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.
How about you? Unwilling to comment on how many you have taken and how many more you are willing to take?
In the US after May 11, bring up this subject and the reply from the multi-vaxxed will be that Covid is over and it's time to move on.
Billions of people all over the world are looking for any excuse to ignore the fact they made a bad decision.
Really? I took 3 doses. Didn’t take the bivalent because I didn’t see Omicron as enough of a risk. For some people, it definitely is. Don’t regret it. Wasn’t a bad decision. The pandemic phase ended, so there’s no need for ‘emergency status’. That has nothing to do with my decision to get vaccinated or not. I ridiculed pseudoscience posts (that would make any second year medical student laugh at their absurdity) and a paranoid ‘insurance fraud’ post that listed nonexistent medical diagnoses as a source of a ‘gravy train’ for doctors. Both of those were hilarious in how detached from reality they were, and showed that neither of you have a remote understanding of the medical field or biology.
People like me contribute strongly to herd immunity, and that just chaps your hide. I’m not sure why.
You do contribute to herd immunity - congrats! You’d be lower risk if you got vaccinated though. I don’t loathe people who choose not to vaccinate for COVID. I just think it’s a poor decision. I do get enjoyably incensed at people who misrepresent data, make post-hoc claims to support their poor vaccination decisions, and claim other general BS about COVID.
Why is it a poor decision? Early 50s, fit, Caucasian male, no comorbidities, rarely get sick. Exercise, eat well, take appropriate supplements. Sure, the “published” statistics show a slightly higher risk at my age, but relative to who? A fit 20 year old? An obese, diabetic, African-American 50+ year old? I made what I considered to be a low risk decision, took some easy supplements that I knew would mollify my symptoms and disease course, and quarantined and masked appropriately.
As far as creating a RCT, you’re deliberately missing the point. There were doctors using whatever antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and and anti-thrombotic protocol they could get their hands on and that made sense to mitigate the disease and save lives, both in the risky cohorts pre-vaccine and after for those who refused vaccination. There wasn’t time to run a RCT and they weren’t going to submit to the conventional hospital protocol of “Run, death is near,” uselessly administered during week two. I’m not talking about chiropractors or DOs. I’m talking about MDs. MDs who wanted to keep patients out of the hospital to begin with. Heroes frankly.
Yes, I do contribute strongly to herd immunity, and so do many like me. It defies fundamental immunology to assert the vaccine provides better, overall adaptive immunity.
In the US after May 11, bring up this subject and the reply from the multi-vaxxed will be that Covid is over and it's time to move on.
Billions of people all over the world are looking for any excuse to ignore the fact they made a bad decision.
Really? I took 3 doses. Didn’t take the bivalent because I didn’t see Omicron as enough of a risk. For some people, it definitely is. Don’t regret it. Wasn’t a bad decision. The pandemic phase ended, so there’s no need for ‘emergency status’. That has nothing to do with my decision to get vaccinated or not. I ridiculed pseudoscience posts (that would make any second year medical student laugh at their absurdity) and a paranoid ‘insurance fraud’ post that listed nonexistent medical diagnoses as a source of a ‘gravy train’ for doctors. Both of those were hilarious in how detached from reality they were, and showed that neither of you have a remote understanding of the medical field or biology.
Well I took zero doses and am fine while you have three doses of that stuff in you that could cause problems down the road. Often takes years. Why don't you regret it? It is now acknowledged that it does not prevent you from getting or transmitting it in direct contradiction of what they were saying initially. You seem to believe we should listen to the establishment and not think for ourselves. Why? They have been shown to be liars and criminals
Really? I took 3 doses. Didn’t take the bivalent because I didn’t see Omicron as enough of a risk. For some people, it definitely is. Don’t regret it. Wasn’t a bad decision. The pandemic phase ended, so there’s no need for ‘emergency status’. That has nothing to do with my decision to get vaccinated or not. I ridiculed pseudoscience posts (that would make any second year medical student laugh at their absurdity) and a paranoid ‘insurance fraud’ post that listed nonexistent medical diagnoses as a source of a ‘gravy train’ for doctors. Both of those were hilarious in how detached from reality they were, and showed that neither of you have a remote understanding of the medical field or biology.
Well I took zero doses and am fine while you have three doses of that stuff in you that could cause problems down the road. Often takes years. Why don't you regret it? It is now acknowledged that it does not prevent you from getting or transmitting it in direct contradiction of what they were saying initially. You seem to believe we should listen to the establishment and not think for ourselves. Why? They have been shown to be liars and criminals
Really? I took 3 doses. Didn’t take the bivalent because I didn’t see Omicron as enough of a risk. For some people, it definitely is. Don’t regret it. Wasn’t a bad decision. The pandemic phase ended, so there’s no need for ‘emergency status’. That has nothing to do with my decision to get vaccinated or not. I ridiculed pseudoscience posts (that would make any second year medical student laugh at their absurdity) and a paranoid ‘insurance fraud’ post that listed nonexistent medical diagnoses as a source of a ‘gravy train’ for doctors. Both of those were hilarious in how detached from reality they were, and showed that neither of you have a remote understanding of the medical field or biology.
Well I took zero doses and am fine while you have three doses of that stuff in you that could cause problems down the road. Often takes years. Why don't you regret it? It is now acknowledged that it does not prevent you from getting or transmitting it in direct contradiction of what they were saying initially. You seem to believe we should listen to the establishment and not think for ourselves. Why? They have been shown to be liars and criminals
mRNA has a half life of hours, and degrades in the body within a few days. All the spike protein it produces is removed by the immune response it generates within a couple of weeks. Even the antibodies they produce are short-lived (months)… which is a valid criticism of the vaccine. (It doesn’t generate lifelong immunity). I don’t have to ‘believe’ any ‘establishment’. We did our own research on it (and I don’t mean ‘googled it’). I’m sure those real scary side effects that ‘often take years’ are going to haunt me ANY MINUTE NOW.
There are very few infections or vaccines that produce lifelong, sterilizing immunity. You wouldn’t understand that statement, or the implications of it. So it’s not ‘we now know that it doesn’t prevent transmission’ we always knew that. At least those of us who know enough about biology to understand that an airborne infectious agent, once inhaled, can actually go to the lung.
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
You do contribute to herd immunity - congrats! You’d be lower risk if you got vaccinated though. I don’t loathe people who choose not to vaccinate for COVID. I just think it’s a poor decision. I do get enjoyably incensed at people who misrepresent data, make post-hoc claims to support their poor vaccination decisions, and claim other general BS about COVID.
Why is it a poor decision? Early 50s, fit, Caucasian male, no comorbidities, rarely get sick. Exercise, eat well, take appropriate supplements. Sure, the “published” statistics show a slightly higher risk at my age, but relative to who? A fit 20 year old? An obese, diabetic, African-American 50+ year old? I made what I considered to be a low risk decision, took some easy supplements that I knew would mollify my symptoms and disease course, and quarantined and masked appropriately.
As far as creating a RCT, you’re deliberately missing the point. There were doctors using whatever antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and and anti-thrombotic protocol they could get their hands on and that made sense to mitigate the disease and save lives, both in the risky cohorts pre-vaccine and after for those who refused vaccination. There wasn’t time to run a RCT and they weren’t going to submit to the conventional hospital protocol of “Run, death is near,” uselessly administered during week two. I’m not talking about chiropractors or DOs. I’m talking about MDs. MDs who wanted to keep patients out of the hospital to begin with. Heroes frankly.
Yes, I do contribute strongly to herd immunity, and so do many like me. It defies fundamental immunology to assert the vaccine provides better, overall adaptive immunity.
1) “poor” means counter to the risk:benefit analysis. You’re welcome to willingly disregard that but don’t try and claim it’s rational. No one can actually precisely assess their individual risk! We don’t have data for every possible variable, so the classic stance of “for ME the risk was low” just seems like a big leap. Again, you’re welcome to make these choices. I’m welcome to call them poor. Whatever. 2) We have the time space and money to run the ideal RCT now - what would you do? Convince me. I’m open minded. Let’s be rigorous. 3) Absurdly wrong. Many vaccines cover better immunity than infections. Infections can be too weak to stimulate immunity. Vaccines can be extra-immunostimulatory. Vaccines can present the most immunoreactive antigens that might be sparse or poorly presented when occurring through infection. Vaccines can be given as boosters (re-exposure is key to developing a persistent response). Vaccines can be better directed towards cell-type specific responses. You get a better clonal breadth of antibodies and T cells from infection but that can cause WORSE durability if poor clones get enriched from it. But yes sometimes it’s better. You’ve been stuck on this for years and it’s wrong. Obviously an infection driven immunization strategy is stupid as it costs millions of lives.
Well I took zero doses and am fine while you have three doses of that stuff in you that could cause problems down the road. Often takes years. Why don't you regret it? It is now acknowledged that it does not prevent you from getting or transmitting it in direct contradiction of what they were saying initially. You seem to believe we should listen to the establishment and not think for ourselves. Why? They have been shown to be liars and criminals
mRNA has a half life of hours, and degrades in the body within a few days. All the spike protein it produces is removed by the immune response it generates within a couple of weeks. Even the antibodies they produce are short-lived (months)… which is a valid criticism of the vaccine. (It doesn’t generate lifelong immunity). I don’t have to ‘believe’ any ‘establishment’. We did our own research on it (and I don’t mean ‘googled it’). There are very few infections or vaccines that produce lifelong, sterilizing immunity. You wouldn’t understand that statement, or the implications of it. So it’s not ‘we now know that it doesn’t prevent transmission’ we always knew that. At least those of us who know enough about biology to understand that an airborne infectious agent, once inhaled, can actually go to the lung.
The “long term effects without acute damage” bogeyman is the only they have to hope for still. Safety signals aren’t here after 2 years for long term damage, it’s simply not plausible they’d magically appear after > 2 years… but gotta keep the grift going.
Fueled by free doughnuts, Joe Caramagna is on a mission to encourage vaccinations, raise money for charity and satisfy his sweet tooth all at the same time.
mRNA has a half life of hours, and degrades in the body within a few days. All the spike protein it produces is removed by the immune response it generates within a couple of weeks. Even the antibodies they produce are short-lived (months)… which is a valid criticism of the vaccine. (It doesn’t generate lifelong immunity). I don’t have to ‘believe’ any ‘establishment’. We did our own research on it (and I don’t mean ‘googled it’). There are very few infections or vaccines that produce lifelong, sterilizing immunity. You wouldn’t understand that statement, or the implications of it. So it’s not ‘we now know that it doesn’t prevent transmission’ we always knew that. At least those of us who know enough about biology to understand that an airborne infectious agent, once inhaled, can actually go to the lung.
The “long term effects without acute damage” bogeyman is the only they have to hope for still. Safety signals aren’t here after 2 years for long term damage, it’s simply not plausible they’d magically appear after > 2 years… but gotta keep the grift going.
Darvon was on the market for 53 years.
FIFTY-THREE ꞘǓ₵ĶINĜ YEARS, GENIUS.
Vax mob mafia, go to hell. Every last one of you.
"Looking more closely at the history of this drug, it is quite surprising that it took 53 years to remove it from the market despite a number of reports, case studies, and research reporting its dangers. The first report that the drug produced physical dependence was published by Fraser and Isbell in 1960 (Claghorn and Schoolar, 1966)."
The “long term effects without acute damage” bogeyman is the only they have to hope for still. Safety signals aren’t here after 2 years for long term damage, it’s simply not plausible they’d magically appear after > 2 years… but gotta keep the grift going.
Darvon was on the market for 53 years.
FIFTY-THREE ꞘǓ₵ĶINĜ YEARS, GENIUS.
Vax mob mafia, go to hell. Every last one of you.
"Looking more closely at the history of this drug, it is quite surprising that it took 53 years to remove it from the market despite a number of reports, case studies, and research reporting its dangers. The first report that the drug produced physical dependence was published by Fraser and Isbell in 1960 (Claghorn and Schoolar, 1966)."
Thanks for proving my point! Dextropropoxyphene opoid toxicity comes from acute overdoses not magically hidden invisible damage that appears spontaneously years later.
Let me know when you find evidence of vaccine overdoses LOL!
Why is it a poor decision? Early 50s, fit, Caucasian male, no comorbidities, rarely get sick. Exercise, eat well, take appropriate supplements. Sure, the “published” statistics show a slightly higher risk at my age, but relative to who? A fit 20 year old? An obese, diabetic, African-American 50+ year old? I made what I considered to be a low risk decision, took some easy supplements that I knew would mollify my symptoms and disease course, and quarantined and masked appropriately.
As far as creating a RCT, you’re deliberately missing the point. There were doctors using whatever antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and and anti-thrombotic protocol they could get their hands on and that made sense to mitigate the disease and save lives, both in the risky cohorts pre-vaccine and after for those who refused vaccination. There wasn’t time to run a RCT and they weren’t going to submit to the conventional hospital protocol of “Run, death is near,” uselessly administered during week two. I’m not talking about chiropractors or DOs. I’m talking about MDs. MDs who wanted to keep patients out of the hospital to begin with. Heroes frankly.
Yes, I do contribute strongly to herd immunity, and so do many like me. It defies fundamental immunology to assert the vaccine provides better, overall adaptive immunity.
1) “poor” means counter to the risk:benefit analysis. You’re welcome to willingly disregard that but don’t try and claim it’s rational. No one can actually precisely assess their individual risk! We don’t have data for every possible variable, so the classic stance of “for ME the risk was low” just seems like a big leap. Again, you’re welcome to make these choices. I’m welcome to call them poor. Whatever. 2) We have the time space and money to run the ideal RCT now - what would you do? Convince me. I’m open minded. Let’s be rigorous. 3) Absurdly wrong. Many vaccines cover better immunity than infections. Infections can be too weak to stimulate immunity. Vaccines can be extra-immunostimulatory. Vaccines can present the most immunoreactive antigens that might be sparse or poorly presented when occurring through infection. Vaccines can be given as boosters (re-exposure is key to developing a persistent response). Vaccines can be better directed towards cell-type specific responses. You get a better clonal breadth of antibodies and T cells from infection but that can cause WORSE durability if poor clones get enriched from it. But yes sometimes it’s better. You’ve been stuck on this for years and it’s wrong. Obviously an infection driven immunization strategy is stupid as it costs millions of lives.
Ok,
1.) Fair enough we cannot precisely know all the variables and our individual risk assessments, but I just simply disagree. Especially when it came to a novel vaccine platform focused on a very specific, “mostly conserved” super-antigen. The data may say it looks slightly better now than strict convalescence, but we did not know that at the time. If we were talking about obviously high risk cohorts, then we would be in agreement.
2.) It’s too late to do this frankly. That’s kind of the point I’m making. Covid is over. It was with Omicron. Amazing Japan had an awful fifth wave of it. Kind of curious.
3.) Ok, we speak the same language. Yes, sometimes vaccines actually are better. That’s not the argument, at least not my argument. Other than a couple of papers, we don’t really know when it comes to this mRNA SARS-Cov2 platform. You are right about clonal expansion and the possibility of diluting the response. But very narrow antigenic vaccines risk greater antigenic sin. I believe that’s why the bivalent is really bad, for efficacy and durability. I know there’s one paper trying to suggest antigenic sin is worse with natural infection for this virus, but I remain unconvinced. It’s not compelling data.
Not once have I ever suggested an infection driven immunization strategy for the entire, broad population. That wasn’t my position. There was always room for nuance. I do believe hybrid immunity is the best immunity for most folks, with the booster coming second. But also not strictly necessary except in some folks.
Enough said. Objectively a mathematically incorrect decision. There's a reason you were eligible for the vax on like Feb 1 2021.
The vaccine does provide better immunity – especially breadth. As the papers have shown (and you agreed), infection with COVID impairs a durable T-cell response.
Viruses have often evolved immunosuppressive qualities because they increase spread. It is not surprising that delivering the most potent and effective antigen (spike proteins) without the rest of the virus can avoid this immunosuppression and mount a better immune response.
"Looking more closely at the history of this drug, it is quite surprising that it took 53 years to remove it from the market despite a number of reports, case studies, and research reporting its dangers. The first report that the drug produced physical dependence was published by Fraser and Isbell in 1960 (Claghorn and Schoolar, 1966)."
Thanks for proving my point! Dextropropoxyphene opoid toxicity comes from acute overdoses not magically hidden invisible damage that appears spontaneously years later.
Let me know when you find evidence of vaccine overdoses LOL!
That german dude took like 98 vaccines and is fine. Disproves Dan's logic!
Enough said. Objectively a mathematically incorrect decision. There's a reason you were eligible for the vax on like Feb 1 2021.
The vaccine does provide better immunity – especially breadth. As the papers have shown (and you agreed), infection with COVID impairs a durable T-cell response.
Viruses have often evolved immunosuppressive qualities because they increase spread. It is not surprising that delivering the most potent and effective antigen (spike proteins) without the rest of the virus can avoid this immunosuppression and mount a better immune response.
Now THAT's fundamental immunology!
Fyi, killing the host is not a good evolutionary survival strategy. But Omicron was the very best vaccine of all! Unless you were a heavily vaccinated nation like Japan and then Omicron became quite a killing machine until it knocked off all the weak.
Omicron ended Covid. I wonder if it evolved from an unvaccinated person?
Enough said. Objectively a mathematically incorrect decision. There's a reason you were eligible for the vax on like Feb 1 2021.
The vaccine does provide better immunity – especially breadth. As the papers have shown (and you agreed), infection with COVID impairs a durable T-cell response.
Viruses have often evolved immunosuppressive qualities because they increase spread. It is not surprising that delivering the most potent and effective antigen (spike proteins) without the rest of the virus can avoid this immunosuppression and mount a better immune response.
Now THAT's fundamental immunology!
Fyi, killing the host is not a good evolutionary survival strategy. But Omicron was the very best vaccine of all! Unless you were a heavily vaccinated nation like Japan and then Omicron became quite a killing machine until it knocked off all the weak.
Omicron ended Covid. I wonder if it evolved from an unvaccinated person?
Long way between killing the host and mounting a full immune response. The point is that your “fundamental immunology” ignores, uh, very fundamental ideas about immunology! Shallow.
(Japan is currently at 1/5 the deaths/cap of the USA with a very old population. Vaccination accounts for much of that difference along with better containment measures.)
Omicron ended COVID after killing tens of thousands more antivaxxers and slaughtering any remaining arguments you had. What a win.
