Met Summer Banter

[Cyclone-68]

24 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

That is something I never heard before.  Any links/articles that you know of?  

Just a very quick search but this seems to pick up on the tornado/nuclear weapons testing idea:

[HoarfrostHubb]

2 hours ago, Lava Rock said:

Big brother watching. My wife went to Greece for 10days with her friends. Within 12 hrs of her being home yesterday, Maine CDC calls and asks if she is quarantining for next 7days and whether she is vaccinated. Other than passport and covid test before flying out and covid test before coming home, which were negative, not sure how they knew she was home. There was no paperwork req'd for the 1st covid test stating if she was traveling to a foreign country, so we think it must be traced through the passport. 

As I've mentioned we are heading to Iceland in a couple of months.  When we land we need to do a Covid test even if vaccinated (for now, that might change soon).  You are then required to head directly to your hotel/ rental until you get notified of your test being negative.   On a forum about Iceland travel people have described their experiences of getting called etc. when they did not comply.  Some have been sent home (very rare though) if they didn't follow through.  Big fines.

[Typhoon Tip]

Guys...

The intelligence agencies know when you shit.

End discussion -

[radarman]

1 hour ago, HIPPYVALLEY said:

That’s a good point, can you imagine the fear porn, media feeding frenzy that would catalyze in 2021? 

perhaps, but I will say that the media has been pretty good in recent years about divorcing severe weather from AGW.  Whether that's because it's been a slow decade for the most part is up for debate... But I think the correlations are pretty unclear to perhaps non-existent.  Perhaps a shift SE in tornado alley... whether statistically significant or not, I don't really know.  If it became clear that AGW would result in less severe weather, I'm not sure most outlets would be trumpeting the benefits.

[Great Snow 1717]

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Guys...

The intelligence agencies no when you shit.

End discussion -

You aren't kidding

[radarman]

at this point it's basically well known scientifically, but another large study (Cleveland Clinic) confirms that the vaccines are unnecessary after previous infection.  Gotta wonder when more places start paying attention and changing vaccination policies.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v2

Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

"Among the 52238 included employees, 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22777 (41%) of 49659 not previously infected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study"

"Conclusions Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination"

[HoarfrostHubb]

Yeah, having the 'vi early should give you the antibodies.  I would still probably get the jab but understnad not wanting to in that case.

I know for travel, some countries accept proof of previous infection in lieu of a vaccinaion

[Lava Rock]

16 minutes ago, radarman said:

at this point it's basically well known scientifically, but another large study (Cleveland Clinic) confirms that the vaccines are unnecessary after previous infection.  Gotta wonder when more places start paying attention and changing vaccination policies.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v2

Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

"Among the 52238 included employees, 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22777 (41%) of 49659 not previously infected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study"

"Conclusions Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination"

that's not stopping big pharma from conducting vax studies on kids as young as 6 months. I was half joking a couple weeks ago when I mentioned "what's next, vaccinating babies?" the push to vax kids under 12 or even 16 is unnecessary and wrong

[Brian5671]

21 minutes ago, radarman said:

at this point it's basically well known scientifically, but another large study (Cleveland Clinic) confirms that the vaccines are unnecessary after previous infection.  Gotta wonder when more places start paying attention and changing vaccination policies.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v2

Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

"Among the 52238 included employees, 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22777 (41%) of 49659 not previously infected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study"

"Conclusions Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination"

If you don't need a vaxx after infection that will help us get to herd immunity all the quicker as unvaccinated folks get the virus, recover (hopefully) and have immunity joining the ranks of the vaccinated.

[Hoosier]

20 minutes ago, radarman said:

at this point it's basically well known scientifically, but another large study (Cleveland Clinic) confirms that the vaccines are unnecessary after previous infection.  Gotta wonder when more places start paying attention and changing vaccination policies.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v2

Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

"Among the 52238 included employees, 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22777 (41%) of 49659 not previously infected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study"

"Conclusions Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination"

I think the role of variants shouldn't be ignored though.  If you had covid a year ago and you're in an area/country that has a high level of variant spread, then maybe it changes the calculation a bit.  For example, I wouldn't feel that comfortable traveling to India unvaccinated, even if I already had covid.

[DavisStraight]

24 minutes ago, radarman said:

at this point it's basically well known scientifically, but another large study (Cleveland Clinic) confirms that the vaccines are unnecessary after previous infection.  Gotta wonder when more places start paying attention and changing vaccination policies.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v2

Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

"Among the 52238 included employees, 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22777 (41%) of 49659 not previously infected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study"

"Conclusions Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination"

I was reading this article this morning, thought it was interesting.

Was the Whole Pandemic About the Vaccine? - LewRockwell

[Brian5671]

7 minutes ago, DavisStraight said:

I was reading this article this morning, thought it was interesting.

Was the Whole Pandemic About the Vaccine? - LewRockwell

that guy is a nut-population control?  Thousands dying from the vaxx itself?   Lolz.

[radarman]

12 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

I think the role of variants shouldn't be ignored though.  If you had covid a year ago and you're in an area/country that has a high level of variant spread, then maybe it changes the calculation a bit.  For example, I wouldn't feel that comfortable traveling to India unvaccinated, even if I already had covid.

Are there studies suggesting that vaccines are performing better against variants than natural immunity?   At some point in the future a new vaccine may prove more effective, not sure about the existing ones though.  Some of these longer studies are probably incorporating multiple waves of variants.

[DavisStraight]

3 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

that guy is a nut-population control?  Thousands dying from the vaxx itself?   Lolz.

Little tin foil hat but the stats on little kids getting vaccinated was interesting.

[HIPPYVALLEY]

Buying a little bitcoin on the dip this morning worked out for me. 

[PhineasC]

50 minutes ago, Lava Rock said:

that's not stopping big pharma from conducting vax studies on kids as young as 6 months. I was half joking a couple weeks ago when I mentioned "what's next, vaccinating babies?" the push to vax kids under 12 or even 16 is unnecessary and wrong

Any parent that forces their toddler to get injected with an experimental vaccine due to their own paranoid fear is a monster.

[PhineasC]

37 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

that guy is a nut-population control?  Thousands dying from the vaxx itself?   Lolz.

There have definitely been deaths across the world from the vaccine. That isn't really unexpected. It can cause very bad reactions in people.

[PhineasC]

Considering that many "experts" and "trusted media voices" spent all of 2020 gaslighting and lying to us about the origins of the virus to protect their own skin/funding streams and hurt their political opponents, I would hope that we would have learned to be very suspicious of anyone telling us matter-of-factly that toddlers need the jab to "prevent variants."

You have to stop blindly trusting the man on TV. The appeal to authority fallacy is rampant right now, and people tend to fall for it.

[mreaves]

13 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Any parent that forces their toddler to get injected with an experimental vaccine due to their own paranoid fear is a monster.

You do know they aren't "experimental" right?  An EUA basically authorizes the manufacturer to start production before approval, instead of waiting to ramp it up afterwards.

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-vaccines/corrected-fact-check-covid-19-vaccines-are-not-experimental-and-they-have-not-skipped-trial-stages-idUSL1N2M70MW

https://vaccine.unchealthcare.org/science/vaccine-approval/whats-the-difference-between-fda-emergency-use-authorization-and-fda-approval/

[PhineasC]

19 minutes ago, mreaves said:

You do know they aren't "experimental" right?  An EUA basically authorizes the manufacturer to start production before approval, instead of waiting to ramp it up afterwards.

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-vaccines/corrected-fact-check-covid-19-vaccines-are-not-experimental-and-they-have-not-skipped-trial-stages-idUSL1N2M70MW

https://vaccine.unchealthcare.org/science/vaccine-approval/whats-the-difference-between-fda-emergency-use-authorization-and-fda-approval/

There has never been an mRNA infectious disease vaccine approved for use in humans. Of course it is still experimental since we have had zero experience with these vaccines in humans until very recently. It's ridiculous to even assert these are not experimental vaccines. Most new medicines and therapies are experimental by nature of the fact that they are adjusted and changed based on feedback from real patients. This is just gaslighting, dude.

Here is what Pfizer has to say:

Quote

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine that may prevent COVID-19. There is no FDA-approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19.

And Moderna:

Quote

The Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine has not been approved or licensed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but has been authorized for emergency use by FDA, under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), to prevent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID‑19) for use in individuals 18 years of age and older. There is no FDA-approved vaccine to prevent COVID‑19.
The EUA for the Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine is in effect for the duration of the COVID‑19 EUA declaration justifying emergency use of the product, unless the declaration is terminated or the authorization is revoked sooner.

The very "fact-check" you posted states:

Quote

Correction, April 30, 2021: An earlier version of this check described the Pfizer/BioNtech, Moderna and J&J vaccines as being approved for use in the United States. This has been corrected to say these vaccines have been authorized for emergency use by the FDA. Vaccine makers will need to apply to the FDA for full approval to continue use after the pandemic.

Let's not obfuscate by pretending this is a well-studied and well-documented vaccine at this time. There is no legal claim being made that is even effective at preventing COVID infection. We know now that it is effective based on real-world observations, but we should not hide the reality of where the vaccine is in the approval process or where liability for the manufacturers stands. 

[PhineasC]

If you are comfortable injecting a little kid with the Pfizer EUA vaccine against a disease that is incredibly low-risk for him/her, that is on you as a parent. Please don't try to convince the rest of us you are making the right call based on the "science." It's all on you, parent.

[WhitinsvilleWX]

14 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

There has never been an mRNA infectious disease vaccine approved for use in humans. Of course it is still experimental since we have had zero experience with these vaccines in humans until very recently. It's ridiculous to even assert these are not experimental vaccines. Most new medicines and therapies are experimental by nature of the fact that they are adjusted and changed based on feedback from real patients. This is just gaslighting, dude.

Here is what Pfizer has to say:

And Moderna:

The very "fact-check" you posted states:

Let's not obfuscate by pretending this is a well-studied and well-documented vaccine at this time. There is no legal claim being made that is even effective at preventing COVID infection. We know now that it is effective based on real-world observations, but we should not hide the reality of where the vaccine is in the approval process or where liability for the manufacturers stands. 

You do realize that when these are fully approved that there will be very little, if any, difference in data once they get the official stamp? I've told you before full vaccine trials that result in fully approved entities generally run 20,000 to 80,000 people. These trials ran the standard number of people and the safety data is obtained during the dose escalation during phase 1

What you posted is boiler plate insert wording because its required by federal law under an EAU designation. . 

Pembromizulab (Keytruda) is a first in class drug approved for lung cancer and melanoma. Its the first drug to block PD-1 and inhibit T-cell exhaustion. So just because these vaccines are mRNA vaccines doesn't mean they are any less appropriate. A lot of drugs get approved all the time that have a 1st in class MOA. 

[PhineasC]

7 minutes ago, WhitinsvilleWX said:

You do realize that when these are fully approved that there will be very little, if any, difference in data once they get the official stamp? I've told you before full vaccine trials that result in fully approved entities generally run 20,000 to 80,000 people. These trials ran the standard number of people and the safety data is obtained during the dose escalation during phase 1

What you posted is boiler plate insert wording because its required by federal law under an EAU designation. . 

Pembromizulab (Keytruda) is a first in class drug approved for lung cancer and melanoma. Its the first drug to block PD-1 and inhibit T-cell exhaustion. So just because these vaccines are mRNA vaccines doesn't mean they are any less appropriate. A lot of drugs get approved all the time that have a 1st in class MOA. 

We have already seen a steady decrease in the purported efficacy of these vaccines from the trial data as we get data back from real world usage. So the data will definitely be different under full auth. Also, it’s very likely these vaccines will be superseded by a second-generation of vaccines. The pharma companies have already discussed this and there was already talk about how to adjust the AstraZeneca vaccine to reduce the incidence of blood clots.

I am not trying to impugn the good name of these vaccines. They are effective and generally safe. But we shouldn’t lie to people and tell them the situation with them at this time is no different than the flu vaccine or polio vaccine. 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

The dude told us many weeks ago this is over, to stop talking about it, and to go on with our lives…and look at him, he can’t help himself. Glued to covid 24/7 lol. 

[Typhoon Tip]

48 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

There has never been an mRNA infectious disease vaccine approved for use in humans. Of course it is still experimental since we have had zero experience with these vaccines in humans until very recently. It's ridiculous to even assert these are not experimental vaccines. Most new medicines and therapies are experimental by nature of the fact that they are adjusted and changed based on feedback from real patients. This is just gaslighting, dude.

Here is what Pfizer has to say:

And Moderna:

The very "fact-check" you posted states:

Let's not obfuscate by pretending this is a well-studied and well-documented vaccine at this time. There is no legal claim being made that is even effective at preventing COVID infection. We know now that it is effective based on real-world observations, but we should not hide the reality of where the vaccine is in the approval process or where liability for the manufacturers stands. 

This whole ordeal was a dress rehearsal - a test, to see if RNA delivery systems can be used efficiently on live targets for the eventual d-day trigger event.  Population and resource procurement is an unattainable, unsustainable physical impossibility so...wipe out 97% of the population, leave the tech infrastructures and libraries in place.  

Boom, problem solved.  Enough pop density for a viable species health remains alive, and the wheel doesn't have to re-invented.  

[Cyclone-68]

4 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

This whole ordeal was a dress rehearsal - a test, to see if RNA delivery systems can be used efficiently on live targets for the eventual d-day trigger event

Yikes..That actually seems plausible enough to make me a little nervous 

[Spanks45]

50 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

If you are comfortable injecting a little kid with the Pfizer EUA vaccine against a disease that is incredibly low-risk for him/her, that is on you as a parent. Please don't try to convince the rest of us you are making the right call based on the "science." It's all on you, parent.

I will wait to see what direction Covid decides to take before I make a decision on whether my children get the vaccine. However, at this point I would feel safer having them get this vaccine than I would taking them to eat at McDonalds everyweek or feeding them hormone enhanced Franken meats. The longterm effects on our population being fed the food we are today has not yet been studied and highly questionable if we really want to go down that road.....

[WhitinsvilleWX]

15 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

We have already seen a steady decrease in the purported efficacy of these vaccines from the trial data as we get data back from real world usage. So the data will definitely be different under full auth. Also, it’s very likely these vaccines will be superseded by a second-generation of vaccines. The pharma companies have already discussed this and there was already talk about how to adjust the AstraZeneca vaccine to reduce the incidence of blood clots.

I am not trying to impugn the good name of these vaccines. They are effective and generally safe. But we shouldn’t lie to people and tell them the situation with them at this time is no different than the flu vaccine or polio vaccine. 

Link?

You may be a great engineer, but you know shit about pharma, clinical trials an drug development:

[STILL N OF PIKE]

Covid does seem “over” for now In the USA. I mean basically .

Late fall winter may offer some opportunities but the vaccines seem to be doing extremely well at preventing hospitalization and i would think the biggest issue this may create for drug companies is that the percent getting the booster will be much lower than the initial vaccine (because deaths and cases will likely be so low by the time the booster is offered ) .
 

Now if the majority of annual flu shots are able to be combined with a Covid vaccine manufacturer then I think That is the key to having a higher booster shot vaccination rate ( short of a large increase in deaths)

 

[STILL N OF PIKE]

2 minutes ago, WhitinsvilleWX said:

Link?

You may be a great engineer, but you know shit about pharma, clinical trials an drug development:

There has not been any surprise in the efficacy in the data I saw . The trials may have had people sheltering more and certainly less interacting than currently (but there is also much less cases around now ) . I believe it was estimated that real world results in efficacy would be 90% even when the trial data was showing 94% and I think this is what some experts have said is being  borne out.