Covid vaccination status for CF members

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by Greg K

I presume this is just your opinion based on your own logic, but from what I have read about mutations, it doesn't really make sense. Mutations, as I understand it, are generally driven by evolutionary pressure. A virus (or bacteria) that can easily reproduce will generally not be under much evolutionary pressure and consequently not mutate to become more infectious or virile over time ( think common cold, for example) It may, however, be more prone to mutation when, for example, a vaccinated person or a partially vaccinated person who has not yet developed full strength immunity gets infected. In such a case, much of the virus load will be destroyed but some more resistant variants will survive. If such a partially vaccinated infected person then infects another individual with that surviving variant, that variant will become dominant in an environment where there is evolutionary pressure put on the virus by the immune response of vaccinated individuals.

This is why it is crucial that vaccinated individuals continue to protect themselves against infection during the interim before reaching full vaccinated status. Not only because they may get sick, but more importantly because if they do get sick and shed the virus, it may add to more mutations in the general population.

This, I believe, is fairly general knowledge regarding mutations ( especially when it comes to antibiotic resistant bacteria) . and it is why some scientist were opposed to a mass vaccination effort during a pandemic where ubiquitous infection almost guarantees that numerous partially vaccinated individuals will likely get infected before reaching full immunity and may infect others with the surviving variants which would lead towards more resistant variants.

Unless a vaccine is 100% effective the virus will continue to mutate. Covid and variants is here to stay for the foreseeable future.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

The vaccination progress is not being reduced at this time by the people that chose not to be vaccinated. It's the lack of sufficient supply of vaccine. The poor eligibility rules will certainly cause millions of deaths that could have been avoided if those most likely to spread were vaccinated first. Unfortunately age was the criteria used. Of course I'm speaking for what happened in the US. Could be different elsewhere.

This story and others state that the US demand is waning in many places, and that some states have even delayed or refused vaccine shipments because of reduced demand.

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

This story and others state that the US demand is waning in many places, and that some states have even delayed or refused vaccine shipments because of reduced demand.

The distribution model is the problem. In most areas there is only very limited supply. There is no integrated system of finding a vaccine in your area. You must check with each pharmacy, doctors office, clinic, state departments of health, etc to see if one is available. Most don't have a waiting list, you can only sign up if one is available. I received my first dose of Moderno last Thursday and know this to be true in Maryland. It has been spun by the politicians and media.

There is little need for vaccination in some locations and lifestyles. It's hard to convince individuals of the need for vaccination when there are no new cases in your area and you don't travel. Again, this speaks volumes for the ineptness of government to optimize a response to Covid.

[thomm225]

Pretty amazing statements.

Here many of us have never isolated or have been quarantined this whole period since 12/2019. We continued to work full time also.

I have a private office but most employees input data on my computer after hours.

I had one employee pass away from Covid 19 like symptoms in December 2019. He had pneumonia like symptoms and was about to be released then died the following day.

He was in my office the week before.

We have many ships from China coming in here especially back then.

So some of us had weird illnesses that following Spring but we got the shots anyway. I had mine on Tuesday and jogged 3 miles on Wednesday. Today I'm beat from both probably. I had Pfizer.

Next shot is in a couple weeks.

The place I went was similar to this but a bit larger. The nurse that gave me my shot had already had Covid and she said it was the worst thing she had ever gone through and she was probably mid 40's

https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news...in-chesapeake/

[Greg K]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Just to glance at the goalposts:
The truth, stated briefly, is that widespread vaccination REDUCES the likelihood of successful new mutations. The mutations we're currently battling today all came from unvaccinated people, since the vaccines were not yet widely available.

Wading back into the weeds... What is selective pressure? It's a $10 way of saying that antibodies (from past illness, or a vaccine) act on one or a subset of the characteristics of that virus, but that some mutations which don't happen to have that set of target characteristics, are not suppressed by the existing antibodies. These are your escape mutants.

My god, you are truly dense. Not only do you not respond to the specific passage whose meaning was in dispute, but then you go and pile on a bunch of other content mixed in with your own proclamations.

Yes, you are right, from everything I have read, there is a large and growing number of variants/mutations circulating in the world population and in infected individuals. Which variants survive and become dominant depends on selective pressure. One of the sources of such selective pressure ( as per the paragraph of the article that was in dispute) comes from the very focused antibody response specific to the vaccine sequence (ie, a single monoclonal antibody that targets a single epitope on a viral protein).


The bolded point regarding the specific response has interesting potential implications, one of which may be that the much wider natural immune response of unvaccinated asymptomatics and recovered patients may, in fact, be more effective in dealing with mutations than the vaccinated who may need further booster vaccinations when the variants become resistant to the narrow focus of the targeted antibody response of the vaccine.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Greg K

My god, you are truly dense. Not only do you not respond to the specific passage whose meaning was in dispute, but then you go and pile on a bunch of other content mixed in with your own proclamations.

O rly? I've responded precisely to the original assertion that COVID vaccines cause mutations. No, they do not.

Yes, you are right, from everything I have read, there is a large and growing number of variants/mutations circulating in the world population and in infected individuals. Which variants survive and become dominant depends on selective pressure. One of the sources of such selective pressure ( as per the paragraph of the article that was in dispute) comes from the very focused antibody response specific to the vaccine sequence (ie, a single monoclonal antibody that targets a single epitope on a viral protein).

... which assumes a single monoclonal antibody. Which vaccines produce just those?

The bolded point regarding the specific response has interesting potential implications, one of which may be that the much wider natural immune response of unvaccinated asymptomatics and recovered patients may, in fact, be more effective in dealing with mutations than the vaccinated who may need further booster vaccinations when the variants become resistant to the narrow focus of the targeted antibody response of the vaccine.

Well, one of the things I have shown is that the natural immune response can be all over the map, from strong to insufficient. As compared to the fairly uniformly strong protection from vaccination. So I'd bet that natural immunity is overall inferior to that from the vaccines. They actually do try to make vaccines as broad as possible.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Not true; the vaccinated are much less likely to get COVID, period, and what illness they might catch will be less severe and of a shorter duration. And the vaccinated folks they hang around with are much less likely to catch it from them. And so on. That's "herd immunity", achieved through vaccination.

You do know that those trials had limitations, discrepancies and this giant conflict of interest right:

Pfizer was responsible for the design and conduct of the trial, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, and the writing of the manuscript. BioNTech was the sponsor of the trial, manufactured the BNT162b2 clinical trial material, and contributed to the interpretation of the data and the writing of the manuscript.https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577

One way the trial’s raw data could facilitate an informed judgment as to whether any potential unblinding might have affected the results is by analyzing how often people with symptoms of covid-19 were referred for confirmatory SARS-CoV-2 testing. Without a referral for testing, a suspected covid-19 case could not become a confirmed covid-19 case, and thus is a crucial step in order to be counted as a primary event: lab-confirmed, symptomatic covid-19. Because some of the adverse reactions to the vaccine are themselves also symptoms of covid-19 (e.g. fever, muscle pain), one might expect a far larger proportion of people receiving vaccine to have been swabbed and tested for SARS-CoV-2 than those receiving placebo.

This assumes all people with symptoms would be tested, as one might expect would be the case. However the trial protocols for Moderna and Pfizer’s studies contain explicit language instructing investigators to use their clinical judgment to decide whether to refer people for testing.https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/11/26...the-full-data/

n a proper trial, all cases of covid-19 should have been recorded, no matter which arm of the trial the case occurred in. (In epidemiology terms, there should be no ascertainment bias, or differential measurement error). It’s even become common sense in the Covid era: “test, test, test.” But if referrals for testing were not provided to all individuals with symptoms of covid-19—for example because an assumption was made that the symptoms were due to side-effects of the vaccine—cases could go uncounted.

THOSE WITHOUT SYMPTOMS WERE NOT TESTED FOR COVID! From the trials, there is no way to tell if asymptomatic people had covid nor if you were more likely to be an asymptomatic carrier if you were in the vaccine arm. People are getting vaccinated so they can go back to the old normal (spreading germs). I will stand by what I said which is that if the vaccinated are going to end up being likely to be asymptomatic yet contagious carriers (The trials didn't study this), then we have a huge problem! Why does Pfizer (convicted felons for false marketing of drugs causing death due to stroke and heart attack) Get to design the study, conduct the study, do the analysis, interpret the results and write the manuscript. Besides that, there is data missing from the study that they are not releasing to the public. Meanwhile we have completely ignored and suppressed important and effective treatment and prevention protocols. Now they are allowed to unblind and medicate the placebo cohort which will completely destroy the longer term safety portion of the trials of this still UNAPPROVED EXPERIMENTAL DRUG.

[Thumbs Up]

Mutations. They are finding thousands of them. The more they look the more they find. The articles referenced are only looking at a few. Mutations will be the fear tactic that keep you coming back for more shots, forever. Whatever long term side effects any of these drugs do have will be a boon for big pharma. Just like the flu which they probably spread each year with their FLUMIST live virus contagion vaccine containing the current year's best guess for the variant of the year. Crooked to the core.

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Viral mutations "happen". Evolutionary pressure (aka natural selection) is simply another way to say that the mutations that confer advantage will survive and spread. And the useless or non-beneficial mutations die out.

SARS-CoV-2 is an RNA virus, which has high propensity to mutate, compared to DNA viruses.

Vaccines do not 'drive' mutations; the antibodies they generate fight the virus; they are another set of hurdles that a mutation must get over, to survive and propagate.

Hm. The "vaccines" do not generate antibodies, stop spinning pseudo-science. Both viral vector virus GEN therapies and mRNA gene therapies framed as vaccines evade yor cell and force it to produce foreign proteines (the ones, that Covid has as spike proteins and who knows what else) instead of your own ones from your DNA derived RNA.

This are hopefully identified as bogus and your own immune system produces either antibodies / t-cells to fight them or just maybe ignores them. That is the immune reaction.

Your immune system then hopefully remembers the thread and stores it in his database of viruses either shortterm by just producing excess antibodies / t- cells or long term by altering some of your DNA, so it can be inherited to the next generation. If and how it stores it or not decides your organism alone. The Virus RNA is ripped in peaces, analyzed, categorised and used or stored to produce the antibodies.

Also mRNA parts of the vector virus DNA/RNA can be split and reverse transcribed into your DNA, the reverse-transcriptase and transcriptase proteins are produced by your cell for such purposes of learning by mutations.

Same can happen to the virus DNA / RNA, while it is transcribed, it can append or insert some parts of your RNA floating around and create that way mutations adapted to the host. they are not always just accidents, they adapt while they multiply.

This is a war of cells, they take foreigh genes as hostage, duck, cover, disguise and adapt as any other living creature.

The helper proteines for the transcription are either from the host or are provided by the virus itself.

Basic genetics lectures. You can watch some online medicine classes from your favorite university on DNA, transcriptase, retroviruses, reverse transcription, error correction by the double helix of DNA and RNA based life, mutations and variations and many more.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by GoinSumWare

Asymptomatic also does not mean there IS underlying damage that isn't immediately apparent. You are making an assumption to buttress your position. Do you have any data to support it?

BTW due to Prop 65, passed by the government of California, pretty much anything you buy contains the following:

"WARNING: This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm."

Does the fact that using a tennis racket or toaster containing that warning give you cause for concern?

This is true, an asymptomatic infection doesn't guarantee there is or isn't damage. However, knowing that the infection can result in a set of outcomes, some of which manifest as external symptoms and some that don't, would suggest it's not unreasonable to look for such signs. My comment was based on the recollection that signs of heart/lung damage had been observed in asymptomatic cases. A simple link from a quick Google: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/2020...e-not-harmless

For a more crude example, suppose your boat is hit by lightning but apart from a few scorch marks appears undamaged (plotter still working, lights still on, etc). Do you simply celebrate and carry on, or do you do a more thorough check for hidden damage?


Re Prop 65: I, as I suspect many Californians, consider the prop 65 warnings to be generally information-free; their ubiquity, minimal triggering threshold, and the lack of any exposure guidelines are sufficient to render them pointless.

[UFO]

Originally Posted by Greg K

My god, you are truly dense. Not only do you not respond to the specific passage whose meaning was in dispute, but then you go and pile on a bunch of other content mixed in with your own proclamations.

Yes, you are right, from everything I have read, there is a large and growing number of variants/mutations circulating in the world population and in infected individuals. Which variants survive and become dominant depends on selective pressure. One of the sources of such selective pressure ( as per the paragraph of the article that was in dispute) comes from the very focused antibody response specific to the vaccine sequence (ie, a single monoclonal antibody that targets a single epitope on a viral protein).


The bolded point regarding the specific response has interesting potential implications, one of which may be that the much wider natural immune response of unvaccinated asymptomatics and recovered patients may, in fact, be more effective in dealing with mutations than the vaccinated who may need further booster vaccinations when the variants become resistant to the narrow focus of the targeted antibody response of the vaccine.

I would not waste your energy, He/She will never admit in any thread about anything to something that does not agree with their personal beliefs and ideas.



As far as the Covid threads go the vehemence behind the posts and the sheer amount of posts many spouting corporate propaganda makes me at times think they work in the marketing department for a pharmaceutical company.

[lonesoldier0408]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

If you just forget for a moment your addiction to needles in your arms, there is another more natural path to immunity with a broad band protection towards viruses, their DNA or RNA is chopped, sampled and memorized by the immune system. Instead of relying on a single spike protein, the normal immune system memorizes different pattern and reacts much better to mutations than a designer mRNA or Trojan horse Virus used as attack Vector to inject the spike protein RNA into your cells as GEN therapy.

Also the risks for your further life by your genetically tampered immune system is unpredictable. It may fight you to death on the next infection by freaking out and overreacting.

Young people sozializing and spreading the virus among them without symptoms or with a light cold symptomatic causes their immune system to learn and immunize them, much more efficiently than the jab. You can consider them as being vaccinated with a broad band vaccine. No need for experimental shots.

I agree, that people with a weak immune system may need vaccinations, but disagree to impose unnecessary health risks to the non vulnerable by vaccinating them, just to make some person feel safer or happy - what in fact is not true.

The shot does not stop spreading the virus, does not stop the virus from mutating either, but it promotes variations and selection of more resistent variants.

And the virus is not a death sentence to an average person at all. This exaggregation is simply scare mongering.

As a Cold virus, it will disappear during the summer and will come back in the winter, and there is nothing you can do about it.

The masking and social distancing has to end, to allow the natural immune system to recover after being artificially supressed for over an year.

I’ve also noted, that there are those in the, “Infectious Diseases Field,” who are now proposing, that the vaccines may have the effect of, “Putting blinders on the immune system.”
Your immune system gets locked on one variant, allowing the others to end you.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

Hm. The "vaccines" do not generate antibodies, stop spinning pseudo-science. Both viral vector virus GEN therapies and mRNA gene therapies framed as vaccines evade yor cell and force it to produce foreign proteines (the ones, that Covid has as spike proteins and who knows what else) instead of your own ones from your DNA derived RNA.

This are hopefully identified as bogus and your own immune system produces either antibodies / t-cells to fight them or just maybe ignores them. That is the immune reaction.

Since tonight's discussions are all about hair splitting... ok you're right that vaccines don't generate antibodies. Let me clarify then: vaccines present a harmless viral target dressed up like the virus they want to create immunity to, and your body memorizes the look of the harmless intruder as it beats the snot out of it. Hope that's better.

That mRNA gen therapy stuff? Purest anti-vax hokum.

Also mRNA parts of the vector virus DNA/RNA can be split and reverse transcribed into your DNA, the reverse-transcriptase and transcriptase proteins are produced by your cell for such purposes of learning by mutations.

Same can happen to the virus DNA / RNA, while it is transcribed, it can append or insert some parts of your RNA floating around and create that way mutations adapted to the host. they are not always just accidents, they adapt while they multiply.

BS built on top of BS. The mRNA vaccines use a harmless, short-lived virus to ask your cells to make some proteins that resemble the SARS-CoV2 spike. Then they get wiped out, and your body remembers the spike-like proteins. Period. Full Stop. No antlers, no microchips, no genetic alterations.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by UFO

I would not waste your energy, He/She will never admit in any thread about anything to something that does not agree with their personal beliefs and ideas.

"He" will do, thanks.

As far as the Covid threads go the vehemence behind the posts and the sheer amount of posts many spouting corporate propaganda makes me at times think they work in the marketing department for a pharmaceutical company.

It would be flattering to be repeatedly accused of being a professional communicator of some sort, if it wasn't so... juvenile. Do you seriously wanna share a tent with T-Up and the plandemic/5G/"covid was engineered!"/evil Bill Gates/microchip stuff? Cos that's where all this stuff leads.

Originally Posted by lonesoldier0408

I’ve also noted, that there are those in the, “Infectious Diseases Field,” who are now proposing, that the vaccines may have the effect of, “Putting blinders on the immune system.”
Your immune system gets locked on one variant, allowing the others to end you.

Links would help.


Vaccines are a bit better engineered than that, and whatever immunity they confer is not at the cost of greater susceptability to something else, like a variant. Variants get more transmissible because that's how viral evolution works... and evolution works the same whether or not you've been vaccinated. But vaccination, by reducing the duration and severity of illness, provides LESS opportunity for variants to evolve and propagate.

Don't anyone take my word for this. Look it up for yourselves.

[UFO]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

"He" will do, thanks.




It would be flattering to be repeatedly accused of being a professional communicator of some sort, if it wasn't so... juvenile. Do you seriously wanna share a tent with T-Up and the plandemic/5G/"covid was engineered!"/evil Bill Gates/microchip stuff? Cos that's where all this stuff leads.

Objection... Leading statement.


Typical of you to make such a Junk statement trying to link legitimate concerns into far out extreme views. One thinks it is you who needs to grow up as you are now just throwing out schoolyard insults and logic.