If the Vaccines Work, Why Aren't They Working?

[JonC]

This is literally the problem ...

convince the yet cv vaxed to take the vax because it works ...

but convince the already cv vaxed that they need a booster because it doesn't work.

You should not try to convince somebody to take a vaccination or to reject a vaccination. Their health decisions are their business.

For me the decision to take a booster was easy. I looked at the benefits and risks of the booster and compared them to the risks of the virus. If the virus does not warrant a vacvine because the statistics are so low of a serious case or death (as the anti-covid-vaxers claim) then the vaccine itself warrants even less concern (as statistically one is over 300% less likely to have an issue with a vacvine than of catching and having serious issues with the virus).

So if the pro-covid-vaxers are right it is best to get a vaccine and boosters. If the anti-covid-vaxers are right it does not matter either way as the risks of a vaccine are so small they do not warrant concern.

Easy decision for me. Either the vaccine helps a lot or it helps a little on the off chance of getting infected.

 

[Two Wings]

If the virus does not warrant a vacvine because the statistics are so low of a serious case or death (as the anti-covid-vaxers claim) then the vaccine itself warrants even less concern (as statistically one is over 300% less likely to have an issue with a vacvine than of catching and having serious issues with the virus).

Sure ... with data from trials which had adverse effects people removed from the trial. Kinda shoots that 300% number full of holes.

I know more people who regret taking the cv vax than who have taken it and are happy they did.

If we'd used the standard for new vaccine type trials ... we'd have better confidence in the outcome ... but we didn't. We were all about to die of covid ... so "damn the torpedos" ... start jabbing arms ASAP.

I don't wish it, but I believe we will soon start seeing massive issues from the spike protein overload ... while cv vaxed continue to contract and spread the disease.

... and I was referring to the govt's presumptive catch-22. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything except "don't take what is presented as gospel. Find out for yourself. If there's something about the cv vax you can't learn (55 year FOIA filling), then there's a problem right there. MAJOR flag."

if they expect me to take that jab, they'll be transparent with their findings. They're not ... so I'm not.

Good luck to those who did with the expectation the cv jab would be more beneficial than detrimental.

 

[JonC]

Sure ... with data from trials which had adverse effects people removed from the trial. Kinda shoots that 300% number full of holes.

I know more people who regret taking the cv vax than who have taken it and are happy they did.

If we'd used the standard for new vaccine type trials ... we'd have better confidence in the outcome ... but we didn't. We were all about to die of covid ... so "damn the torpedos" ... start jabbing arms ASAP.

I don't wish it, but I believe we will soon start seeing massive issues from the spike protein overload ... while cv vaxed continue to contract and spread the disease.

... and I was referring to the govt's presumptive catch-22. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything except "don't take what is presented as gospel. Find out for yourself. If there's something about the cv vax you can't learn (55 year FOIA filling), then there's a problem right there. MAJOR flag."

if they expect me to take that jab, they'll be transparent with their findings. They're not ... so I'm not.

Good luck to those who did with the expectation the cv jab would be more beneficial than detrimental.

Adverse effects people were not removed from the trials. The effects are recorded in the data. More importantly is the fact I'm speaking of Adverse effects reported post-trial.

I do not know anybody who regretted getting a vaccine. I know several who regretted not getting a vaccine, and a few families who regretted that a loved one did not get a vaccine.

Often our experiences help to form our opinions. My wife works with the school system and they have list 4 children to covid. They have also lost several teachers and administrative staff members. At work we lost 16 this year to covid. We list several in our community to covid. Two were young city police officers. Over 1000 at work have been vaccinated and there have been no adverse issues.

I admit that experience does shape our opinions.

 

[Two Wings]

Adverse effects people were not removed from the trials.

then go have those witnesses who testified on the Ron Johnson Congressional panel arrested for lying to Congress.

dozens if not thousands were removed from the trials. They each even spoke to the fact they had to represent a few dozen ... names on a list ... because there wasn't time for all of 'em to testify.

that ANY, let alone a significant percentage, were dismissed is a MAJOR problem with the entire deal. I wrote in my paper from Dec '20 posted here somewhere ... I knew Pfizer was actively blocking peer review, but I didn't know why ... after the Johnson panel ... now I know why.

feeling good about taking the cv vax (presumably with no significant side effects) is a feel good measure. There's no way to know whether the cv vax is actually working in a given individual, just as there's no way to know in advance if a given individual is going to have any of these tragic side effects.

 

[JonC]

then go have those witnesses who testified on the Ron Johnson Congressional panel arrested for lying to Congress.

dozens if not thousands were removed from the trials. They each even spoke to the fact they had to represent a few dozen ... names on a list ... because there wasn't time for all of 'em to testify.

that ANY, let alone a significant percentage, were dismissed is a MAJOR problem with the entire deal. I wrote in my paper from Dec '20 posted here somewhere ... I knew Pfizer was actively blocking peer review, but I didn't know why ... after the Johnson panel ... now I know why.

feeling good about taking the cv vax (presumably with no significant side effects) is a feel good measure. There's no way to know whether the cv vax is actually working in a given individual, just as there's no way to know in advance if a given individual is going to have any of these tragic side effects.

I'm sure they were removed from the trial. This does not mean the data did not remain a part of the trial.

We should not insist on scientists giving additional shots to persons who had adverse effects.

 

[Two Wings]

I'm sure they were removed from the trial. This does not mean the data did not remain a part of the trial.

We should not insist on scientists giving additional shots to persons who had adverse effects.

My understanding is dismissed meant ... never started.

i could be wrong.

 

[JonC]

My understanding is dismissed meant ... never started.

i could be wrong.

I am sure (I hope) those with known health issues were not included in a trial. They should be dropped, IMHO. Not to do so could be considered irresponsible for a trial.

 

[DaveXR650]

So could you say that according to this thread vaccines don't work. Natural immunity works. Everyone in the country has already had Covid. And the infection rates continue to rise.

 

[JonC]

So could you say that according to this thread vaccines don't work. Natural immunity works. Everyone in the country has already had Covid. And the infection rates continue to rise.

No. There is an issue here.

First is "natural immunity". Both immunity via a man made vaccine and via a man virus is natural immunity to an unnatural thing.

Second, there have been too many patients suffering from covid multiple times to count immunity acquired by infection with the man made virus to be an effective means of protection.

But both immunity via vaccine and immunity via infection provides a degree of functional immunity. An increase in cases does not provide information. An increase in covid deaths, however, may.

 

[Two Wings]

I am sure (I hope) those with known health issues were not included in a trial. They should be dropped, IMHO. Not to do so could be considered irresponsible for a trial.

the way every witnessed described ... and apparently was authorized to speak for the list they each had ... they were dismissed after the first shot and their adverse reactions. I remember one of the critiques was the phone app they had only allowed for a handful of specific reactions, there was no ability to enter what they really experienced.

I'll look around for the link to the panel's hearing, but it's probably NOT on youtube anymore.

 

[JonC]

the way every witnessed described ... and apparently was authorized to speak for the list they each had ... they were dismissed after the first shot and their adverse reactions. I remember one of the critiques was the phone app they had only allowed for a handful of specific reactions, there was no ability to enter what they really experienced.

I'll look around for the link to the panel's hearing, but it's probably NOT on youtube anymore.

I don't trust all accounts, but it does make sense not to give a second shot to somebody who had a reaction to the first. The data of participants was recorded prior to the vaccinations, so I suspect those who had adverse effects after the first shot correspond with the data of first shot adverse reactions in the trial. Since they are not recorded in the trial by name I don't know that they could know if their data was excluded (just like they would not know if they actually received a vacvine vs a placebo). Even adverse issues post placebo are recorded in the trial data.

 

[Two Wings]

. The data of participants was recorded prior to the vaccinations, so I suspect those who had adverse effects after the first shot correspond with the data of first shot adverse reactions in the trial.

evidently the were not accounted. If they were, there's no way these jabs could have been deemed safe by any reasonable standard. thousands, Jon. Unaccounted in the trial data.

Yes, of course, forgoing a second shot ... but not being dismissed from the trial, those experiences are relevant to determining the safety. When they are not accounted, then there's the false declaration of "extremely rare side effects, and they're mostly mild" ... and off goes the promotion for the cv vaxes.

garbage in ... garbage out, right?

 

[JonC]

evidently the were not accounted. If they were, there's no way these jabs could have been deemed safe by any reasonable standard. thousands, Jon. Unaccounted in the trial data.

Yes, of course, forgoing a second shot ... but not being dismissed from the trial, those experiences are relevant to determining the safety. When they are not accounted, then there's the false declaration of "extremely rare side effects, and they're mostly mild" ... and off goes the promotion for the cv vaxes.

garbage in ... garbage out, right?

It depends on the numbers. Adverse effects were listed, to include heart issues (which occurred with the vaccine and placebo).

On the ground we know side-effects (thus far) are not only listed possible side effects but also rare (more rare than dying from covid, anyway).

 

[Two Wings]

On the ground we know side-effects (thus far) are not only listed possible side effects but also rare (more rare than dying from covid, anyway).

that's TBD.

We've used animals as gauges in the past. The history of the mRNA cv jab is 2 human years and a large majority perished in at least 5 different species. That's not a good sign, Jon.

The science is still being learned. I choose to wait and see given my successful history with this virus and the disease ...

like the flu, right? I haven't taken a flu shot in almost 30 years. Caught the flu twice. used a high zinc medicine to neuter the virus' replication.

This isn't so unlike that it can't be a reasonable basis for most people.

 

[JonC]

that's TBD.

We've used animals as gauges in the past. The history of the mRNA cv jab is 2 human years and a large majority perished in at least 5 different species. That's not a good sign, Jon.

The science is still being learned. I choose to wait and see given my successful history with this virus and the disease ...

like the flu, right? I haven't taken a flu shot in almost 30 years. Caught the flu twice. used a high zinc medicine to neuter the virus' replication.

This isn't so unlike that it can't be a reasonable basis for most people.

I agree with Trump on this one. I think what was cutcwas red tape, not the science.

One of the benefits being explored with mRNA vaccines was that they can be produced and evaluated much quicker.

That said, to each his own. What is sufficient for me may not be to you.

 

[Two Wings]

One of the benefits being explored with mRNA vaccines was that they can be produced and evaluated much quicker.

true ... but we didn't need to produce as many as has been. We needed the susceptible to get vaxed. Could have been done with current vaccine types (MLV). Didn't need this all new type (yes, I recognize your rabies example ... but this isn't how the mRNA cv vax was promoted and it CLEARLY wasn't deployed in a volume anywhere close to what's been with this one in the first couple of months. So the sample size of the rabies mRNA vax isn't statistically significant.

What's a better gauge is the "o-fer" Veterinarians have suffered in seeking to develop an mRNA type vax for the coronavirus class pathogen.

 

[JonC]

true ... but we didn't need to produce as many as has been. We needed the susceptible to get vaxed. Could have been done with current vaccine types (MLV). Didn't need this all new type (yes, I recognize your rabies example ... but this isn't how the mRNA cv vax was promoted and it CLEARLY wasn't deployed in a volume anywhere close to what's been with this one in the first couple of months. So the sample size of the rabies mRNA vax isn't statistically significant.

What's a better gauge is the "o-fer" Veterinarians have suffered in seeking to develop an mRNA type vax for the coronavirus class pathogen.

I think the reason mRNA was the focus is mRNA vaccines showed the most promise in a short time frame with the least risk (again, if done in a short timeframe).

My concern with all of the vaccines would be the suspension (purity) on a worldwide scale given mass production. That said, given a short time frame I'd worry more about the non-mRNA vaccines.

The "problem" is not the vaccines. If there is a problem it is with the "problem" itself and that is the urgency to produce a vacvine.

I believe it was urgent and therefore the mRNA route justified. But if you do not belueve it was an urgent situation then more time would have been warranted to study the vaccines.

 

[Two Wings]

If there is a problem it is with the "problem"

OK, Jack Sparrow! LOL

I don't understand how there's more concern with a current vaccine type than with a new vaccine type never deployed.

My information is that the "Novovax" could have been deployed in MUCH smaller numbers ... but in the same time frame (Dec '20). triage the shots to those who really needed it.

doing that ... and bolstering the early treatment protocols ... I'm CONFIDENT we'd have been done with this thing by July of this year, not adding more issues to an already divisive place.

 

[JonC]

OK, Jack Sparrow! LOL

I don't understand how there's more concern with a current vaccine type than with a new vaccine type never deployed.

My information is that the "Novovax" could have been deployed in MUCH smaller numbers ... but in the same time frame (Dec '20). triage the shots to those who really needed it.

doing that ... and bolstering the early treatment protocols ... I'm CONFIDENT we'd have been done with this thing by July of this year, not adding more issues to an already divisive place.

The issue I would have with a quick "traditional" vaccine is we really don't know enough about the virus and the damage it does to the body. A relative (under 23) had a mild covid case about a year ago. He has been in and out of hospitals sence with heart issues they can't quite narrow down. A friend's daughter (mid 20's) had a stroke after a mild covid case. A local businessman killed himself about a year after a mild covid case. He complained about constant headaches and ringing in his head. Wrote he could no longer live with the pain. My wife has a coworker (early 30's, no health issues) who had a bad case of covid. He recovered but his lungs are so damaged he is now dependent on portable oxygen.

On the other hand we do know enough about mRNA vaccines to at least have some level of confidence in their general safety (in the mRNA part).

That said, vacvine numbers are skewed as the largest population of vacvinated are elderly and those with compromised immunity.