Conquer Club

Dukasaur wrote:

I think you need the clip........."You're going to need more body bags... "

Elevators hurt most of us, but are essential for a few. BP medications hurt most of us, but save an even tinier few. For vaccines, it's the reverse. Vaccines hurt a very tiny few, while saving very many.

jonesthecurl wrote:Yeah, I was v. tired after both shots, the first one I actually took an afternoon nap. Both times I was aching the next day, but nothing major. The next day I was fine.

jusplay4fun wrote:Duk, earlier in this thread, said:

Elevators hurt most of us, but are essential for a few. BP medications hurt most of us, but save an even tinier few. For vaccines, it's the reverse. Vaccines hurt a very tiny few, while saving very many.

Everything I have read and heard about the vaccines for COVID (J&J and blood clots, less than 1 in a million, literally) and the deaths due to "Breakthrough infections, (after getting the vaccine) all says to me that Duk made a very valid point about vaccines. NONE are 100& effective; there are side effects and RISKS to any medicine, vaccine, or medical procedure. BUT the benefits of vaccine far outweigh their RISKS.

ALSO: There is now discussion about a need to vaccinate 12 months later, or even annually, like the flu vaccine. and the flu vaccine is only 50-60% effective, unlike the 3 US approved vaccines, at 95%, 94% and 74% effective rates.

Two doses of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine were found to have only a 10.4% efficacy against mild-to-moderate infections caused by the B.1.351 South Africa variant, according to a phase 1b-2 clinical trial published on Tuesday in the New England Journal of Medicine. This is a cause for grave concern as the South African variants share similar mutations to the other variants leaving those vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine potentially exposed to multiple variants.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhas ... 8888b6526e

saxitoxin wrote:Well that sucks. A lifetime of blood clots, Bell's Palsey, and erectile dysfunction for 10.4% protection ...

Two doses of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine were found to have only a 10.4% efficacy against mild-to-moderate infections caused by the B.1.351 South Africa variant, according to a phase 1b-2 clinical trial published on Tuesday in the New England Journal of Medicine. This is a cause for grave concern as the South African variants share similar mutations to the other variants leaving those vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine potentially exposed to multiple variants.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhas ... 8888b6526e

jusplay4fun wrote: You do realize that the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine is NOT approved for use in the USA, right? I wonder why that is so?

The three approved COVID vaccines for use in the USA are Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J.

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote: You do realize that the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine is NOT approved for use in the USA, right? I wonder why that is so?

The three approved COVID vaccines for use in the USA are Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J.

Right. So of four vaccines developed in the West, so far half have been deemed too dangerous to continue to administer --- and we're only four months into the three-year Phase IV trial. Those sound like utterly abysmal odds.

The good news is many people already have some protection against the virus. As of April 14, 123.9 million Americans have received at least one dose of a COVID vaccine, according to data from the CDC.

As of 6 a.m. EDT April 8, a total of 66,203,123 Americans had been fully vaccinated, or 19.9 percent of the country's population, according to the CDC's data

jusplay4fun wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote: You do realize that the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine is NOT approved for use in the USA, right? I wonder why that is so?

The three approved COVID vaccines for use in the USA are Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J.

Right. So of four vaccines developed in the West, so far half have been deemed too dangerous to continue to administer --- and we're only four months into the three-year Phase IV trial. Those sound like utterly abysmal odds.

Your understanding of ODDS and RISK seem to need re-evaluation, Saxi.

China's top disease control official has said the efficacy of the country's Covid vaccines is low, in a rare admission of weakness.

In a press conference, Gao Fu added that China was considering mixing vaccines as a way of boosting efficacy.

China has developed four different vaccines approved for public use, though some trials abroad had suggested efficacy as low as 50%.

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote: You do realize that the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine is NOT approved for use in the USA, right? I wonder why that is so?

The three approved COVID vaccines for use in the USA are Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J.

Right. So of four vaccines developed in the West, so far half have been deemed too dangerous to continue to administer --- and we're only four months into the three-year Phase IV trial. Those sound like utterly abysmal odds.

Your understanding of ODDS and RISK seem to need re-evaluation, Saxi.

Is there anything I said here that is factually incorrect?

COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca: benefits still outweigh the risks despite possible link to rare blood clots with low blood platelets
News 18/03/2021

EMA’s safety committee, PRAC, concluded its preliminary review of a signal of blood clots in people vaccinated with Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca) at its extraordinary meeting of 18 March 2021. The Committee confirmed that:

the benefits of the vaccine in combating the still widespread threat of COVID-19 (which itself results in clotting problems and may be fatal) continue to outweigh the risk of side effects;

the vaccine is not associated with an increase in the overall risk of blood clots (thromboembolic events) in those who receive it;

there is no evidence of a problem related to specific batches of the vaccine or to particular manufacturing sites;

however, the vaccine may be associated with very rare cases of blood clots associated with thrombocytopenia, i.e. low levels of blood platelets (elements in the blood that help it to clot) with or without bleeding, including rare cases of clots in the vessels draining blood from the brain (CVST).

jusplay4fun wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote: You do realize that the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine is NOT approved for use in the USA, right? I wonder why that is so?

The three approved COVID vaccines for use in the USA are Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J.

Right. So of four vaccines developed in the West, so far half have been deemed too dangerous to continue to administer --- and we're only four months into the three-year Phase IV trial. Those sound like utterly abysmal odds.

Your understanding of ODDS and RISK seem to need re-evaluation, Saxi.

Is there anything I said here that is factually incorrect?

Yes, Saxi is wrong for at least THREE reasons:

1) J&J is NOT dangerous (again, one death in less than 7 million).

2) Your assertion of one half is TOTALLY misleading, as is much of the narrative you try to spin. AZ is not relevant to the discussion for the USA. SO at best, 1/4 (25%) and that assumes AZ is TOTALLY or 99.99% dangerous in the West,

3) AZ is not dangerous, as you allege:

COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca: benefits still outweigh the risks despite possible link to rare blood clots with low blood platelets
News 18/03/2021

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid ... lood-clots

EMA’s safety committee, PRAC, concluded its preliminary review of a signal of blood clots in people vaccinated with Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca) at its extraordinary meeting of 18 March 2021. The Committee confirmed that:

the benefits of the vaccine in combating the still widespread threat of COVID-19 (which itself results in clotting problems and may be fatal) continue to outweigh the risk of side effects;

the vaccine is not associated with an increase in the overall risk of blood clots (thromboembolic events) in those who receive it;

there is no evidence of a problem related to specific batches of the vaccine or to particular manufacturing sites;

however, the vaccine may be associated with very rare cases of blood clots associated with thrombocytopenia, i.e. low levels of blood platelets (elements in the blood that help it to clot) with or without bleeding, including rare cases of clots in the vessels draining blood from the brain (CVST).

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote: You do realize that the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine is NOT approved for use in the USA, right? I wonder why that is so?

The three approved COVID vaccines for use in the USA are Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J.

Right. So of four vaccines developed in the West, so far half have been deemed too dangerous to continue to administer --- and we're only four months into the three-year Phase IV trial. Those sound like utterly abysmal odds.

Your understanding of ODDS and RISK seem to need re-evaluation, Saxi.

Is there anything I said here that is factually incorrect?

Yes, Saxi is wrong for at least THREE reasons:

1) J&J is NOT dangerous (again, one death in less than 7 million).

2) Your assertion of one half is TOTALLY misleading, as is much of the narrative you try to spin. AZ is not relevant to the discussion for the USA. SO at best, 1/4 (25%) and that assumes AZ is TOTALLY or 99.99% dangerous in the West,

3) AZ is not dangerous, as you allege:

COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca: benefits still outweigh the risks despite possible link to rare blood clots with low blood platelets
News 18/03/2021

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid ... lood-clots

EMA’s safety committee, PRAC, concluded its preliminary review of a signal of blood clots in people vaccinated with Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca) at its extraordinary meeting of 18 March 2021. The Committee confirmed that:

the benefits of the vaccine in combating the still widespread threat of COVID-19 (which itself results in clotting problems and may be fatal) continue to outweigh the risk of side effects;

the vaccine is not associated with an increase in the overall risk of blood clots (thromboembolic events) in those who receive it;

there is no evidence of a problem related to specific batches of the vaccine or to particular manufacturing sites;

however, the vaccine may be associated with very rare cases of blood clots associated with thrombocytopenia, i.e. low levels of blood platelets (elements in the blood that help it to clot) with or without bleeding, including rare cases of clots in the vessels draining blood from the brain (CVST).

Ok that's fine. I'll reword it. One half of all vaccines developed in the west are soooooo safe that the FDA won't let anyone take them. They're just too safe!

There. Great. Now everyone's happy.

2dimes wrote:I came out of CC retirement to report I took the first shot of Pfizer today because I'm not a giant pussy like ol' Saxi. Maybe in a couple of days I'll go look at some pictures of broads in swim suits to see if I can still get a boner. Unless I wake up early.

saxitoxin wrote:Dr. Luc Montagnier, recipient of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine, has just given an interview calling the vaccination program a grave error. But we won't realize how big of an error until the history of the pandemic is written.

Dukasaur wrote: That's the same nutcase who claimed coronavirus was manufactured with genetic material borrowed from the AIDS virus.

saxitoxin wrote:Dr. Luc Montagnier, recipient of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine, has just given an interview calling the vaccination program a grave error. But we won't realize how big of an error until the history of the pandemic is written.

What Montagnier called the “elements” of HIV were short cis-acting elements that scientists had discovered in the genome of coronaviruses in 2005. They are required for genome replication and are shared by many coronaviruses. So if what Montagnier said is true, the whole family of coronaviruses – which originated over 10,000 years ago – would have to be lab-made, and this is obviously nonsensical.

Many experts have already pointed out this obvious flaw in Montagnier’s argument. As Étienne Simon-Lorière, a professor at the Institut Pasteur in Paris, said, “If we take a word from a book and it looks like another word, can we say that one has copied from the other? This is absurd!”

It is surprising to have a scientist of Montagnier’s stature utter such questionable statements – although Montagnier himself is a controversial figure. Among other causes, he has supported anti-vaxxers, homeopathy and a silly claim that DNA emits “electromagnetic waves”.

As he lost credibility among his peers, scientific agencies around Europe began to reject his grant applications, and eventually he was left with no money to pursue his ideas. In a 2010 interview, Montagnier said he was leaving Europe to “escape the intellectual terror.”