3rd dose coming soon: Pfizer now says that vaccine is 91% effective for up to 6 months. (conspiracy, Brown)
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.
typical CEOs gobbling up more money for their product. 6 months. LOL. 2021 and they can't get a vaccine that gives you protection for at least 10 years? With all the advances in medicine? they can but they wont. Makes me despise corporate america even more and more. Horrible people run these companies
typical CEOs gobbling up more money for their product. 6 months. LOL. 2021 and they can't get a vaccine that gives you protection for at least 10 years? With all the advances in medicine? they can but they wont. Makes me despise corporate america even more and more. Horrible people run these companies
They sure do. Moderna whose claim to fame is the mRNA based vaccine finished at the top in 2020's Shkreli (Pharma Bro) Awards that highlight the worst examples of profiteering and dysfunction in healthcare.
These vaccines do not appear to be "safe" for the capacity of our amazingly effective immunity systems to be able to continue to work in the best way to protect and defend us against viruses such as the coronavirus. A virus which has been around longer than any of us has been alive and will continue to be here in the form of new strains and variants long after everyone currently living is long gone.
I am so sick of hearing left wing busybodies blabbing about things being "safe." "Safe" is a nonsense word for morons who don't understand that NOTHING is ever 100% "safe." A close second is any of the government propaganda phrases we've had to hear incessantly on TV and radio over the past year. "Mask up." "Social distancing." "Wash your hands."
typical CEOs gobbling up more money for their product. 6 months. LOL. 2021 and they can't get a vaccine that gives you protection for at least 10 years? With all the advances in medicine? they can but they wont. Makes me despise corporate america even more and more. Horrible people run these companies
Well since this is a new vaccine they can't say it protects for 10 years until the 10 years is up..right ?
They can only say 6 months because we are only at the 6 month mark.
People are so used to living with "history" of everything that they cannot fathom "new"..you are the first to use this and we don't know how long it's good for.
I found this to be encouraging. If true, recovered covid people don't need a vaccine and, if true, they can take their vaccine passports in the future and stuff 'em.
Well since this is a new vaccine they can't say it protects for 10 years until the 10 years is up..right ?
They can only say 6 months because we are only at the 6 month mark.
People are so used to living with "history" of everything that they cannot fathom "new"..you are the first to use this and we don't know how long it's good for.
Thank you. Not a lot of critical thinking going on with the whole "6 month" thing.
Thank you. Not a lot of critical thinking going on with the whole "6 month" thing.
.. or maybe this just CEO playing CEO (No money in the cure, the money is in the medicine). CEOs only care about money and their stock portfolios. Humans come last for sociopaths
.. or maybe this just CEO playing CEO (No money in the cure, the money is in the medicine). CEOs only care about money and their stock portfolios. Humans come last for sociopaths
You are deflecting. You want a 10 year guarantee. How can someone guarantee 10 years on a product that has been in the market for the first time with no history ?
Think this is it.
Not only could the variant “break through” protections offered by the Pfizer vaccine, but it uniquely affects those who have been vaccinated (around eight times higher) than those who have not received the vaccine — 5.4% to 0.7%. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...d-unvaccinated
Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis
Well, IF this turns out to be true, it is just something else not to be concerned about, right?
A thousand times NO to the first bold. The study does NOT mean that the Pfizer vaccine is more likely to give someone covid, albeit the South African variant. EVERYBODY in the study of 800 (400 vaccinated and 400 unvaccinated) was positive.
The study was asking what variant were they positive WITH. The South African variant was 8 times more likely to be found - albeit to "breakthrough" the vaccinated group than the wild virus or the UK variant. The study authors derived that figure by comparing the prevalence rates of the covid strains found between the two groups.
This means the Pfizer vaccine was highly likely - as advertised - to protect against wild covid and the the UK variant but not against the South African variant.
Last edited by EveryLady; 04-17-2021 at 04:32 PM..
A thousand times NO to the first bold. The study does NOT mean that the Pfizer vaccine is more likely to give someone covid, albeit the South African variant. EVERYBODY in the study of 800 (400 vaccinated and 400 unvaccinated) was positive.
The study was asking what variant were they positive WITH. The South African variant was 8 times more likely to be found - albeit to "breakthrough" the vaccinated group than the wild virus or the UK variant. The study authors derived that figure by comparing the prevalence rates of the covid strains found between the two groups.
This means the Pfizer vaccine was highly likely - as advertised - to protect against wild covid and the the UK variant but not against the South African variant.
Another way of trying to explain this is that a prevalence rate is STANDARDIZED - per a set number. Of the X number of "breakthrough" cases in Israel what % per the study could be projected to have the South African variant (5.4%). Of the Y number of unvaccinated who were positive what % had wild covid or B.1117 (0.7%). BUT the total numbers or raw figures for the X or breakthrough cases is far lower in the total population than the number of unvaccinated who get covid.
Obviously, because the vaccine works just not as effectively for the South African variant.
The article contains the bolded words. Maybe you should take it up with the author. Yes, it’s talking about the SA variant. Nobody is saying otherwise.
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.
