All About The Vaccines (global warming, conspiracy, rating, party)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Guess what you need a robust CD4 T cell response for? Covid. It's been hypothesized that only vaccinating for the flu every other year would be more beneficial for an individuals protection than vaccinating EVERY year but God Forbid! Who cares about you as an individual? That would decrease UPTAKE. Vaccine UPTAKE is all that matters ...
Back then an actual diagnosis of Covid 19 is what it took. Otherwise they were not able to keep up with local prophylactic demands.
Things is many studies suggests the Influenza vaccine is somewhat protective with a Covid 19 infection.
I see no problem with the disclosures. They state that the investigators had worked with pharma companies on other unrelated projects in the past. I doubt there is anyone in the field who has not. You can infer what you wish, but your inference is a feeble attempt to discredit the study when you have no facts that support your position that the results are "cooked".
Because you truly believe the government would never lie, manipulate, deceive you.
I have 11 years of universities and I re read quoted statement 6 times and I still can’t understand what it says, why it compares apples to oranges, why it mentions COVID like diseases and, more so, why it so bluntly contradicts real life data from the field. And I have masters in pharmacy and work in health care. Add to this pharma sponsorship. Blame me of being dumb but that’s not logical scientific statement. It’s confusing attempt to gain popularity for a very unpopular cause, against multiple researches stating just the opposite. Counting on dimwits taking it for the face value.
As example, Oregon reports for the last 8 or so months show that vaccinated average 25% breakthrough cases. Eat that, CEC.
Spin it any way you want (or can think of), nanny-staters.
Tis is just another push from Big Brother and his friends, to get his tentacles into everyone's private life.
And when that intrusion involves someone's children, the backlash is going to intensify.
(I am fully vaxxed, BTW -- as are 5 out of 6 Americans over age 65; but the more we comply with Big Brother's wishes, the more Big Brother seems to want to expand his power.)
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 10-29-2021 at 05:26 PM..
I have 11 years of universities and I re read quoted statement 6 times and I still can’t understand what it says, why it compares apples to oranges, why it mentions COVID like diseases and, more so, why it so bluntly contradicts real life data from the field. And I have masters in pharmacy and work in health care. Add to this pharma sponsorship. Blame me of being dumb but that’s not logical scientific statement. It’s confusing attempt to gain popularity for a very unpopular cause, against multiple researches stating just the opposite. Counting on dimwits taking it for the face value.
As example, Oregon reports for the last 8 or so months show that vaccinated average 25% breakthrough cases. Eat that, CEC.
And that is why it was put out as an internal study only found on the CDC site.
That would be ripped to shreds if it were put out for peer review.
It's a bogus study, flies in the face of what we're seeing and also data from Israel and many other places. Of course, I see CDC sponsored this study, so explains a lot.
Also such wonderful disclosures:
With such a whose of whose of big pharma shills, how you cannot trust such obviously cooked results?
Cooking the books too. COVID-like illness. LOL.
TRANSLATION: I have no evidence to show that the results of this study are false, compromised, "bogus", or "cooked". But I hate it anyway, so I'll call it all those names and more, try to smear the people involved with no evidence, and generally pretend there's something wrong with it anyway.
TRANSLATION: I have no evidence to show that the results of this study are false, compromised, "bogus", or "cooked". But I hate it anyway, so I'll call it all those names and more, try to smear the people involved with no evidence, and generally pretend there's something wrong with it anyway.
in fact, i shouldn't even call it a study. just some scientists who get funded from pfizer made up some numbers, hid behind terrible and opaque criteria, at the behest of the cdc.
this is a real study:
Quote:
Results SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well. When allowing the infection to occur at any time before vaccination (from March 2020 to February 2021), evidence of waning natural immunity was demonstrated, though SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinees had a 5.96-fold (95% CI, 4.85 to 7.33) increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold (95% CI, 5.51 to 9.21) increased risk for symptomatic disease. SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees were also at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those that were previously infected.
Numerous other studies say otherwise. The CDC and the FDA never even gives them a mention.
I do not trust U.S. agencies who are nothing more than politicized propaganda machines.
And that is why it was put out as an internal study only found on the CDC site.
That would be ripped to shreds if it were put out for peer review.
Ripped to shreds? This would be laughed at, and not even submitted for peer review.
I hate we're even calling it a study. It's just cooked numbers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
