Vaccine effectiveness and Herd Immunity

[Missnaughty]

….. and now.. they silent those who against them eventhou she has the capacity and experience with covid-19. Like her, we are just smart people who sees what “normal commoners” don’t see. We don’t against the vaccine but people should have a choice as the vaccine has not been in trial long enough and whether it works like what they said or not. Remember, the fact of the vaccine keep changing everyday. It is not about politic.. but digging the truth. And by “they”…. I dont really know who they are.. but feels who those in the front line are just puppets.

Dr. Mary Bowden suspended by Houston Methodist Hospital over COVID claims

Houston Methodist has suspended privileges for a Houston doctor for 'spreading dangerous misinformation' about the COVID-19 vaccine and treatments.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Missnaughty]

The British Medical Journal is a creditable source of information, and their investigation into mistakes and sloppy work at Pfizer's trials in Texas raises questions. But that's all; its not a smoking gun, especially given the statistical analyses of many other researchers as to the impact of the widespread application of the vaccine. BMJ relied upon unnamed sources, hearsay evidence, and speculation to raise its questions, but provided no answers. The real evidence is the effectiveness of the mass inoculation efforts throughout the world, coupled with the minimal side-effects in terms of numbers and seriousness.

There are no 100% guarantees in life. Those waiting for guaranteed certainty to inform their vaccination decision are in one of two camps: those who are unreasonably argumentative simply, it would seem, for the sake of being noticed and those who have already paid the ultimate price for their obstinance.

When you put a mandate on something.. it has to be guaranteed. If you can not give that 100% guarantee.. dont make people do it. It should be taken by choice.

 

[Nimbus]

When you put a mandate on something.. it has to be guaranteed. If you can not give that 100% guarantee.. dont make people do it. It should be taken by choice.

No.

A mandate does not have to carry a 100% guarantee, and it never has. None of the previous vaccinations (Smallpox, MMR, DPT, Meningitis, etc.) has a 100% safety guarantee. None.

Smallpox vaccine causes about 1 death in 1 million vaccinations, so it is NOT 100% safe. However, smallpox has 30% death rate. If you refuse mandating the vaccine to 1 million people, up to 300,000 people can die. With the mandate only 1 person dies.

Because you want 100% guarantee, you’re gonna accept 300 thousand deaths over 1 death.

Your 100% safety standard is not acceptable, never has been, and never will be.

Did I say never? Yes I did.

The latest study from CDC that involves 11 million persons concluded that people who received the 3 Covid vaccines available in the US (Pfizer, Moderna, and Janssen) are less likely to die from non-Covid causes. Statistically the vaccines are better than safe, they somehow reduce the risk of death outside of Covid.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Non–COVID-19 Mortality Risk ...

This report describes lower non-COVID-19 death rates among COVID-19 vaccinated people.

www.cdc.gov

 

[Nimbus]

….. and now.. they silent those who against them eventhou she has the capacity and experience with covid-19. Like her, we are just smart people who sees what “normal commoners” don’t see. We don’t against the vaccine but people should have a choice as the vaccine has not been in trial long enough and whether it works like what they said or not. Remember, the fact of the vaccine keep changing everyday. It is not about politic.. but digging the truth. And by “they”…. I dont really know who they are.. but feels who those in the front line are just puppets.

Dr. Mary Bowden suspended by Houston Methodist Hospital over COVID claims

Houston Methodist has suspended privileges for a Houston doctor for 'spreading dangerous misinformation' about the COVID-19 vaccine and treatments.

www.yahoo.com

If a doctor is spreading a dangerous misinformation, he or she should be penalized. My uncle died due to following the advice of and taking the prescriptions from one such doctor. He was a real licensed doctor, but he was incompetent and greedy. I am glad that they revoked his license, so I support the revocation of this doctor’s license too.

 

[centurion]

Interesting news from Sweden for mRNA vaccine recipients.

RETRACTED: SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS–CoV–2) has led to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19) pandemic, severely affecting public health and the global economy. Adaptive immunity plays a crucial role in fighting against SARS–CoV–2 infection and directly influences the clinical...

www.mdpi.com

 

[gemima]

Interesting news from Sweden for mRNA vaccine recipients.

RETRACTED: SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS–CoV–2) has led to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19) pandemic, severely affecting public health and the global economy. Adaptive immunity plays a crucial role in fighting against SARS–CoV–2 infection and directly influences the clinical...

www.mdpi.com

I wouldn't call this news - it's an article in a low-quality journal. In a much earlier post I described how you can evaluate the quality of scientific journals. MDPI has loads of really shit quality journals in their portfolio (you can basically publish anything with them).
To be honest, I wouldn't bother reading something in such a journal - if their research was good they would have published somewhere else.
Final note - this "research" is in vitro which means it's not really relevant for real-life conditions. It's from a test tube, not a living animal/ human.

 

[Dave70]

I wouldn't call this news - it's an article in a low-quality journal. In a much earlier post I described how you can evaluate the quality of scientific journals. MDPI has loads of really shit quality journals in their portfolio (you can basically publish anything with them).
To be honest, I wouldn't bother reading something in such a journal - if their research was good they would have published somewhere else.
Final note - this "research" is in vitro which means it's not really relevant for real-life conditions. It's from a test tube, not a living animal/ human.

The MDPI Editorial Process
All articles published by MDPI are peer-reviewed and assessed by our independent Editorial Boards, and MDPI staff are not involved in decisions to accept manuscripts.

Is MDPI a reputable Academic Publisher?
MDPI journals fall short compared to PLOS but they are respectable and are building their reputation. Charges are proportional to the journal reputation and most times can be waived if the author makes its case of lack of funding and it is completely independent of the review process.

Is MDPI a predatory Journal?
MDPI was included on Jeffrey Beall's list of predatory open access publishing companies in February 2014, and removed in October 2015 following a successful appeal.

 

[Dave70]

Interesting news from Sweden for mRNA vaccine recipients.

RETRACTED: SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS–CoV–2) has led to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19) pandemic, severely affecting public health and the global economy. Adaptive immunity plays a crucial role in fighting against SARS–CoV–2 infection and directly influences the clinical...

www.mdpi.com

It's breaking news in Thailand Medical News.

From the article, "Consistent with these new findings, clinical observations also showthat the risk of severe illness or death with COVID-19 increases with age, especially older adults who are at the highest risk. This may be because SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins can weaken the DNA repair system of older people and consequently impede V(D)J recombination and adaptive immunity".

Not a concern for those who had non-mRNA vaccines.

 

[Dave70]

A mandate does not have to carry a 100% guarantee, and it never has. None of the previous vaccinations (Smallpox, MMR, DPT, Meningitis, etc.) has a 100% safety guarantee. None.

I thought COVID-19 vaccine is the first and only vaccine to be mandated.

 

[Dave70]

If a doctor is spreading a dangerous misinformation, he or she should be penalized. My uncle died due to following the advice of and taking the prescriptions from one such doctor. He was a real licensed doctor, but he was incompetent and greedy. I am glad that they revoked his license, so I support the revocation of this doctor’s license too.

A doctor can give his/her opinion on anything, that's why patients sometimes go to see another doctor to get "second opinion".

What she did wrong was put her opinion on social media, there is now NO free speech when it comes to opinions on COVID-19. If you are against vaccine, shut-up or lose your job. Or worse, get vaccinated or get fired.

Perhaps if they have a choice, those anti-vaxxers would have considered vaccination if they can choose non-mRNA vaccines e.g. inactivated-type vaccines.

 

[nd_eric_77]

A doctor can give his/her opinion on anything, that's why patients sometimes go to see another doctor to get "second opinion".

What she did wrong was put her opinion on social media, there is now NO free speech when it comes to opinions on COVID-19. If you are against vaccine, shut-up or lose your job. Or worse, get vaccinated or get fired.

Perhaps if they have a choice, those anti-vaxxers would have considered vaccination if they can choose non-mRNA vaccines e.g. inactivated-type vaccines.

Any adult can get a non-mRNA vaccine in the US. It is the Johnson & Johnson shot and has the added benefit of only requiring a single shot in order to be considered fully vaccinated.

 

[dafluff]

The MDPI Editorial Process
All articles published by MDPI are peer-reviewed and assessed by our independent Editorial Boards, and MDPI staff are not involved in decisions to accept manuscripts.

Is MDPI a reputable Academic Publisher?
MDPI journals fall short compared to PLOS but they are respectable and are building their reputation. Charges are proportional to the journal reputation and most times can be waived if the author makes its case of lack of funding and it is completely independent of the review process.

Is MDPI a predatory Journal?
MDPI was included on Jeffrey Beall's list of predatory open access publishing companies in February 2014, and removed in October 2015 following a successful appeal.

Wow, look who has all of the sudden become proficient at determining the quality of an internet source. You've come a long way from posting stuff from a pro-Kremlin and antisemitic conspiracy theory and fake news website. Well done.

As for MDPI, here is their "article processing fee", ie. how much they charge to have an article published. On some of their journals, this is over US$2500. We used to call paying to have something published "advertising", but now apparently it's scientific publishing...

 

[Dave70]

Wow, look who has all of the sudden become proficient at determining the quality of an internet source. You've come a long way from posting stuff from a pro-Kremlin and antisemitic conspiracy theory and fake news website. Well done.

Older wiser, and learning everyday. Anyway, that quote "a pro-Kremlin, antisemitic conspiracy theory and fake news website" is from Wikipedia.

But is Wikipedia a reliable source? Most of their content are, however, according to Wikipedia itself, "Wikipedia is not a reliable source for citations elsewhere on Wikipedia. Because it can be edited by anyone at any time, any information it contains at a particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or just plain wrong".

As for MDPI, here is their "article processing fee", ie. how much they charge to have an article published. On some of their journals, this is over US$2500. We used to call paying to have something published "advertising", but now apparently it's scientific publishing...

You think other scientific journals are FREE?

PLOS is the pioneer of open-access business model of charging authors to publish scientific articles. To fund the journals, PLOS charges an article processing charge (APC) to be paid by the author or the author's employer or funder.

From their website: PLOS employs several business models to support equitable Open Access. Most OA journals offset publication expenses – including the cost of peer review management, journal production, and online hosting and archiving – by charging a fee for each article published (APC). Our partnerships with institutions and funders aim to simplify the process for authors and reduce the burden of cost. Publication fees vary by journal and are payable upon article acceptance. Fees are subject to change and charged at the applicable rates effective on your submission date.

 

[Nimbus]

The MDPI Editorial Process
All articles published by MDPI are peer-reviewed and assessed by our independent Editorial Boards, and MDPI staff are not involved in decisions to accept manuscripts.

Is MDPI a reputable Academic Publisher?
MDPI journals fall short compared to PLOS but they are respectable and are building their reputation. Charges are proportional to the journal reputation and most times can be waived if the author makes its case of lack of funding and it is completely independent of the review process.

Is MDPI a predatory Journal?
MDPI was included on Jeffrey Beall's list of predatory open access publishing companies in February 2014, and removed in October 2015 following a successful appeal.

These are statements from MDPI about itself. I can just as easily make flattering statements about myself.

 

[Nimbus]

A doctor can give his/her opinion on anything, that's why patients sometimes go to see another doctor to get "second opinion".

What she did wrong was put her opinion on social media, there is now NO free speech when it comes to opinions on COVID-19. If you are against vaccine, shut-up or lose your job. Or worse, get vaccinated or get fired.

Perhaps if they have a choice, those anti-vaxxers would have considered vaccination if they can choose non-mRNA vaccines e.g. inactivated-type vaccines.

Opinions have consequences, especially false and fraudulent ones. Freedom of speech does not protect bald lies.

 

[Nimbus]

I thought COVID-19 vaccine is the first and only vaccine to be mandated.

No.

You dig all over the internet for articles supporting anti vaxxers, and you can’t be bothered to look up a simple vaccine mandate?

Every time I enroll in a new college in USA I was required to show proof of vaccination. They would stop me from coming to class if I couldn’t produce the record, or get the shot directly from the college clinic. The same requirement applies to all public school children in USA.

Vaccinations were not a controversy until Trump decided that Covid was fake, and his followers built a belief based on denying every established science about the disease. If that wasn’t bad enough, they export it to other idiots around the world.

 

[ChrisTex]

Any adult can get a non-mRNA vaccine in the US. It is the Johnson & Johnson shot and has the added benefit of only requiring a single shot in order to be considered fully vaccinated.

Ironically, it is the J&J that is hard to find now. When the wife got her second jab, I asked the people at CVS in Target about J&J. They said it has been the most popular mainly because of the one and done.

Tom Thumb(grocery store)'s paramacy told me to make an appointment on their website as they do accept walk ups. Go to their website, it claims they don't have J&J at any Tom Thumb within 250 miles.

Still looking at getting the J&J since whenever I mention Sinovac, I get confused looks.

 

[ChrisTex]

I thought COVID-19 vaccine is the first and only vaccine to be mandated.

I believe measles, polio were two of the required vaccines for K-12 and I am sure there are others. Those are the only two that I can think of right now.

With anti vaxxers, you need to divide it into two groups: complete anti vaxxers who are against all vaccines and the covid anti vaxxers, those who are just against the covid vaccines.

 

[dafluff]

Older wiser, and learning everyday. Anyway, that quote "a pro-Kremlin, antisemitic conspiracy theory and fake news website" is from Wikipedia.

But is Wikipedia a reliable source? Most of their content are, however, according to Wikipedia itself, "Wikipedia is not a reliable source for citations elsewhere on Wikipedia. Because it can be edited by anyone at any time, any information it contains at a particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or just plain wrong".

The Wiki article includes no less than 14 citations, so you can further your research. But yes, you're right: When quoting Wikipedia, a little common sense is required. Unfortunately, this can't be taught as easily as just telling someone to Google something. But at least we got you to stop posting stuff from crazy contrail conspiracy websites, so I count that as a win.

You think other scientific journals are FREE?

As a matter of fact, every article I've ever published in a scientific journal was free (for the author). Do you think there are many starving graduate students able to pay $2,500 article hosting fees?

 

[centurion]

I wouldn't call this news - it's an article in a low-quality journal. In a much earlier post I described how you can evaluate the quality of scientific journals. MDPI has loads of really shit quality journals in their portfolio (you can basically publish anything with them).
To be honest, I wouldn't bother reading something in such a journal - if their research was good they would have published somewhere else.
Final note - this "research" is in vitro which means it's not really relevant for real-life conditions. It's from a test tube, not a living animal/ human.

Are these people writing this article in this journal engaged in shaman rituals and crystal healing?

Stockholm University does sound credible and any possibility of risk that you can develop cancer from mRNA vaccines in years following the vaccination should be taken seriously.

The last important invented vaccine before covid, Dengvaxia, had 5 years of development before approval, and even when approved had side effects for kids, including alleged 600 deaths. After that, Sanofi changed Dengvaxia vaccination guidelines.