The Other Covid Thread

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, John Madden said:

"[A]bout the same?" 

About the same as what other vaccines? 

"[P]retty normal?"

What other vaccines, once introduced, have required a booster that also leaked at this rate? 

I agree with you, and we do have common ground here, that the vaccine leaked. I do not know what quantifiable validity there is for this being about the same as other vaccines. Neither do I have the data to support that this is pretty normal in terms of efficacy, where other vaccines do not have this rate of infection and symptoms among those who received the vaccine. I repeat this here for emphasis - I do not have the data to refute or accept your conclusion. 

I don’t agree that it “leaked” and think using that word as a description is misleading.

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, rongo said:

The evolutionary likelihood tends towards more contagious and less lethal --- exactly what we're seeing with Omicron. It is far less likely that future mutations will lead to more lethal variants. 

This is the path to endemic, like other coronaviruses (colds) and the flu. Where we can stop fretting about positivity rate when symptoms are mild or absent (cf. MTC) and stop obsessing about constant testing.

That is the long term trend. It is not inevitable and we are still way too early in the process to heave a sigh of relief and say it is ending.

[The Nehor]

17 minutes ago, juliann said:

These are not leaky vaccines. Covid is. It's not so much about the leaky vaccine itself as it is about them eventually creating more serious viruses. 

Yeah, I was only using the term because I was quoting a post that used it. It is a terrible description.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Harry T. Clark said:

This is nonsense.  "Dangerous information" is simply going against the vaccine narrative promulgated by the pharmaceutical companies and some parrots on the internet.  Debating issues and not simply falling in line with authority is what science is all about.  The statement should actually be question the science, not trust the science, because science is never settled completely.  There are always questions to be explored.  The vaccines have proven ineffective against the latest iteration of sars-cov-2.  Maybe they need to be improved?  Is that possible?  Are they perfect?  Can we question their efficacy?  Maybe we need to have the internal fortitude to realize this and perhaps look at alternatives instead of just falling in line with authority because of fear?

Virtually all health organizations worldwide on both the national and international level are not “the pharmaceutical companies and some parrots on the internet”.

Science is not about debating. It is about data and evidence and rigor and repeatability and all that. Debate is pretty worthless.

The vaccines have not been proven ineffective against the latest iteration.. That is a lie. They have been less effective than everyone likes because everyone would love complete and utter immunity and no possibility of transmission when vaccinated but no one who knows anything about vaccines expected that to be the case.

“Maybe they need to be improved? Is that possible?”

BRILLIANT! Why did no one think of that? Oh right, everyone thought of that and there are dozens of organizations all over the world developing and testing vaccines to deal with new variants. Yes, it is possible but it is going to take time.

“Are they perfect?”

No, and they never will be.

“Can we question their efficacy?”

You can. You shouldn’t. Unless you have a lot of solid data backing it up. Spreading doubt about vaccines that work is not furthering debate and seeking truth. It is encouraging people to make dangerous decisions that could literally kill them.

“Maybe we need to have the internal fortitude to realize this and perhaps look at alternatives instead of just falling in line with authority because of fear?”

WHAT ALTERNATIVES? The medical research establishment of the entire world is out there testing and trying things left and right to find things that will treat and prevent the disease. There is no hidden cure or prophylactic being suppressed by anyone.

I also hate the fear argument. It is entirely emotional and suggests that it is brave to refuse the vaccine because why? The only reason I can think of is that the person is afraid to get it.

We should fear deadly diseases. It is healthy to do so.

Edited December 31, 2021 by The Nehor

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, John Madden said:

AMEN! 

I would add one thing to your list which is that the self-victimization is EXTREME! The failures of the vaccines are being blamed on the people whose personal decision it was to not get it. Huh? In what universe does that make any sense? Everyone now is a victim of what everyone else does. It gets exhausting. 

This universe. In this universe that makes perfect sense. It is not the failure of the vaccines that are being blamed. It is the lack of protection for everyone that being unvaccinated propagates to everyone. It is not a vaccine failure when the problem is caused by people not getting the vaccine.

What happened to you that you somehow believe that actions and decisions taken by people cannot have an impact on other people? Just because you call it a “personal decision” does not magically make it so that no matter what choice you make it will not impact others. Not getting vaccinated is prolonging the pandemic. It is killing people. Often the person who chose not to get vaccinated. Often it is another unvaccinated person and more rarely a vaccinated one.

So yes, i do feel like actions have consequences and that sometimes a lot of people suffer more because people make bad choices. 

[BRMC]

8 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This universe. In this universe that makes perfect sense. It is not the failure of the vaccines that are being blamed. It is the lack of protection for everyone that being unvaccinated propagates to everyone. It is not a vaccine failure when the problem is caused by people not getting the vaccine.

What happened to you that you somehow believe that actions and decisions taken by people cannot have an impact on other people? Just because you call it a “personal decision” does not magically make it so that no matter what choice you make it will not impact others. Not getting vaccinated is prolonging the pandemic. It is killing people. Often the person who chose not to get vaccinated. Often it is another unvaccinated person and more rarely a vaccinated one.

So yes, i do feel like actions have consequences and that sometimes a lot of people suffer more because people make bad choices. 

This argument just doesn't work when you consider the number of vaccinated people catching, and spreading, COVID.  In fact, they are theorizing the vaccinated people are spreading it faster due to their lack of symptoms and high viral loads.  It was reported yesterday that Germany (with a 71.1% vaccination rate) is showing 95.58% of its positive cases in vaccinated people.   The "you aren't vaccinated so it's your fault" canard has long since played out.

Edited December 31, 2021 by BRMC

[John Madden]

13 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This universe. In this universe that makes perfect sense. It is not the failure of the vaccines that are being blamed. It is the lack of protection for everyone that being unvaccinated propagates to everyone. It is not a vaccine failure when the problem is caused by people not getting the vaccine.

What happened to you that you somehow believe that actions and decisions taken by people cannot have an impact on other people? Just because you call it a “personal decision” does not magically make it so that no matter what choice you make it will not impact others. Not getting vaccinated is prolonging the pandemic. It is killing people. Often the person who chose not to get vaccinated. Often it is another unvaccinated person and more rarely a vaccinated one.

So yes, i do feel like actions have consequences and that sometimes a lot of people suffer more because people make bad choices. 

If you have facts to support this, let's talk. The logic here has been debunked by actual events in the actual universe. 

The reality is that people who are not vaccinated and have antibodies, are moving us toward normalcy not away from it. We may not agree with their decision, but we can't ignore reality. 

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, BRMC said:

This argument just doesn't work when you consider the number of vaccinated people catching, and spreading, COVID.  In fact, they are theorizing the vaccinated people are spreading it faster due to their lack of symptoms and high viral loads.  It was reported yesterday that Germany (with a 71.1% vaccination rate) is showing 95.58% of its positive cases in vaccinated people.   The "you aren't vaccinated so it's your fault" canard has long since played out.

I have not seen that statistic reported by any major news outlet. Not Fox, not CNN, not MSNBC. I am also not seeing it from reputable smaller organizations or the credible people I go to for Covid information. It is all over social media and some clickbait and propaganda sites that don’t have any journalistic ethics or fact-checkers or anything along those lines.

That is usually a sign that it is made up crap. It is a good method though. Hard to check unless you can read German.

Got anyone credible reporting that statistic? Basically, CFR

[BRMC]

Just now, The Nehor said:

I have not seen that statistic reported by any major news outlet. Not Fox, not CNN, not MSNBC. I am also not seeing it from reputable smaller organizations or the credible people I go to for Covid information. It is all over social media and some clickbait and propaganda sites that don’t have any journalistic ethics or fact-checkers or anything along those lines.

That is usually a sign that it is made up crap. It is a good method though. Hard to check unless you can read German.

Got anyone credible reporting that statistic? Basically, CFR

That's the problem with the politicization of COVID.  You don't get ALL the reporting.  You only get the reporting that fits the narrative.   Take the death of Tejada, for example.

Here's the thread, which contains the direct data sources if you scroll down enough.  Twitter Link  I posted another further up in the thread that suggested evidence and vaccine dependence through immune system damage due to the vaccine.   

[The Nehor]

35 minutes ago, John Madden said:

If you have facts to support this, let's talk. The logic here has been debunked by actual events in the actual universe. 

You are demanding facts backing the stance that decisions about vaccination can and often do have consequences for people other than the person choosing whether to get vaccinated?

Are you from some kind of alternate reality?

Would you also like some evidence backing the idea that getting hit by a car can injure or kill people? How about some backing the idea that being out in the sun too long with exposed skin can cause sunburn?

[The Nehor]

6 minutes ago, BRMC said:

That's the problem with the politicization of COVID.  You don't get ALL the reporting.  You only get the reporting that fits the narrative.   Take the death of Tejada, for example.

Here's the thread, which contains the direct data sources if you scroll down enough.  Twitter Link  I posted another further up in the thread that suggested evidence and vaccine dependence through immune system damage due to the vaccine.   

Disclose.tv? That is the most credible report you can find?

The chemtrail and UFO site?

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/disclose-tv/

Cool, I can safely ignore that statistic.

[BRMC]

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Disclose.tv? That is the most credible report you can find?

The chemtrail and UFO site?

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/disclose-tv/

Cool, I can safely ignore that statistic.

You safely ignored the source citation, too?  Gotcha.    Like I said, people love to confirm their bias.   https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Situationsberichte/Wochenbericht/Wochenbericht_2021-12-30.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

Edited December 31, 2021 by BRMC

[John Madden]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

You are demanding facts backing the stance that decisions about vaccination can and often do have consequences for people other than the person choosing whether to get vaccinated?

Are you from some kind of alternate reality?

Would you also like some evidence backing the idea that getting hit by a car can injure or kill people? How about some backing the idea that being out in the sun too long with exposed skin can cause sunburn?

No. Not an alternate universe nor any other twist. Neither am I asking for evidence about the consequences of a body taking the direct hit from a moving vehicle. I was not speaking in metaphors. 

As Dr. Robert Malone said, "First time in history that the ineffectiveness of a medicine is being blamed on those who haven't taken it."  You may discount Dr. Malone and you may discount those that consider his comments and experience. You may do so because of political ideology or another affiliation. 

The question and comments in this thread are logical and clear, not metaphorical. Do the vaccines prevent acquisition and transmission of the targeted virus? Over time, it has become clear that the answer to both, if considered uniquely, is no. Is it the fault of the nonimmunized that the vaccines are not preventing acquisition or transmission? I doubt it, but I am listening. If the virus morphs, but the vaccine is targeting the old strain, well, bummer for whoever has the virus with or without the vaccine. If the virus morphs because the vaccine leaked, lets discuss that too. But for hell sakes, lets not just pretend that all the rules of science and common sense and logic and reality no longer apply because a vaccine does not work. 

[The Nehor]

19 minutes ago, BRMC said:

You safely ignored the source citation, too?  Gotcha.    Like I said, people love to confirm their bias.   https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Situationsberichte/Wochenbericht/Wochenbericht_2021-12-30.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

I can’t read German and I doubt you can. 

[John Madden]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I don’t agree that it “leaked” and think using that word as a description is misleading.

With respect. Leaking is not just a term, it is a defined term and the use of it in this application is appropriate.

see quotes and links below. This research is from 2015, published and reviewed 4 years before this corona virus was discovered/created. 

The bottom line (my paraphrase): In a pandemic, a leaky vaccine MAY be worse than no vaccine. A vaccine that leaks and leads to an evolution, or morph, of the virus to a lethal form that can escape the vaccine MAY be worse than a form of the virus that naturally morphs to a form that does not kill the host as a survival evolution. The damn virus wants to live, and if it kills all the hosts, it does not live. If we intervene and make it morph into a form that escapes the target of the vaccine - be careful what you wish for. 

Quote

Could some vaccines drive the evolution of more virulent pathogens? Conventional wisdom is that natural selection will remove highly lethal pathogens if host death greatly reduces transmission. Vaccines that keep hosts alive but still allow transmission could thus allow very virulent strains to circulate in a population. Here we show experimentally that immunization of chickens against Marek's disease virus enhances the fitness of more virulent strains, making it possible for hyperpathogenic strains to transmit. Immunity elicited by direct vaccination or by maternal vaccination prolongs host survival but does not prevent infection, viral replication or transmission, thus extending the infectious periods of strains otherwise too lethal to persist. Our data show that anti-disease vaccines that do not prevent transmission can create conditions that promote the emergence of pathogen strains that cause more severe disease in unvaccinated hosts.

 

Quote

 

Author Summary

There is a theoretical expectation that some types of vaccines could prompt the evolution of more virulent (“hotter”) pathogens. This idea follows from the notion that natural selection removes pathogen strains that are so “hot” that they kill their hosts and, therefore, themselves. Vaccines that let the hosts survive but do not prevent the spread of the pathogen relax this selection, allowing the evolution of hotter pathogens to occur. This type of vaccine is often called a leaky vaccine. When vaccines prevent transmission, as is the case for nearly all vaccines used in humans, this type of evolution towards increased virulence is blocked. But when vaccines leak, allowing at least some pathogen transmission, they could create the ecological conditions that would allow hot strains to emerge and persist. This theory proved highly controversial when it was first proposed over a decade ago, but here we report experiments with Marek’s disease virus in poultry that show that modern commercial leaky vaccines can have precisely this effect: they allow the onward transmission of strains otherwise too lethal to persist. Thus, the use of leaky vaccines can facilitate the evolution of pathogen strains that put unvaccinated hosts at greater risk of severe disease. The future challenge is to identify whether there are other types of vaccines used in animals and humans that might also generate these evolutionary risks.

 

 

[BRMC]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I can’t read German and I doubt you can. 

Many things that you doubt, are in fact true.   You can lead a horse to water.....

[The Nehor]

13 minutes ago, John Madden said:

No. Not an alternate universe nor any other twist. Neither am I asking for evidence about the consequences of a body taking the direct hit from a moving vehicle. I was not speaking in metaphors. 

As Dr. Robert Malone said, "First time in history that the ineffectiveness of a medicine is being blamed on those who haven't taken it."  You may discount Dr. Malone and you may discount those that consider his comments and experience. You may do so because of political ideology or another affiliation. 

The question and comments in this thread are logical and clear, not metaphorical. Do the vaccines prevent acquisition and transmission of the targeted virus? Over time, it has become clear that the answer to both, if considered uniquely, is no. Is it the fault of the nonimmunized that the vaccines are not preventing acquisition or transmission? I doubt it, but I am listening. If the virus morphs, but the vaccine is targeting the old strain, well, bummer for whoever has the virus with or without the vaccine. If the virus morphs because the vaccine leaked, lets discuss that too. But for hell sakes, lets not just pretend that all the rules of science and common sense and logic and reality no longer apply because a vaccine does not work. 

“Do the vaccines prevent acquisition and transmission of the targeted virus?“

A nice vague question. Do you mean does it prevent it for most and not for others or does it absolutely and completely always prevent transmission and acquisition.

“Is it the fault of the nonimmunized that the vaccines are not preventing acquisition or transmission?”

No, and no one is arguing for that except for that straw man you are beating the hell out of. That is not what I said. It is not what anyone is saying.

“But for hell sakes, lets not just pretend that all the rules of science and common sense and logic and reality no longer apply because a vaccine does not work.”

Still nice and vague with the “does not work” bit. Are you saying that it never works in any situation? Or just that it sometimes doesn’t prevent transmission and/or developing symptoms? Or is it whatever you need it to mean in the moment and shifts as needed? I am going with the last one.

[MacGyver]

9 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I can’t read German and I doubt you can. 

I can read German. Many people can. There's also google translate for those who can't. 

[The Nehor]

11 minutes ago, John Madden said:

With respect. Leaking is not just a term, it is a defined term and the use of it in this application is appropriate.

see quotes and links below. This research is from 2015, published and reviewed 4 years before this corona virus was discovered/created. 

The bottom line (my paraphrase): In a pandemic, a leaky vaccine MAY be worse than no vaccine. A vaccine that leaks and leads to an evolution, or morph, of the virus to a lethal form that can escape the vaccine MAY be worse than a form of the virus that naturally morphs to a form that does not kill the host as a survival evolution. The damn virus wants to live, and if it kills all the hosts, it does not live. If we intervene and make it morph into a form that escapes the target of the vaccine - be careful what you wish for. 

 

 

The “leaky vaccine” in the chicken study was a vaccine that did not reduce transmission at all. That is not the case with Covid vaccines.

If you don’t believe me then how about the author of the study who weighed in because you and people like you have been misusing his research:

https://www.kare11.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/author-of-vaccine-study-terrified-his-work-is-being-misinterpreted/89-4b4a66b7-46e4-49cf-814f-9f98ecfbb8fd

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

I can read German. Many people can. There's also google translate for those who can't. 

Yes, so why has this news not gone mainstream? Many outlets would love to run with the story told on Twitter. Yet they are not. So what does the paper say? I don’t know. I am not going to try to refute something I can’t read and I don’t feel obligated to believe crackpot news sites that are trying to tell me what it says.

Google translate is not reliable enough to be trusted in regards to documents that are highly specific such as case studies and other scientific papers. The language is too specialized and precise.

[John Madden]

No problem. 

I do not read German. I got the message. 

[MacGyver]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, so why has this news not gone mainstream? Many outlets would love to run with the story told on Twitter. Yet they are not. So what does the paper say? I don’t know. I am not going to try to refute something I can’t read and I don’t feel obligated to believe crackpot news sites that are trying to tell me what it says.

Google translate is not reliable enough to be trusted in regards to documents that are highly specific such as case studies and other scientific papers. The language is too specialized and precise.

Google translate works just fine. It may not be perfect, but it should give you a pretty good idea if the claim you are disputing comes from a legitimate source or not. 

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Google translate works just fine. It may not be perfect, but it should give you a pretty good idea if the claim you are disputing comes from a legitimate source or not. 

I am not disputing a claim. I am saying I haven’t seen a legitimate claim to dispute. I am not taking on the burden of proof based solely on trust in disclose.tv’s ability to accurately read a report written in German. If you can read it though go nuts.

[BRMC]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

I am not disputing a claim. I am saying I haven’t seen a legitimate claim to dispute. I am not taking on the burden of proof based solely on trust in disclose.tv’s ability to accurately read a report written in German. If you can read it though go nuts.

Yes you are.  You stated "I can safely ignore that statistic".   That's a choice.  That's a dismissal.  The data is there.  The means of reviewing the data are available.  You're willfully choosing not to.

[The Nehor]

23 minutes ago, BRMC said:

Yes you are.  You stated "I can safely ignore that statistic".   That's a choice.  That's a dismissal.  The data is there.  The means of reviewing the data are available.  You're willfully choosing not to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)