Ontopic Find all your Covid-19 needs here!

HipHugHer said:
Pedantics over terms, language, definitions, etc.
Click to expand...
Nah.
A) it shows your willing ignorance about how all vaccines work. No vaccine is 100% effective.
B) it shows that you are consciously deciding you love the smell of your own shit.

Either way it shows I don't need to read your nonsense.

Educate yourself, please.

U.S. Vaccine Safety - Overview, History, and How It Works | CDC

Safety is a priority during the development and use of all vaccines in the United States. Learn more about the history of vaccine safety, current safety programs, and how they work.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov
 
TO BE FAIR, the study I linked does show some reduced likelihood of developing a full-blown case in vaxxed vs. unvaxxed though the numbers are still plenty high enough you still stand a decent chance of catching it even with vaccination.
And if you do, the likelihood of spreading it is too small to make a difference vaxxed vs. unvaxxed. They're both spreaders. And the "reduced likelihood" of not developing a case in the first place isn't all that damn reduced.
 
Mr. Argumentor said:
Nah.
A) it shows your willing ignorance about how all vaccines work. No vaccine is 100% effective.
B) it shows that you are consciously deciding you love the smell of your own shit.

Either way it shows I don't need to read your nonsense.

Educate yourself, please.

U.S. Vaccine Safety - Overview, History, and How It Works | CDC

Safety is a priority during the development and use of all vaccines in the United States. Learn more about the history of vaccine safety, current safety programs, and how they work.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov
Click to expand...
Where did I say 100% effective? You referring to the "you don't get it/your antibodies kill it" part? Because that's what happens for the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time in other vaccines.
Would you rather I wrote a whole 'nother wall of text saying nothing is 100% and there's always outliers? Is that not common knowledge anymore?
The covid stuff helps some. I took it myself. That oughtta be enough. I don't need to be some cheerleader for the stuff. Somebody else doesn't want to, fine by me. Not my circus not my monkeys.
 
to be fair letterkenny problems GIF
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: HipHugHer
HipHugHer said:
Pedantics over terms, language, definitions, etc.

Other vaccines - you can be exposed to it and not get it/your antibodies kill it.

Covid vaccine - you can still catch it, still spread it, and still get sick yourself though probably not as severe.

It's like the "just the tip" of vaccines.
Click to expand...
yeah this is literally exactly how vaccines work - you're exposed to something that tells your body what antigens to look out for and your body makes antibodies based on that. everything you said about the COVID vaccine is also true for every other vaccine as well - you *can* still catch it and still get sick, but that doesn't happen as often because a large enough population has been vaccinated for long enough that the viruses they protect against aren't an epidemic in the U.S. so you're far less likely to be exposed to them. the most similar one is the flu vaccine, which is fresh every year based on the most prevalent 4 strains leading up to flu season, and as with the COVID vaccine it's still entirely possible to still get the flu (but also it's likely to be less severe if you've been vaccinated).
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: HipHugHer
HipHugHer said:
At the time it hadn't received the full Monty FDA anal exam nearly everything medical related does so ya we were guinea pigs in a way.
I got it anyway. If somebody else didn't want to I'm cool with that.
I'm not so sure vaccine is even a correct term. I suppose it could be because it has to do with a virus but it just reduces severity, doesn't prevent you from either getting it or spreading it. Not seeing how that's supposed to "stop the spread".

Found this from last month.

DEFINE_ME

www.thelancet.com


I'll get the booster anyway, there are benefits. Just the way the authorities talk it's as if the stuff is some kinda covid kryptonite when it's nowhere near it.

Still wear a mask too if someplace "strongly recommends" it or not having one would make people feel uncomfortable, even though there's studies saying anything less than n95 doesn't really do that much, and most people just use cloth or surgeons type mask anyway.


So basically I'm vaccinated but I can still catch it and spread it and the masks myself and most other people use are as much theatre prop as they are protective device but I play along anyway. It's for the good of the collective after all.
Doesn't bother me if someone doesn't want to do some or any of that though.
Click to expand...
If you want to argue against Emergency Use Authorization, I guess you can, but I think that may stem from a lack of understanding of the approval process (not to suggest I understand it either). When final approval came, it was from the exact same data they used to grant the EUA. The reason is that the science is done and we knew it was safe and effective. If your argument is that because we don't if its 100% safe and effective that we're all guinea pigs you may not really seem to understand our knowledgebase of the human body. While better than it was yesterday, or fifty years ago, its still grossly incomplete. You could make the exact same argument about any drug that is ever approved, EUA or full authorization. Right? But that's a silly and useless argument.

And on the vaccine front, you've read a lot about this man. Come on. You absolutely know that the COVID vaccines prevent you from getting it. And if you get it, it greatly reduces your chance of spreading it. If your complaint is that it isn't perfect, reread my previous paragraph.

As far as the study you posted, doesn't it seem somewhat normal that in a situation that the study authors define exposure as "close and prolonged" that people would test positive for the virus? Additionally, they're using PCR tests which don't align at all with the ability to spread the virus. And finally, I see nothing about the severity of these secondary attacks on the vaccinated (or unvaccinated, not that it matters) individuals. I'd bet there's a good chance that they are both asymptomatic and not contagious.

I agree that anything less than N95 is theatre.
 
NukesII said:
10 years of required trials to get FDA approval.
Unless the Technocrats wish otherwise.
Apparently they do.
Click to expand...
There is no time mandate. That doesnt exist

There is three phases, with required data collection, statistical analysis, and further testing.

HMH_COVID19_AcceleratedVaccineInfographic.jpg


As the article/image above states, none of that was waived or changed for COVID vaccines. Its just occurred on a far faster and wider scale, meaning the data was collected more quickly due to larger sample sizes, etc, and that set of data was analyzed with priority.

If Phase III is 1000s of volunteers? We're on phase 5000 with the amount of folks that have taken it, and provided data to ensure its safety.
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: fly
For most drugs, its sometimes takes 3-4 years just to get a couple thousand volunteers for Phase III trials. With COVID, they each got 30,000+ volunteers (which is an INSANELY huge trial) overnight.
 
Domon said:
There is no time mandate. That doesnt exist

There is three phases, with required data collection, statistical analysis, and further testing.

HMH_COVID19_AcceleratedVaccineInfographic.jpg


As the article/image above states, none of that was waived or changed for COVID vaccines. Its just occurred on a far faster and wider scale, meaning the data was collected more quickly due to larger sample sizes, etc, and that set of data was analyzed with priority.

If Phase III is 1000s of volunteers? We're on phase 5000 with the amount of folks that have taken it, and provided data to ensure its safety.
Click to expand...

dont bother arguing the crazy with facts
 
  • Gravy
Reactions: Mr. Argumentor, Domon and Jehannum
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back