Alternative 'rona thread

[Pureblood]

15 minutes ago, SasaS said:

Well, I don't know what it was supposed to do or not to do, but you posted the links in response to it, hence my comment. 

I get you, I was just pointing out that he's not a lone wolf. 

[SasaS]

Just now, Pureblood said:

I get you, I was just pointing out that he's not a lone wolf. 

We all know that, there is a whole movement and hundreds and thousands of people expressing their opinions. 

[Pureblood]

17 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

Not sure what answer you want.

 

The charge was levelled by an anti-vax reporters and a senators, who, unsurprisingly, likes comparing covid restrictions to the holocaust, that there was some nefarious reason for the change, yet the CDC definition has changed three times in the last 6 years from 

 

Up to 2015 -  Injection of a killed or weakened infections organism in order to prevent the disease 

 

2015 - 2021 - The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.

 

Most recent change - The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.

 

Seemingly the change was brought about because as no vaccine is 100% successful and as people mis-interpret immunity as 100% protection it was no longer an adequate description, especially as immunity means different things in different contexts.

 

This, for example describes immunity as protection from disease

https://www.tabers.com/tabersonline/view/Tabers-Dictionary/768075/all/immunity

 

This describes it as a condition of being able to resist a particular disease especially through preventing development of a pathogenic microorganism or by counteracting the effects of its products

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/immunity#medicalDictionary

 

This describes it as the body’s ability to resist infection, afforded by the presence of circulating antibodies and white blood cells. Healthy individuals ...

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199557141.001.0001/acref-9780199557141-e-4908

 

This describes it as The body’s ability to resist infection and disease.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/d-through-i#I-terms

 

The legal meaning of immunity means something else, and so on.

 

Despite this the CDC appear to interchange protection and immunity so they aren't hiding the change, "COVID-19 vaccines teach our immune systems how to recognize and fight the virus that causes COVID-19. It typically takes 2 weeks after vaccination for the body to build protection (immunity) against the virus that causes COVID-19.". which can be found

 

Here:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/how-they-work.html

Here:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/keythingstoknow.html

And Here:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html

 

for example.

 

Perhaps if you could narrow down your complaint I'd be able to look at it a bit more thoroughly as I have no doubt that this answer isn't satisfactory for you. 

 

The real reason is obvious - the current generation of Covid vaccines didn't meet the definition, so it was altered in the year of the rollout.

[Captain Turdseye]

1 hour ago, Pureblood said:

I doubt many will be watching 45 minutes of that.

 

10k subscribers v Joe Rogan. Not gonna work, is it. 

I watched it. I don’t listen to Rogan. 

[Pureblood]

4 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:

I watched it. I don’t listen to Rogan. 

[Red Phoenix]

 

I wonder if many of those supporting mandatory vaccines for NHS staff looked into this?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

I wonder if many of those supporting mandatory vaccines for NHS staff looked into this?

That whole thread belongs in the grown-up Coronavirus thread.

[No2]

2 hours ago, Pureblood said:

Robert Malone isn't an island.  He has a group of 16,000 scientists backing him.

 

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/humanitys-whistleblower-dr-robert-malone-sounds-the-alarm/article_e9c05e86-6ccf-11ec-9417-bbc21429de9c.html

 

The Chief Architect of mRNA platform technology is blowing the whistle on the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. And if he is correct, we are all in grave danger – and 16,000 of his fellow scientists agree with him.

 

https://doctorsandscientistsdeclaration.org/

16001 now, you're now a member. You're welcome.

 

 

[Pureblood]

[Pureblood]

[Jose Jones]

2 hours ago, Pureblood said:

The real reason is obvious - the current generation of Covid vaccines didn't meet the definition, so it was altered in the year of the rollout.

Yeah probably because a lot of people were simplistically using it as a gotcha that the Covid vaccines weren't by "definition" vaccines, so they changed it, but same people now are using it as a gotcha for vaccine propaganda.

 

Anyway, why do you care what the CDC say, you aren't in America?

[Guest]

 

[Pureblood]

2 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Yeah probably because a lot of people were simplistically using it as a gotcha that the Covid vaccines weren't by "definition" vaccines, so they changed it, but same people now are using it as a gotcha for vaccine propaganda.

 

Anyway, why do you care what the CDC say, you aren't in America?

Wouldn't say I particularly care that much in the grand scheme of things.  That said, it's another example of the kind of sleight of hand and duplicity we've seen throughout this pandemic from regulatory agencies in the US and globally.

 

In an ideal world, if the vaccines had done what they'd said on the tin, the definition wouldn't have been changed.  Would you agree?    

[Pureblood]

2 minutes ago, Shooter in the Motor said:

 

Thank you for your kind offer of a first dose, Mr Whitty, but I accept the warning on the label.

[TD_LFC]

3 minutes ago, Pureblood said:

Wouldn't say I particularly care that much in the grand scheme of things.  That said, it's another example of the kind of sleight of hand and duplicity we've seen throughout this pandemic from regulatory agencies in the US and globally.

 

In an ideal world, if the vaccines had done what they'd said on the tin, the definition wouldn't have been changed.  Would you agree?    

It's the dictionary's you need to watch, looks like they're aiding and abetting.

[Pureblood]

Just now, TD_LFC said:

It's the dictionary's you need to watch, looks like they're aiding and abetting.

The correct plural noun in this instance is "dictionaries".  

[TD_LFC]

5 minutes ago, Pureblood said:

The correct plural noun in this instance is "dictionaries".  

I burnt my dictionary in solidarity with the anti vaxxers so had nothing to check.

 

Big Pharma hand in hand with Big Dic's

[Pureblood]

7 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

I burnt my dictionary in solidarity with the anti vaxxers so had nothing to check.

That's more like it. Want some horse paste?

[Jose Jones]

3 minutes ago, Pureblood said:

Wouldn't say I particularly care that much in the grand scheme of things.  That said, it's another example of the kind of sleight of hand and duplicity we've seen throughout this pandemic from regulatory agencies in the US and globally.

 

In an ideal world, if the vaccines had done what they'd said on the tin, the definition wouldn't have been changed.  Would you agree?    

Yeah, sorry, it was mainly Iceman going on about the CDC definition, and he's in America so fair enough.  I just have a bee in my bonnet about social media basically being polluted by polarised US political bollocks, so couldn't help myslef.  

You can generally tell if people who are not based in the US start banging on about the FDA or CDC that they are just parroting bullshit by partisan bullshitters. 

 

Anyway, I don't think it matters a jot whether the CDC changed their wording or not.  Arguing about it is mainly hot air by people who prefer the hot air to reasonable discussion.

 

The data shows that most of the Covid vaccines that got approved (the mRNA vaccines and the others) were very effective at reducing severe outcomes and hospitalisation in the alpha strain what they were designed for but less effective at reducing infection - reduced infection by something like 35%.  Then for the delta strain, the effect on outcomes held up, but ability to prevent infection dropped.

For Omicron the data doesn't seem too clear just yet, but certainly seems they have very little effect on spread, judging by the massive numbers about the place.

 

[Pureblood]

11 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Yeah, sorry, it was mainly Iceman going on about the CDC definition, and he's in America so fair enough.  I just have a bee in my bonnet about social media basically being polluted by polarised US political bollocks, so couldn't help myslef.  

You can generally tell if people who are not based in the US start banging on about the FDA or CDC that they are just parroting bullshit by partisan bullshitters. 

Personally I no longer have much faith in left/right politics and its political spectrum, and try not to see things through a left/right schism.  By letting go of this, I have benefitted from going to sources that I would have avoided in the past.  It has been a liberating experience for me, to no longer get wound up and have a political axe to grind when consuming the news from whatever source it may be.  For me, the message is more important.  Does it make sense, does the science make sense, does it all tally up; that kind of thing.  

 

I agree that there's far too much partisan crap, but I can filter it now.

[Iceman]

If you still need a booster after being fully vaxxed, and still need to
be tested after being fully vaxxed, and you still need to wear a mask after
being fully vaxxed, and you can get hospitalized and die after being fully vaxxed,

don't you think its time to admit you've been conned???

Asking for a friend.

[SasaS]

22 minutes ago, Pureblood said:

Personally I no longer have much faith in left/right politics and its political spectrum, and try not to see things through a left/right schism.  By letting go of this, I have benefitted from going to sources that I would have avoided in the past.  It has been a liberating experience for me, to no longer get wound up and have a political axe to grind when consuming the news from whatever source it may be.  For me, the message is more important.  Does it make sense, does the science make sense, does it all tally up; that kind of thing.  

 

I agree that there's far too much partisan crap, but I can filter it now.

And yet...

[Iceman]

They've changed the definition of vaccines so that it no longer means preventing the disease or producing immunity. Whereas before the Covid vaccine wouldn't necessarily meet their definition of a vaccine, now it meets the new definition. 

 

Funnily enough it's exactly what they are doing to the definition of vaccinated. 

[ManéMan]

 

[Red Phoenix]

55 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

You can generally tell if people who are not based in the US start banging on about the FDA or CDC that they are just parroting bullshit by partisan bullshitters.

 

The US clearly has a big influence on the rest of the world, especially the western world. That's why I've usually tried to follow some of what's been going on over there. With this, if the narrative goes to shit it'll likely have a domino effect in other countries not long after, and it's looking kind of crazy over there at the moment with Biden coming across as more of a clown as time passes so maybe there's some hope that more rational changes will be made in the future.

 

Not that you can see that much now when looking at Macron and other idiots in Europe though.

 

And if the FDA and/or CDC blocked any version of Pfizer or Moderna vaccines that would also have a big effect around the world and make people finally pay more attention to what's going on.

 

But this is what we get instead :

 

 

If you click through to that FDA tweet itself the replies are interesting. Not looking so good for them at the moment I don't think.

 

Thread here too :