editor
hiraethified
Are you really this ignorant?
Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion
- Thread starter Sasaferrato
- Start date
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
As ed says- nope.
The only vaccine considered at all "sterilising" is the HPV.
The latest bullshit is the shocking revelation that Pfizer did not spent months testing effectiveness at preventing onward transmission while people were dying in their thousands - hence the "emergency" licensing - well duh.
I had the measles as a kid too despite being vaccinated. But 'a rash and feeling a bit rubbish for a week' measles, not the potential 'blindness/brain damage/death' kind of measles because of the vaccine.
Kind of like Covid, Griff. With the vaccine, you can still get it but you're way less likely to get seriously ill/die of Covid.
Without the vaccine...have you forgotten all the deaths and people being left with serious impairments from getting Covid already?
Last edited:
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
Apparently an unpleasant feature of measles is its ability to undo acquired immunity to other diseases ...
Since I have no way of knowing if I had measles as a kid, I will probably get my MMRs at some point.
www.newscientist.com
Since I have no way of knowing if I had measles as a kid, I will probably get my MMRs at some point.
Measles has a devastating and long-term effect on your immune system
Measles makes children vulnerable to other infections and now we know why – it wipes a large part of the immune system's memory of other pathogens
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
I noticed on the RaDIO 4 news that someone at the
nhsproviders.org
was citing underfunding in the NHS and holding up the spectre of
www.sandiegouniontribune.com
Maybe the NHS providers (or to be more specific the NHS internal market) might be a contributory cause of this underfunding problem here in the UK.
Still at least the NHS Providers held their conference in Liverpool, not Sharm El Sheik, or indeed Cannes - where Homes for Lambeth np doubt go for their MIPIM property fairs.
Annual Conference and Exhibition event - NHS Providers
NHS Providers' flagship Annual Conference and Exhibition is a unique event. It brings together senior NHS leaders for debate discussion and networking.
nhsproviders.org
Uptick in flu cases prompts hospitals to use overflow tents in parking lots to ease ER burden
Health care professionals unsure if season is peaking early or will be sustained through winter
www.sandiegouniontribune.com
Maybe the NHS providers (or to be more specific the NHS internal market) might be a contributory cause of this underfunding problem here in the UK.
Still at least the NHS Providers held their conference in Liverpool, not Sharm El Sheik, or indeed Cannes - where Homes for Lambeth np doubt go for their MIPIM property fairs.
Thesaint
Active Member
The problem is claims were made about the vaccines performance which turned out to be not reflected in real life.
In Pfizers case the CEO famously claimed at one time his product was effective at stopping covid but the company now admit they didn't really test this feature as they didn't have time which itself is fair enough, but begs questions about his claims.
Normally PR bluster of a company over promoting their product is nothing new, but in 2021 situation this was poorly judged by the CEO and and those implementing policy becomes particularly political as people have lost their liberties and livelyhoods because of these claims....the backlash is hardly surprising if we're honest.
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
Do you have a link for that ?
Not that what the CEO of a massive scientific company says counts for much ..
I find it best not to listen to such people ..
Even Fauci et al. saying not to wear masks at the start - they had their reasons and were working within the limitations of knowledge and expectations of acceptability to the public.
I masked from day 1 - though mostly it would have protected others from me ...
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I think you'll find that assumptions were made - in the media, politics, etc. - about vaccine performance. Any virologist knows damn well that a vaccine isn't some kind of magic bullet. But the narrative gets oversimplified by non-clinicians, and those oversimplifications quickly become accepted as "fact".
Bottom line: vaccination HAS reduced severity of infection in many, many cases: you only have to look at the sharp drop in hospitalisations and deaths following the rollout of vaccination programmes. It would be harder to measure, but it is likely that vaccination has also reduced transmissivity of the virus, as well.
I notice you're still wedded to your tactic of snide insinuation.
Thesaint
Active Member
Try searching Twitter for "Albert Bourla 100% claim". As time progressed he did admit they were effective at limiting serious problems but not so good at the infection/transmission side in a tv interview from memory which is what real life was showing but the internet remembers his early claims.
Exactly, and not only the media and politiciansbut people repeating these 'facts' online with a cult like ferocity.
My main point was somebody somewhere decided or advised policies on assumptions/claims and people cant be surprised people react back
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Absolutely. It has never been claimed that any of the Covid vaccines are 100% effective in preventing you catching Covid, because they are not.I had the measles as a kid too despite being vaccinated. But 'a rash and feeling a bit rubbish for a week' measles, not the potential 'blindness/brain damage/death' kind of measles because of the vaccine.
Kind of like Covid, Griff. With the vaccine, you can still get it but you're way less likely to get seriously ill/die of Covid.
Without the vaccine...have you forgotten all the deaths and people being left with serious impairments from getting Covid already?
Nor do they necessarily stop spread.
What they do do is help people like me not to die if we catch Covid.
Anyone questioning the desirability of the vaccination campaign should just cast their mind back to the pre-vaccine days, and the death figures at that time.
One would have thought that the usefulness of vaccination wouldn't even be a topic for discussion, now that there is solid evidence.
2hats
Dust.
Whoops! My ‘mendacious troll’ detector appears to have gone off.
Meanwhile I had a dip in the sludge of social media and see that your fellow travellers appear to be using that ('100%') phrase to refer to this tweet from Bourla:
nitter.net
where he clearly references this press release:
www.pfizer.com
Which makes it very clear that they refer to 100% efficacy to severe disease seen in a key study (and sub-study thereof):
Anyone with any awareness of the underlying science was, well before they were publicly available, very clear that these first generation vaccines were unlikely to provide sterilising immunity:
Shy about providing actual references eh? I’m still waiting for you to answer this question:
Meanwhile I had a dip in the sludge of social media and see that your fellow travellers appear to be using that ('100%') phrase to refer to this tweet from Bourla:
Albert Bourla (@AlbertBourla)
Excited to share that updated analysis from our Phase 3 study with BioNTech also showed that our COVID-19 vaccine was 100% effective in preventing #COVID19 cases in South Africa. 100%...
nitter.net
Pfizer and BioNTech Confirm High Efficacy and No Serious Safety Concerns Through Up to Six Months Following Second Dose in Updated Topline Analysis of Landmark COVID-19 Vaccine Study | Pfizer
Analysis of 927 confirmed symptomatic cases of COVID-19 demonstrates BNT162b2 is highly effective with 91.3% vaccine efficacy observed against COVID-19, measured seven days through up to six months after the second dose Vaccine was 100% effective in preventing severe disease as defined by the...
www.pfizer.com
Anyone with any awareness of the underlying science was, well before they were publicly available, very clear that these first generation vaccines were unlikely to provide sterilising immunity:
Last edited:
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
wemakeyousoundb
hopefully not gimboid
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
I meant to post this somewhere, there are better threads but this will do:
Thread by @jljcolorado on Thread Reader App
@jljcolorado: 1/ The Skagit Choir outbreak was dominated by aerosol transmission 52 out of 60 infected after 2.5 hr practice Our Skagit Choir Paper has been accepted after peer review, available at: 2/ Not isolated ...…threadreaderapp.com
Basically a relatively interesting peer reviewed study out studying infection cases in choirs. Suggests, unsurprisingly, that it’s largely about aerosols and not e.g. surfaces. This means following some maybe weirder rules like do more outside, have windows open, don’t go to places where people are shouting or whatever.
Turns out this peer-reviewed choir superspreader case wasn’t anything of the sort. Oh well never mind I guess.
Ban on choral singing based on flawed evidence, study suggests
Misguided risk analysis lay behind pandemic ruling, paper says
www.churchtimes.co.uk
Last edited:
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
If there's one thing I really dislike, it's people who don't actually have the integrity to stand behind their views. So when one of them gets decently owned, I'm going to permit myself just a little gloat.shouldn't gloat about the reminder
but hey,
it's 1Am and I'm pissed
Not that it'll make any odds. He'll just lie low for a bit, and be back in due course peddling the same half-arsed drivel.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
He'd rather spend half a dozen posts implying something that he can then run away from than commit himself to a position and debate it honestly.
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Yeah, I think it's not really a distinction that's massively relevant in day-to-day conversation. People look at you funny when you say "SARS-Cov-2"
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
teuchter
je suis teuchter
A PDF of this (pre print) paper is here, for anyone interested in reading it.Turns out this peer-reviewed choir superspreader case wasn’t anything of the sort. Oh well never mind I guess.
Ban on choral singing based on flawed evidence, study suggests
Misguided risk analysis lay behind pandemic ruling, paper says
elbows
Well-Known Member
Fucking Dingwall is one of the authors of that paper. One of the other 4 authors is a music director and conductor. I will look into the other authors. One of the complaints is about 'excessive' investment in ventilation equipment.
It is reasonable to think that some assumptions about super-spreaders may have been wide of the mark. But its not sensible to form an opinion based on a single paper, regardless of authors and establishments involved, and especially when one of its authors has such as disgraceful pandemic record and attitude as Dingwall.
It is reasonable to think that some assumptions about super-spreaders may have been wide of the mark. But its not sensible to form an opinion based on a single paper, regardless of authors and establishments involved, and especially when one of its authors has such as disgraceful pandemic record and attitude as Dingwall.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Ah, another of that papers authors is Colin Axon who says a lot of things about masks. Some of the details he goes into may even be reasonable at times, but the overall agenda is pretty clear and the likes of HART and the Telegraph made heavy use of him to serve their agenda. Includes claims that masks 'reinforce bad behaviour' and do such little good that its impossible to measure the positive effects.
For example the following Telegraph article that they later had to edit:
www.telegraph.co.uk
An example of the shit that HART peddle on this, the doubts they deliberately sew, again featuring some quotes from Axon:
www.hartgroup.org
For example the following Telegraph article that they later had to edit:
Cloth face masks are 'comfort blankets' that do little to curb Covid spread, Scientist warns
Dr Colin Axon warned some cloth masks have gaps that are invisible to the naked eye, but are 5000 times the size of viral Covid particles
www.telegraph.co.uk
An example of the shit that HART peddle on this, the doubts they deliberately sew, again featuring some quotes from Axon:
Drop the mask and be a force for good
Masks are nothing more than a ‘comfort blanket’
www.hartgroup.org
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
I know a person who is both a vaccine denier and an ecstasy user.
He was banging on at length about the vaccines not being tested enough, and you can't be sure they are safe.
When I asked him for the product license number for his ecstasy, et al, tablets, he looked at me in a bemused manner.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Another of the authors is Jackie Cassell. At last someone that represents a far more nuanced position. Her track record includes being especially interested in the socioeconomic drivers of the pandemic, with an emphasis on offering support to those who we left throughly exposed during the large pre-vaccine waves.
Here for example is an article she wrote to debunk a complete pandemic shithead:
Likely if I spent ages reading all of Jackies pandemic output then I would find some areas of emphasis that dont actually mirror my own, and much quibbling and exploring of nuanced details could follow. But I dont have the time or inclination to do that right now. Instead I will use her to remind myself that there are some grey areas in the pandemic, some very challenging subjects where 'the right thing to do' could not be boiled down to very simple choices like the ones I have been prone to offer when faced with the likes of fucking Dingwalls attitude. For example it is likely that Jackie was concerned about the effects of certain strict measures on children during the earlier stages of this pandemic, and I can appreciate those arguments even if I didnt draw identical conclusions during the most dramatic crunch moments, or during the periods where we were first feeling our way around the possibilities for easing restrictions.
Here for example is an article she wrote to debunk a complete pandemic shithead:
Medical anti-heroes and Covid-19 - plausible yet wrong. What can we learn? - Jackie Cassell
What should we learn from the popularity of Covid-19 denying scientists?
www.jackiecassell.com
Likely if I spent ages reading all of Jackies pandemic output then I would find some areas of emphasis that dont actually mirror my own, and much quibbling and exploring of nuanced details could follow. But I dont have the time or inclination to do that right now. Instead I will use her to remind myself that there are some grey areas in the pandemic, some very challenging subjects where 'the right thing to do' could not be boiled down to very simple choices like the ones I have been prone to offer when faced with the likes of fucking Dingwalls attitude. For example it is likely that Jackie was concerned about the effects of certain strict measures on children during the earlier stages of this pandemic, and I can appreciate those arguments even if I didnt draw identical conclusions during the most dramatic crunch moments, or during the periods where we were first feeling our way around the possibilities for easing restrictions.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Do you have an opinion on the methods in the paper, or are you just going to make a series of posts about how the authors rank on your personal scale of acceptability?
Similar threads
