Relatively damning article if accurately sourced.

Not that it somehow or in any way proves that boosters are harmful but these comments...

All the advisers acknowledged that they were obligated to make difficult choices, based on sparse research, in the middle of a public health emergency.

Other committee experts said that they wanted to avoid confusing the public further by dissenting, or that they voted according to their views of the evidence and were simply overruled.

"These are not evidence-based recommendations," said Dr. Sarah S. Long, a pediatric infectious disease expert at Drexel University College of Medicine in Philadelphia

In interviews, the experts bemoaned the limited data on the safety and efficacy of the booster shots. The data supporting extra doses of the Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines was "of very low quality," Dr. Kathleen Dooling, a C.D.C. scientist, acknowledged at the committee meeting on Thursday.


....are extremely disturbing as these types of "recommendations" become "mandates" and drive public policy. I dont believe these people have bad intentions (and really pathetic when there is a common theme of lack of data) but we have a government that lusts for money and power and they will take these recommendations and, as said earlier and as everyone knows, create mandates.

Oh I would gue$$ the$e folk$ had $ome other rea$on$ for the recommendation$

Nothing to see here .. move along, science doesn't mean anything anymore .. just do what we say folks

Some of this has turned into a giant joke..

$pot on. I was trying to be overly kind in my assessment of what I just read.

Waiting for someone to explain why this is no big deal.....

Quote:

---

Other committee experts said that they wanted to avoid confusing the public further by dissenting, or that they voted according to their views of the evidence and were simply overruled.

---

They want to avoid confusing the public. A little late for that I think.

As a scientist and a researcher that article is really disturbing. You don't make scientific conclusions without data. Period. End of discussion.

Based on what we know now, I believe the vaccine is safe for the vast majority of people. I also believe the booster is safe for the vast majority of people.

However, safety does not equal necessity. The fact that boosters are being pushed for everyone and not just those with the most severe/significant pre-existing conditions and comorbidities is, in IMO, unethical.

Medical interventions should NOT be "recommended" when they have not been proven to be effective, no matter how harmless said intervention is.

I am vaccinated. I also had covid (before I was vaxxed). I am in no hurry to get the booster. There is no evidence that I would benefit from it. Should that change, then I would reconsider. But in the absence of data showing that I need the booster, there is absolutely no reason for me to get it.

I worry that the booster is going to become required "proof of vaccination", particularly for maintaining employment and for international travel.

All this article does is provide more fuel to the anti-vaxxers. It's shameful that the so-called "experts" and "professionals" can't see that. They are also undermining their own credibility by supporting it.

This is only going to worsen public distrust, not just with respect to this vaccine, but with future vaccines and treatments for covid and other diseases.

This is a straight up embarrassment and failure of the scientific community.

TXTransplant said:

---

As a scientist and a researcher that article is really disturbing. You don't make scientific conclusions without data. Period. End of discussion.

---

Stopped here.

The entire covid pandemic and reaction were "scientific" conclusions without data.

You are not going to sit here and say masks, 6 feet of distance, bleaching my fruit, putting my mail in the sun on back porch and washing clothes after going in public were not based on science????

Just gonna say...

People like me
have been saying stuff like this (op)
for a LONG time.

And we get called evil, anti-science, anti-vaxxers.

Basically, you are a fool to blindly believe anything the government tells you. Do your own research..

A is A said:

---

TXTransplant said:

---

As a scientist and a researcher that article is really disturbing. You don't make scientific conclusions without data. Period. End of discussion.

---

Stopped here.

The entire covid pandemic and reaction were "scientific" conclusions without data.

---

I'll (partially) disagree with this. Some mistakes were made (masks, school closures, and vaccine mandates are the three worst).

But covid is a serious disease that warranted rapid development of a safe and effective vaccine - which we have.

However, like with this push for a booster, the mistakes that were made have done severe damage to the credibility of people who were previously thought to be experts and professionals, and that damage probably can't be repaired in the eyes of a significant portion of the population.

Keeping your distance from people and hand washing are based on "science" - and a whole lot of common sense. Those actually are things you can do to help prevent yourself from catching a virus.

TXTransplant said:

---

Keeping your distance from people and hand washing are based on "science" - and a whole lot of common sense. Those actually are things you can do to help prevent yourself from catching a virus.

---

Hand washing...sure...but how about the abuse of hand sanitizer and fake manufacturers putting that crap out on shelves and kids practically being showered with it by over protective moms?

Social distance....there is no scientific proof of what was needed and what the threshold should be. Just shooting from the hip and making parents / kids base their lives for months on those random measurements. My daughter at school was not allowed to play in close contact w/ kids b/c of some BS distance rules / mandates / suggestions from "science" and doctors. Personally, it seems most likely common sense social distancing (ie how you would normally live your life) was likely all we needed...


edit:

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-updates-hand-sanitizers-consumers-should-not-use

snowdog90 said:

---

Just gonna say...

People like me
have been saying stuff like this (op)
for a LONG time.

And we get called evil, anti-science, anti-vaxxers.

Basically, you are a fool to blindly believe anything the government tells you. Do your own research..

---

I've bolded this because the scientists and professionals we rely on to the be the experts and provide the information by which we would do our own research are being pressured by the government to make recommendations that aren't supported by the data.

The government has no business trying to influence scientists and doctors, and people with those credentials have an obligation to speak out when they do feel that pressure. Unfortunately, the people in that article only did so AFTER they voted to recommend the booster - because they didn't feel they could go against it. That excuse doesn't fly with me. We need people with the courage to do the right, moral, and ethical thing. If these people won't do it, then who will?

planoaggie123 said:

---

TXTransplant said:

---

Keeping your distance from people and hand washing are based on "science" - and a whole lot of common sense. Those actually are things you can do to help prevent yourself from catching a virus.

---

Hand washing...sure...but how about the abuse of hand sanitizer and fake manufacturers putting that crap out on shelves and kids practically being showered with it by over protective moms?

Social distance....there is no scientific proof of what was needed and what the threshold should be. Just shooting from the hip and making parents / kids base their lives for months on those random measurements. My daughter at school was not allowed to play in close contact w/ kids b/c of some BS distance rules / mandates / suggestions from "science" and doctors. Personally, it seems most likely common sense social distancing (ie how you would normally live your life) was likely all we needed...


edit:

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-updates-hand-sanitizers-consumers-should-not-use

---

Don't get me started on hand sanitizer. Anyone who has taken a basic microbiology class knows it's not necessary and has the potential to do more harm than good. I don't use it and I don't buy it. Hand washing with soap is perfectly fine unless absolutely not available.

The 6 ft was arbitrary. But in general, stay away from people to avoid their germs. And if you have any symptoms of any kind, stay away from others out of common courtesy. If you want to say 6 ft to give people some frame of reference, fine.

No one should expect it to be foolproof. Nothing is. If anyone believed that <6 ft meant you contracted covid and >6 ft meant you didn't, then that's a level of stupidity I can't address. It just helps reduce the potential for spread.

The absolute biggest mistake we have made is sending people home, after diagnosis, and telling them there was nothing we could do. It was the absolute, most insanely stupid, worst recommendation. Instead of listening to the doctors who were treating people successfully, we went after them and censored them.

Ironically the 6ft belief was based on science. But the science was old, misunderstood, garbled in presentation and therefore misapplied.

Good article about that here
https://www.wired.com/story/the-teeny-tiny-scientific-screwup-that-helped-covid-kill/

TXTransplant said:

---

As a scientist and a researcher that article is really disturbing. You don't make scientific conclusions without data. Period. End of discussion.

Based on what we know now, I believe the vaccine is safe for the vast majority of people. I also believe the booster is safe for the vast majority of people.

However, safety does not equal necessity. The fact that boosters are being pushed for everyone and not just those with the most severe/significant pre-existing conditions and comorbidities is, in IMO, unethical.

Medical interventions should NOT be "recommended" when they have not been proven to be effective, no matter how harmless said intervention is.

I am vaccinated. I also had covid (before I was vaxxed). I am in no hurry to get the booster. There is no evidence that I would benefit from it. Should that change, then I would reconsider. But in the absence of data showing that I need the booster, there is absolutely no reason for me to get it.

I worry that the booster is going to become required "proof of vaccination", particularly for maintaining employment and for international travel.

All this article does is provide more fuel to the anti-vaxxers. It's shameful that the so-called "experts" and "professionals" can't see that. They are also undermining their own credibility by supporting it.

This is only going to worsen public distrust, not just with respect to this vaccine, but with future vaccines and treatments for covid and other diseases.

This is a straight up embarrassment and failure of the scientific community.

---

The science is settled. You should know your place and be silent, if you know what's good for ya.

Oh, and check which board you're on before you say things like this.

If only this was handled/organized like the annual flu shot from the beginning…