Israel...How is this possible???

6,622 Views | 60 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by thirdcoast
bay fan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

Isn't part of the regulator's role in all of this to assure that they aren't making recommendations that are primarily driven by helping the pharmaceutical company's bottom line? So if the regulator says "booster not warranted" or "booster warranted in limited situations" maybe it's simply a way of saying "booster might be marginally helpful or at least not harmful, but we are not recommending it at this time because it's just going to increase Pfizer's revenues without providing a comparably significant marginal benefit for those who get it"?

So go get the booster if you want it, but we don't recommend it because the marginal benefit is not there, even though it would help Pfizer's bottom line if everyone got the booster.
Honestly, I don't think there's much doubt the booster is beneficial. I think the struggle is that so many parts of the world do not have access to a first dose much less a third so recommendations are factoring that in. We need all countries to take part in this battle to limit the mutations. Every decision is multi layered.
flytxag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If the vaccine works well like being reported in hospital and death data (and I believe they do), why is there even a conversation about boosters? It's working…..
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02 said:

As I said on another thread, our priority is keeping people from being hospitalized and dying of COVID. If it takes 100 boosters to do that, then who cares? No one in the medical field is trying to limit the number of vaccines given. That's not our priority. As of now, more vaccines means less hospitalizations and less deaths in a very direct fashion. So we're all pushing as much vaccine as possible.

Some people here act like our first priority should be avoiding the vaccine. We're fighting COVID, not the COVID vaccine.
YOU may be fighting Covid, but many of us fear the political power grab more than this virus. The moment that governments went from suggesting to mandating (or coercing in the case of corporate deputization) a second threat emerged.

People are making the choice to NOT get vaccinated as a form of opposition to the political power grab (can't follow through on threats that would require firing 30% of your workers) even though they know that the risks from the virus are higher than the vaccines. And some are dying for that choice.

It would be lovely if the calculous were isolated to mitigation of a virus' impacts. But it isn't. It's been co-opted to a permanent erosion of freedoms and personal autonomy.
fightingfarmer09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02 said:

As I said on another thread, our priority is keeping people from being hospitalized and dying of COVID. If it takes 100 boosters to do that, then who cares? No one in the medical field is trying to limit the number of vaccines given. That's not our priority. As of now, more vaccines means less hospitalizations and less deaths in a very direct fashion. So we're all pushing as much vaccine as possible.

Some people here act like our first priority should be avoiding the vaccine. We're fighting COVID, not the COVID vaccine.


Perhaps your patients care.

If I've learned one thing in the last 2 years it's that there is a large sector of medical professionals that don't give 2 craps about you unless you are willing to take them as gospel.
VaultingChemist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Do you guys realize that all COVID immunity natural infection or vaccination wanes over a period of time? Even folks that have had COVID are getting reinfected. It's what happens!
Less than 1% of those that were naturally infected acquired Covid again, with asthma and nicotine use being associated with higher reinfection rates. Non-whites also had higher reinfection rates than whites.

Those rates are much better than for vaccinated folks.
P.U.T.U
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
How about we push people to get healthier?
DadHammer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Who is stoping you?
Drip99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DadHammer said:

Who is stoping you?
Nobody however it was not about me. it was a generalized question to those who know more than me about the effects (negative?) of injecting more vaccine in a human.
planoaggie123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
P.U.T.U said:

How about we push people to get healthier?

Not as much value in that. Provides a good slow-drip of revenue to doctors long term.


I lost 20+ pounds to get my BMI in the normal range (was previously in the overweight range), monitor my blood pressure, started working out more and "re-quit" dipping. COVID has definitely encouraged me to live a healthier lifestyle....yet many seem to have increased their weight / drinking / etc....but they did get the shot!
czechy91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
VaultingChemist said:

Quote:

Do you guys realize that all COVID immunity natural infection or vaccination wanes over a period of time? Even folks that have had COVID are getting reinfected. It's what happens!
Less than 1% of those that were naturally infected acquired Covid again, with asthma and nicotine use being associated with higher reinfection rates. Non-whites also had higher reinfection rates than whites.

Those rates are much better than for vaccinated folks.


All I am saying is that immunity wanes over time. The need for boosters shouldn't surprise anyone especially the way they were spaced so close together and no one should expect that natural immunity is a 100% guaranteed magic 5-year shield given the way COVID-19 easily mutates.
traxter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
YouBet said:

Quote:

For people who had been fully vaccinated by April, the vaccine was 79% effective against symptomatic infection, suggesting that immunity gained through immunization depletes over time.
"Suggesting?"

This is a fact.
Is it as much of a fact as you think it is though? How do you prove that the vaccine wasn't 79% effective the whole time and the reason why it initially appeared 95% effective is because there was less virus circulating during the initial trial? And that trial was only 40k people compared with millions with whom we're currently getting post administration data from now?

Does the waning antibody level automatically mean depleting immunity? We know antibodies are supposed to wane over time normally, and you've got memory cells to help.



ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Is it as much of a fact as you think it is though? How do you prove that the vaccine wasn't 79% effective the whole time and the reason why it initially appeared 95% effective is because there was less virus circulating during the initial trial? And that trial was only 40k people compared with millions with whom we're currently getting post administration data from now?
I think the consensus is that the vaccine was 95% effective against the original alpha strain, but the vaccines are less effective against the delta variant. COVID alpha has all but died out, and now everyone has delta. So the vaccines look less impressive than they did, but they did their original job as advertised. Boosters can make the vaccines almost as effective against delta as they were against alpha, and that's the main reason for recommending them. Not some idea of waning immunity.

I don't think anyone has any clue if natural immunity or vaccine immunity wanes or how quickly. Nearly all the reinfections and breakthroughs are first alpha then delta. So we may all have lifelong immunity to alpha for all we know, but it won't matter because it's gone. For now all that matters is immunity to delta.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
traxter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That makes sense. My point was in my reading of scientific literature you typically don't see absolute statements until a long time of data crunching and analysis.
YouBet
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
traxter said:

That makes sense. My point was in my reading of scientific literature you typically don't see absolute statements until a long time of data crunching and analysis.


Rambling Ags answer is more complete and, I think, accurate than mine. I suspect that is the case.

It's also really convenient for the pharma companies that most people are fine getting a booster every few months as that plays right into the vaccine as a service mentality that we've adopted in most every other aspect of society.

I'll play out the boosters like I did with the original vaccine and will wait and see how it plays out in the real world for some amount of time before I make a decision one way or the other on it.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
In a more rational world, we would just create a new vaccine for each variant. With mRNA it's trivially easy and quick to customize a new vaccine for each variant. You could do it in days. However, even the expedited FDA approval process has proven to be very slow compared to the virus mutation rate. On top of that, we had a huge amount of pushback against the speed the vaccines were developed and approved. So while it would be easy, quick, and more effective to make new mRNA vaccines for each strain, it's a political and regulatory non-starter. So instead we're pretty much stuck doing our best with what we already have
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
traxter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm in a low risk group, so no booster for me yet. However, if they come out with a booster with a new variant (like with the flu shot), I'd stand in line after the elderly and healthcare workers have gotten theirs.

Also, the approval process for the new flu shot each year doesn't seem to be bad. Hopefully the approval for a new mRNA booster isn't bad either.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Also, the approval process for the new flu shot each year doesn't seem to be bad. Hopefully the approval for a new mRNA booster isn't bad either.
The fact that it hasn't happened yet is not encouraging. The technology is there. Maybe the full approval of the mRNA vaccines will get the ball started for rapid approvals of minor tweaks to take care of variants, but I'm not optimistic about it.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Aston94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FratboyLegend said:

ramblin_ag02 said:

As I said on another thread, our priority is keeping people from being hospitalized and dying of COVID. If it takes 100 boosters to do that, then who cares? No one in the medical field is trying to limit the number of vaccines given. That's not our priority. As of now, more vaccines means less hospitalizations and less deaths in a very direct fashion. So we're all pushing as much vaccine as possible.

Some people here act like our first priority should be avoiding the vaccine. We're fighting COVID, not the COVID vaccine.
Here is where it all breaks down.

MY priority is keeping MYSELF from dying of Covid. I am uninterested in YOUR priority for 'people' which seems to include me.

For ME, the strategy for protecting MYSELF became obvious in Feb - March 2020 (when the Diamond Princess data became clear), and was confirmed in April 2020 (when governments through their actions said hospitals wouldn't be overcrowded).

The strategy for me and those like me was: do nothing, ignore Covid. It posed no meaningful idiosyncratic risk to me as a pathogen, and became clear there was no more systematic risk to me from hospital overcrowding once the temporary hospitals came down.

Good luck in your priorities. I suggest you internalize what I said about the credibility of experts in my last post, as that credibility is a lynchpin to achieving your priorities.
And yet here you are, arguing with a doctor about Covid, on a Covid message board.
traxter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02 said:

Quote:

Also, the approval process for the new flu shot each year doesn't seem to be bad. Hopefully the approval for a new mRNA booster isn't bad either.
The fact that it hasn't happened yet is not encouraging. The technology is there. Maybe the full approval of the mRNA vaccines will get the ball started for rapid approvals of minor tweaks to take care of variants, but I'm not optimistic about it.
I heard on the radio that one vaccine company is going to start making flu shots with mRNA tech. So hopefully this'll usher in a new age of vaccines.

Who knows, maybe we'll now have vaccines for ebola, hepC, and other crazy diseases.
Boo Weekley
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Gordo14 said:

SB 43rd STREET OG said:

JesusQuintana said:

ramblin_ag02 said:

Israel used Pfizer almost exclusively, and the data shows that Pfizer boosters really help against Delta. So they are giving boosters.

I also still haven't figured out why boosters are bad. I missed that memo somewhere.
I agree. If you have already had 2 shots of pfizer 8 months ago, what is the bodily harm or cause for concern with receiving a third?
Covid is here to stay. Why wouldn't boosters be needed every 4-5 months for the rest of your life? I am not a scientist so genuinely looking for an explanation.


There's a good chance a 3rd shot is all we need. Your immune system often responds more powerfully to things that it is exposed to with a lot of time in between. There's also the possibility that we need a shot every year for winter once society's collective immunity has normalized (see: Flu). And there's also the possibility that the only people that actually need boosters are immunocompromised and elderly people.

Either way, it's ****ing better than getting put on a vent so who gives a **** if they recommend that certain people get the shot every 4-5 months. Oh the horror.
No one gives a sh** about RECOMMENDATIONS. I wish it were just RECOMMENDATIONS. I think they should definitely recommend it for certain people, in particular, gordos.
Boo Weekley
How long do you want to ignore this user?
VaultingChemist said:

Quote:

Do you guys realize that all COVID immunity natural infection or vaccination wanes over a period of time? Even folks that have had COVID are getting reinfected. It's what happens!
Less than 1% of those that were naturally infected acquired Covid again, with asthma and nicotine use being associated with higher reinfection rates. Non-whites also had higher reinfection rates than whites.

Those rates are much better than for vaccinated folks.
Most likely due to Vitamin D deficiencies in those with darker skin.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02 said:

Quote:

The boosters are the latest in a long line of evidence that the Covid situation is being managed in a real-time, seat-of-our-pants, figure it out as we go along manner.
Do you have an alternative? It's a new virus. Everyone is making it up as we go along, because that's the only option. We know COVID is bad and killing people so we do the best we can with the information we have at any given moment


Good try to address management-speak. It's not accounting, or transmission repair. It's actually the generation of new knowledge. In the same way that some economic systems can't conceive of the creation of capital, some people can't understand that science not only processes knowledge, but also creates it.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
traxter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Boo Weekley said:

VaultingChemist said:

Quote:

Do you guys realize that all COVID immunity natural infection or vaccination wanes over a period of time? Even folks that have had COVID are getting reinfected. It's what happens!
Less than 1% of those that were naturally infected acquired Covid again, with asthma and nicotine use being associated with higher reinfection rates. Non-whites also had higher reinfection rates than whites.

Those rates are much better than for vaccinated folks.
Most likely due to Vitamin D deficiencies in those with darker skin.
Interesting hypothesis. Is there any evidence?
BoerneAg11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FratboyLegend said:

ramblin_ag02 said:

FratboyLegend


MY priority is MYSELF

Proposition Joe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"I didn't get the vaccine and I'm fine because my immune system is not weak" has become the new "I do crossfit" or "I'm a vegan".
03_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Proposition Joe said:

"I didn't get the vaccine and I'm fine because my immune system is not weak" has become the new "I do crossfit" or "I'm a vegan".


Would be funnier if it was original. Even more so if you didn't flip it from the side it originated.
thirdcoast
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
All the corporations requiring vaccines will need to log each employees vaccine date and subsequent booster schedules. If they only require proof of initial vaccine, they are 100% virtue signaling.

Most of these corporations that tout science and medical community make no differentiation between unvaccinated who are naturally protected and unvaccinated who are not protected. Also a dead giveaway that they are just giving in to leftist covidians.
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.