people now have higher levels of protection from vaccines or having recovered from infections, and the fact that the Omicron variants as a group, BA.4/5 and XBB.1.5 included, do not seem to cause serious disease in most healthy people, the job of booster doses has also evolved. Now, boosting everyone with an Omicron shot is “trying to prevent, in otherwise healthy people, mild illness for a few months,” says Offit, until the next variant comes along to replace it. “That doesn’t make sense.”
“It was reasonable to think that a bivalent booster targeting BA.4/5 would produce more robust levels of antibodies against BA.4/5, but it turns out that’s not necessarily the case, and that the protection is only slightly better when compared to the original booster. “[The bivalent booster] was sold as better, and better at preventing mild disease and transmission,” says Offit, “when there was no evidence for that.”
Also, Topol is just a man trying to stay relevant and justify his existence and funding. A total alarmist.
Topol is all over the place sometimes, but his assessment of the Bivalent booster matches mine. It's a big advance for severe disease -- mild disease is limited (but, hey, we don't care about that, do we?)
The focus is on 65+. That’s where the primary benefit is observed. That is a different cohort than most demographics and more prone to comorbidities. So this is risk stratification. As it should be.
Topol is all over the place sometimes, but his assessment of the Bivalent booster matches mine. It's a big advance for severe disease -- mild disease is limited (but, hey, we don't care about that, do we?)
Nope, we don’t. Nor does your recently and oft-cited Offit:
“But COVID-19, and the population’s ability to combat it, has changed since then. For one, the variant of the virus now infecting people—XBB.1.5—is different from the original. Through a combination of the fact that many people now have higher levels of protection from vaccines or having recovered from infections, and the fact that the Omicron variants as a group, BA.4/5 and XBB.1.5 included, do not seem to cause serious disease in most healthy people, the job of booster doses has also evolved. Now, boosting everyone with an Omicron shot is “trying to prevent, in otherwise healthy people, mild illness for a few months,” says Offit, until the next variant comes along to replace it. “That doesn’t make sense.”
“It was reasonable to think that a bivalent booster targeting BA.4/5 would produce more robust levels of antibodies against BA.4/5, but it turns out that’s not necessarily the case, and that the protection is only slightly better when compared to the original booster. “[The bivalent booster] was sold as better, and better at preventing mild disease and transmission,” says Offit, “when there was no evidence for that.”
Also, Topol is just a man trying to stay relevant and justify his existence and funding. A total alarmist.
So if we don't care about mild disease then...
The vaccines were indisputably the greatest public health intervention of the last 50 years.
20 million lives saved. You can't argue with that.
Also P.S. attack Topol all you want but you can't attach the obvious data showing the boosters benefit.
Topol is all over the place sometimes, but his assessment of the Bivalent booster matches mine. It's a big advance for severe disease -- mild disease is limited (but, hey, we don't care about that, do we?)
The focus is on 65+. That’s where the primary benefit is observed. That is a different cohort than most demographics and more prone to comorbidities. So this is risk stratification. As it should be.
No, the benefit against severe disease is seen across all age cohorts. It even reversed the 'died suddenly' cardiac deaths that COVID was causing in younger populations.
It's the beginning and the end. The anecdote and the RCT. All is one. Breathe.
Nope, we don’t. Nor does your recently and oft-cited Offit:
“But COVID-19, and the population’s ability to combat it, has changed since then. For one, the variant of the virus now infecting people—XBB.1.5—is different from the original. Through a combination of the fact that many people now have higher levels of protection from vaccines or having recovered from infections, and the fact that the Omicron variants as a group, BA.4/5 and XBB.1.5 included, do not seem to cause serious disease in most healthy people, the job of booster doses has also evolved. Now, boosting everyone with an Omicron shot is “trying to prevent, in otherwise healthy people, mild illness for a few months,” says Offit, until the next variant comes along to replace it. “That doesn’t make sense.”
“It was reasonable to think that a bivalent booster targeting BA.4/5 would produce more robust levels of antibodies against BA.4/5, but it turns out that’s not necessarily the case, and that the protection is only slightly better when compared to the original booster. “[The bivalent booster] was sold as better, and better at preventing mild disease and transmission,” says Offit, “when there was no evidence for that.”
Also, Topol is just a man trying to stay relevant and justify his existence and funding. A total alarmist.
So if we don't care about mild disease then...
The vaccines were indisputably the greatest public health intervention of the last 50 years.
20 million lives saved. You can't argue with that.
Also P.S. attack Topol all you want but you can't attach the obvious data showing the boosters benefit.
Not a good night for ya
Yeah, I simply don’t agree. They were unnecessary for a great many people. That’s the entire point. The benefit of the bivalent is marginal. That’s not nothing but it’s not a panacea as Topol himself says. Not a sustainable paradigm. And we really are targeting the highest risk groups with this minutiae of positive benefit. There’s never been an argument from me there. Me thinks you are overplaying your hand, as usual.
The vaccines were indisputably the greatest public health intervention of the last 50 years.
20 million lives saved. You can't argue with that.
Also P.S. attack Topol all you want but you can't attach the obvious data showing the boosters benefit.
Not a good night for ya
Yeah, I simply don’t agree. They were unnecessary for a great many people. That’s the entire point. The benefit of the bivalent is marginal. That’s not nothing but it’s not a panacea as Topol himself says. Not a sustainable paradigm. And we really are targeting the highest risk groups with this minutiae of positive benefit. There’s never been an argument from me there. Me thinks you are overplaying your hand, as usual.
You said the vaccines were 'terrible.'
That is an indefensible position if you 'don't care about mild disease.'
The protection against severe disease has been repeatedly proven for 2 years across many different circulating strains. It's one of the things nobody argues about.
Characterizing 20 million lives saved as 'minutiae of positive benefit' is laughable. Even for the booster the benefits against severe disease are already clear. You're losing the plot..
Yeah, I simply don’t agree. They were unnecessary for a great many people. That’s the entire point. The benefit of the bivalent is marginal. That’s not nothing but it’s not a panacea as Topol himself says. Not a sustainable paradigm. And we really are targeting the highest risk groups with this minutiae of positive benefit. There’s never been an argument from me there. Me thinks you are overplaying your hand, as usual.
You said the vaccines were 'terrible.'
That is an indefensible position if you 'don't care about mild disease.'
The protection against severe disease has been repeatedly proven for 2 years across many different circulating strains. It's one of the things nobody argues about.
Characterizing 20 million lives saved as 'minutiae of positive benefit' is laughable. Even for the booster the benefits against severe disease are already clear. You're losing the plot..
In reference to Topol’s opinion, which you are staking your credibility on, the minutia of positive benefit comment was relative to the 65+ cohort, which he focuses heavily on here and where the primary benefit is seen. The boost is terrible is relative to the fact that we are seeing a durability of response for 3-4 months tops. Nobody thinks that’s acceptable, hence your Marks paper about Huey Lewis’s “We need a new drug.” Again, mastering the obvious.
"But we can know after the fact if someone was susceptible so we simply can teleport back in time to administer the vaccine. Therefore the vaccine is terrible."
That is an indefensible position if you 'don't care about mild disease.'
The protection against severe disease has been repeatedly proven for 2 years across many different circulating strains. It's one of the things nobody argues about.
Characterizing 20 million lives saved as 'minutiae of positive benefit' is laughable. Even for the booster the benefits against severe disease are already clear. You're losing the plot..
In reference to Topol’s opinion, which you are staking your credibility on, the minutia of positive benefit comment was relative to the 65+ cohort, which he focuses heavily on here and where the primary benefit is seen. The boost is terrible is relative to the fact that we are seeing a durability of response for 3-4 months tops. Nobody thinks that’s acceptable, hence your Marks paper about Huey Lewis’s “We need a new drug.” Again, mastering the obvious.
Durability of response against mild disease. But we 'don't care about that.'
At worst the bivalent is the same as re-boosting after ~1 year with the WT vaccine. The improvement is already visible in CDC death and hospitalization data across all age cohorts.
FWIW I do agree we need better or improved vaccine modalities - we should strive for durable sterilizing immunity! We are in the era of modern biotech and modern vaccine tech. We can and should develop mRNA vaccines (and other types) to be far better than they are now.
That does not say anything about the efficacy and the risk:reward of the current vaccines and booster guidelines. Which are obvious and clearly good.
In reference to Topol’s opinion, which you are staking your credibility on, the minutia of positive benefit comment was relative to the 65+ cohort, which he focuses heavily on here and where the primary benefit is seen. The boost is terrible is relative to the fact that we are seeing a durability of response for 3-4 months tops. Nobody thinks that’s acceptable, hence your Marks paper about Huey Lewis’s “We need a new drug.” Again, mastering the obvious.
Durability of response against mild disease. But we 'don't care about that.'
At worst the bivalent is the same as re-boosting after ~1 year with the WT vaccine. The improvement is already visible in CDC death and hospitalization data across all age cohorts.
Consistency please.
Honestly I can’t figure out what Covidicy is arguing. The vaccines are terrible… but only against mild disease which no one cares about. The booster sucks except only the bivalent and uhhh I guess only against mild disease which no one cares about. And imprinting could be happening and dampening the response against mild disease… which no one cares about. So his major gripes are over things “no one cares about!” Im sense just general discontent search for a sensible reason lol.
A senior high school student at Amplus Academy in Las Vegas was found unresponsive in the school bathroom last week after suffering cardiac arrest for unknown reasons, according to his family. Jordan Brister, 18, passed away...
Tragedy struck the community of Huron, Ohio Sunday when a young child died unexpectedly. Shawnee Elementary School announced the death of Evelyn Bauer, a kindergarten student attending the school. In a release to the parents...
A mother in Draper, Utah broke her silence and revealed that her healthy son developed blood clots in his brain nine days after receiving the first dose of the experimental mRNA Covid vaccine. Nearly a year later, another blo...
During a COVID-19 EU hearing last October, Pfizer’s President of International Developed Markets, Janine Small, admitted that the vaccine had never been tested on its ability to prevent transmission, contrary to what was prev...
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
