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.
From what I understand, the vaccine wanes in terms of preventing infection, but certainly not to the point as if you had no vaccine at all. (Seems Moderna is "holding" fairly well at the 6-month point, but Pfizer drops to 74% or something.)
But it remains very effective in preventing hospitalizations and death, and really....isn't that what matters? I'm not going to cower in fear on the chance that I might get a mild, flu-like sickness that will have me down for a week.
And don't start about the break-through cases where vaxxed people did end up hospitalized, or worse. There are always exceptions, and life isn't without some risks. But you have to consider statistics. Otherwise, we'd never get in a car and drive on the highway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncole1
You and others who make this argument should prove you really believe it or I'm not buying it.
I want you and other scientists who subscribe this view to do the following.
Get your data and papers together for presentation.
Sit down at a conference table, 3-4 feet apart, without masks, indoors. Make your case while doing so. You must act like it is 2019.
Then we'll talk.
First, I didn't say I was a scientist. I was just repeating what has been reported.
And I *am* living my life. I just had dinner last night with two others, and we were seated within a couple feet of each other. We weren't wearing masks. (I'm not even sure of your point. You jumped to lots of wrong assumptions.)
FDA does NOT have to listen to their recommendation. This is not a binding statement or advisory body that has any influence over FDA.
But the FDA has typically followed the recommendations in the past.
It would be a surprise if they went against their own advisory board.
Then again...it would also answer a lot of questions if they sided with the CDC/Biden Administration who made their own decision to open vaccines to everyone.
FWIW they recommended the vaccine in July for immunocompromised when Pfizer was putting forth over 65 as well. But they did not recommended over 65 at the July meeting.
It seems Biden just picks arbitrary date out the air for no good reason. He did it with Afghanistan (August 31st, come hell or high water), and now he did it with the booster (September 21, because).
Maybe he thinks that makes he come across as commanding and in control.
I thought he used 9/11 for something as well
And July 4th for wanting 70 percent of people vaccinated
Picking holidays and other key dates out of his ass for absolutely no reason
Likely a globalist decision. The globalists are complaining that people in “rich” countries are using too many vaccines.
So they will cheer for no third booster saying the FDA was right to make that decision but they don't support the FDA's decision to require the vaccine in the first place.
Interesting concept.
“Overall, data indicate that currently US-licensed or authorized COVID-19 vaccines still afford protection against severe COVID-19 disease and death in the United States,” they wrote in a 23-page document.
First, I didn't say I was a scientist. I was just repeating what has been reported.
And I *am* living my life. I just had dinner last night with two others, and we were seated within a couple feet of each other. We weren't wearing masks. (I'm not even sure of your point. You jumped to lots of wrong assumptions.)
Ok.
The FDA panel displays a rather extreme form of "reverse pandemic hypocrisy" and apparently I am one of the few who has noticed. They on the one hand insist that the vaccines have almost everything that anyone could possibly want, without boosting.* But the exact same people say that they "are meeting virtually due to the covid-19 pandemic".
Weird. In 2020 you had governors that told people to stay at home for the holidays but then went out on vacation the very next day. Now, in 2021, you have the exact opposite phenomenon - they are saying "Yes, you're protected, without a booster. But we don't feel safe meeting with each other in person".
This "reverse pandemic hypocrisy" is just as disingenuous as the "forward" version in 2020.
From now on, any officials who want to say the current level of protection is sufficient, should act like it. I want to see them having an in-person meeting, without masks. Because otherwise they are "saying one thing and doing another". Just the other way 'round from 2020.
*This is somewhat of a hyperbolic description, in order to get the point across.
Last edited by ncole1; 09-18-2021 at 03:41 AM..
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.
