The Covid vaccines really do work

[Doctor X]

“Finally?”

Have they established that such is necessary beyond creating more billionaires?

By all means also vaccinate them against Anthrax while we are at it. That is a bad disease!

– J.D.

[Pyrrho]

With regard to press releases, I am like, "Cool story, bro. Let's see the clinical data."

[Doctor X]

. . . I am like, "Cool story, bro. Let's see the clinical data."

Why do you want to spread the disinformations?

– J.D.

[robinson]

A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial. Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding. After repeatedly notifying Ventavia of these problems, the regional director, Brook Jackson (video 1), emailed a complaint to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Ventavia fired her later the same day. Jackson has provided The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails.

https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635

[robinson]

The big money really don't want anyone blowing the whistle on the failed vaccine program, and the governments who forced the issue also can't admit a single thing is wrong, because there are millions, maybe a billion people that might burn them to the ground

[Pyrrho]

What's been seen is that the best protection results from vaccination and actual infection. Involves different T and B cell response.

[robinson]

The COVID-19 vaccines are a remarkable medical innovation that may very well have saved tens of thousands of lives this past year. But let’s be clear: They are not doing what we were told they would do.

When the vaccines were first made available in early 2021, the public was led to believe that inoculation would prevent infection and transmission. President Joe Biden argued last summer that “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.” Dr. Anthony Fauci similarly declared on a Zoom call with TikTokers that if they got vaccinated, they wouldn’t have to worry about catching COVID-19. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow claimed in March that COVID-19 “cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to get more people” and that the “virus does not infect them.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... they-would

[robinson]

The simple fact that nobody, not one single talking head, fake politician or medical doctor involved in the complete scam, has ever apologized, or walked back the complete bullshit claims about the experimental therapies, makes me think of them with contempt. And I don't believe a fucking thing they say now.

[Pyrrho]

https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/15 ... 9451874304

@EricTopol
BA.2 wave in the US ?
—The good part is that we're starting from a very low case burden, unlike previous waves
—There are 8 states + Puerto Rico w/ double digit increase % in the past 2 weeks (not including home tests)
—We will have a wave. The only question is how big it'll be

[Ben Trovado]

The COVID-19 vaccines are a remarkable medical innovation that may very well have saved tens of thousands of lives this past year. But let’s be clear: They are not doing what we were told they would do.

I think that is a pretty fair summary. I don't blame them for overselling it to begin with, but as time has gone along, the lack of self-correction and caveats has been pretty damning.

[Pyrrho]

Moar boosters! :hyper:

[Ben Trovado]

With the 16th booster, you'll be considered "fully vaxxed."

For now.

[Pyrrho]

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-a ... -older-and

A second booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine may be administered to individuals 50 years of age and older at least 4 months after receipt of a first booster dose of any authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine.

A second booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine may be administered to individuals 12 years of age and older with certain kinds of immunocompromise at least 4 months after receipt of a first booster dose of any authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine. These are people who have undergone solid organ transplantation, or who are living with conditions that are considered to have an equivalent level of immunocompromise.

A second booster dose of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine may be administered at least 4 months after the first booster dose of any authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine to individuals 18 years of age and older with the same certain kinds of immunocompromise.

[Anaxagoras]

I recently had my first booster (i.e., third dose). First two were Pfizer, this one was Moderna. I wanted to mix it up, and also Moderna was what they had anyway. Apparently here in Japan there's a perception that Pfizer is better. There were some stories about a contaminated lot last year, although the problem has reportedly been fixed. But the public still remembers, so that's why some people prefer the Pfizer, and if you're holding out for that it's harder to get it right now.

I had side effects including a fever for about 1 day. Sore arm too that lasted a bit longer than a day.

As far as I know, I still haven't had Covid. If I did the symptoms were very mild or non-existent in my case.



Oh, as far as a fourth shot goes, I don't anticipate getting one until they come out with a new, updated vaccine. Every 4 months? No thanks.
But, that I guess that could be subject to change if the situation changes. I see things getting more and more back to normal going forward.

[Doctor X]

Explains your the autisms.

– J.D.

[robinson]

A lot of people very resistant to any evidence that the vaccines work.

That may be true, which begs the question, what evidence is there?

The mRNA “vaccines” do not stop infection from Civid, they don’t stop you from carrying the virus, spreading the virus, getting sick, or dying.

At this point the only “evidence” is now the claims that you have a smaller chance of death.

The evidence from a billion people who are not vaccinated shows that even that claim might be bullshit as well.

[Anaxagoras]

A lot of people very resistant to any evidence that the vaccines work.

That may be true, which begs the question, what evidence is there?

The mRNA “vaccines” do not stop infection from Civid, they don’t stop you from carrying the virus, spreading the virus, getting sick, or dying.

At this point the only “evidence” is now the claims that you have a smaller chance of death.

The evidence from a billion people who are not vaccinated shows that even that claim might be bullshit as well.

I'll give evidence, on the condition that you first say what evidence would be sufficient.

[Doctor X]

Do not hold your breath.

– J.D.

[Pyrrho]

Well I guess I don't need to get any more tetanus vaccines! :hyper:

[Pyrrho]

Coronaviruses have been historically difficult to manage. None of the vaccines show 100% efficacy in the prevention of infection. They do show significant reduction in rates of severe illness and related sequelae such as hospitalization and death. Each different vaccine has a different efficacy/safety profile. The inactive virus vaccines show lower efficacy than the mRNA vaccines. The clinical data for all of them do show that the vaccines do work to lower rates of infection, hospitalization, and death, as do the data from the public administration of the vaccines.

Here is an example of an analysis of breakthrough infection rates with measles vaccinations:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6628760/

Any expectation that vaccines will be 100% effective and safe is misguided, just as any assertion that the vaccines will be 100% safe and effective is misguided. Nevertheless, surveillance of adverse events and breakthrough infection rates is necessary.

What he said.

[Pyrrho]

Unrelated, I was reading something yesterday that listed euthanasia as an "adverse effect leading to death". Yeah it is not good if a medical treatment causes euthanasia.

[Pyrrho]

Crossposted to here because it might be relevant:

FWIW, data were discussed at an FDA advisory committee in June 2022. I have not read through all of it so I have nothing to put my Dunning-Kruger hat on and yelp about:

https://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees ... -materials

There are 2 videos on the page, which are recordings of the meeting, so anyone who cares to can hear what was said during presentations and discussed among the advisors.

Possibly relevant to use in infants:

https://www.fda.gov/media/159255/download

and

https://www.fda.gov/media/159257/download

and

https://www.fda.gov/media/159258/download

It is important to note that at the end of the day, We the People do not get access to the reams of clinical study reports that the FDA gets from the pharmaceutical companies. Only part of it is presented. The "briefing documents" will have more than the presentations. The bulk of the reports are various and sundry data for subgroups and efficacy and safety data that may or may not be useful. It is data that have to be collected, if one is doing science and not variations on a theme of homeopathy.

[Pyrrho]

Will you kindly STFU and find something useful to do? You're talking to yourself again.

[Doctor X]

Who are you talking to?

– J.D.

[Pyrrho]

Who is Number 1?

[robinson]

“The negative vaccine effectiveness figures mean the vaccinated are being hospitalised or admitted to ICU with Covid at a greater rate than the unvaccinated. Addressing this alarming finding, the report claims it is “unlikely to actually measure the probability of COVID-19 hospitalisation increases”. Instead, the “build-up of immunity from past COVID-19 plays a major role”, plus there may be differences in “comorbidity and risk of exposure to coronavirus”.

However, as with similar data from the U.K. Government, once again we find a health authority claiming that negative vaccine effectiveness is entirely due to confounders (prior infection, comorbidities) without producing the data – which it must have – to demonstrate that this is in fact the case, and to quantify it and control for it. Instead what we are given amounts to vague hand-waving and an airy implication that the figures don’t show what they appear to show, namely the vaccines are making things worse. Of course, the message the Dutch Government wants the public to take from this is that they need to get a booster frequently to stay protected, which may be why the Government is now willing to publish data that cast two doses of the vaccine in a poor light.”

[robinson]

While it sounds like crazy talk, the data is indeed showing that the vaccinated are doing WORSE than no vaccination

I told you it sounds crazy

I first noticed it in the Israel data, but now it’s showing up in multiple countries, with solid data and no appearance of the figures being altered

Which is fucking crazy

https://www.rivm.nl/covid-19-vaccinatie ... te-brengen

Those figures are seemingly impossible

[robinson]

Of course the proposed solution is more boosters

Of course

Because if the shit doesn’t work, use more of it

[robinson]

This not hyperbole

The solution for a vaccine that doesn’t work, is to just keep taking more of it

I told you a family member is in the Pfizer trial

When my family member went and got tested for antibodies, and no longer had any, the answer was another shot

[robinson]

This not hyperbole

The solution for a vaccine that doesn’t work, is to just keep taking more of it

I told you a family member is in the Pfizer trial

When my family member went and got tested for antibodies, and no longer had any, the answer was another shot

And in three months when there is no longer any immunity, get another shot

Repeat forever

[Doctor X]

You are Number 6.

– J.D.

[Hotarubi]

You are, Number 6.

– J.D.

FTFY

[Anaxagoras]

Some interesting results:

Effectiveness of a fourth dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against all-cause mortality in long-term care facility residents and in the oldest old: A nationwide, retrospective cohort study in Sweden

It's important to note that what they are looking at here is all-cause mortality, not only mortality attributable to COVID-19.

Summary
Background
The effect of a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine on the risk of death in the oldest and frailest individuals is unknown.
Methods
Two matched cohorts were formed using Swedish nationwide registers. In the first, residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) given a fourth dose of an mRNA vaccine from 1 January 2022 onwards were matched 1:1 on birth year and county of residence to residents given at least a third dose (N = 24,524). In the second, all individuals aged ≥80 years given a fourth dose were matched 1:1 to individuals given at least a third dose (N = 394,104). Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios for all-cause mortality in fourth-dose recipients as compared with in third-dose recipients, with relative vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimated as 1 minus the hazard ratio.

Findings
From 7 days after baseline and onwards, there were 1119 deaths in the LTCF cohort during a median follow-up of 77 days and a maximum follow-up of 126 days. During days 7 to 60, the VE of the fourth dose was 39% (95% CI, 29-48), which declined to 27% (95% CI, -2-48) during days 61 to 126. In the cohort of all individuals aged ≥80 years, there were 5753 deaths during a median follow-up of 73 days and a maximum follow-up of 143 days. During days 7 to 60, the VE of the fourth dose was 71% (95% CI, 69-72), which declined to 54% (95% CI, 48-60) during days 61 to 143. The VE of the fourth dose seemed stronger when it was compared to third-dose recipients where at least four months had passed since vaccination (P < 0·001 for interaction).

Interpretation
As compared with a third dose, a fourth dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, administered during the Omicron era, was associated with reduced risk of death from all causes in residents of LTCFs and in the oldest old during the first two months, after which the protection became slightly lower. These findings suggest that a fourth dose may prevent premature mortality in the oldest and frailest even after the emergence of the Omicron variant, although the timing of vaccination seems to be important with respect to the slight waning observed after two months.

It does seem to indicate that boosters provide additional protection, but the protection is temporary. In this sense, it is not unlike the annual flu shots. But there is less seasonality to COVID-19 than with flu. Here in Japan and elsewhere we are seeing a new wave of infections driven by BA.5 in the middle of summer. But the good news so far is that hospitalizations and "critically ill" cases remain relatively low, compared to the previous wave.

https://toyokeizai.net/sp/visual/tko/covid19/en.html

[Doctor X]

You are, Number 6.

FTFY

That would be telling.

– J.D.

[Pyrrho]

Novavax will now be available. "Traditional" vaccine, not mRNA.

[Anaxagoras]

Novavax will now be available. "Traditional" vaccine, not mRNA.

Apparently it is already available in Japan. My daughter had it a few days ago. Hardly any side effects, in her case. My wife and I had the Moderna as a booster and felt pretty sick for a day. My son felt quite ill too.

So if milder side-effects are something you care about, might be worth a try. Of course, this is all just anecdotal.

But actually, I guess there's data to back that up:

https://www.verywellhealth.com/novavax- ... ts-5192068

[Pyrrho]

FDA page:

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-a ... adjuvanted

[Pyrrho]

Just got my second booster shot (Moderna, the richest kind of vaccine). Friend of the family in his 30s got COVID again and they put him on Paxlovid.

[Pyrrho]

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abq0203

Administration of a homologous or heterologous booster based on the Wuhan-Hu-1 spike sequence markedly increased neutralizing antibody titers and breadth against BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, and BA.4/5 across all vaccines evaluated. Our data suggest that although Omicron sublineages evade polyclonal neutralizing antibody responses elicited by primary vaccine series, vaccine boosters may provide sufficient protection against Omicron-induced severe disease.

[Doctor X]

I reject your linked article due to the microaggression of "Wuhan."

It also does not use a sufficiently gender fluid pronoun.






I will pray for you.

– J.D.