Covid Vaccine

[Badcat]

Here, try this on for size. Don't want you to cramp your brain trying to figure it out.

Unvaccinated people at higher COVID-19 reinfection: Study

A recent story published in in the journal The Lancet Microbe sheds light on the uncertainty about how long immunity lasts after someone who is unvaccinated is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

www.timesnownews.com

New York: Immunity gained after natural infection is short-lived and remaining unvaccinated can increase the risk of getting re-infected with Covid-19, suggests a study published in the journal The Lancet Microbe. Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, there has been much uncertainty about how long immunity lasts after someone who is unvaccinated is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

"Re-infection can reasonably happen in three months or less," said lead author Jeffrey Townsend, Professor of Biostatistics at the Yale School of Public Health.

"Therefore, those who have been naturally infected should get vaccinated. Previous infection alone can offer very little long-term protection against subsequent infections," Townsend added.

The team analysed known re-infection and immunological data from the close viral relatives of SARS-CoV-2 that cause "common colds" -- along with immunological data from SARS-CoV-1 and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. Leveraging evolutionary principles, the team was able to model the risk of Covid-19 re-infection over time. Re-infections can and have happened, even shortly after recovery. And they will become increasingly common as immunity wanes and new SARS-CoV-2 variants arise.

"We tend to think about immunity as being immune or not immune. Our study cautions that we instead should be more focused on the risk of re-infection through time," said Alex Dornburg, Assistant Professor of bioinformatics and genomics at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

"As new variants arise, previous immune responses become less effective at combating the virus. Those who were naturally infected early in the pandemic are increasingly likely to become re-infected in the near future," he added.

The team's data-driven model reveals striking similarities to the re-infection risks over time between SARS-CoV-2 and endemic coronaviruses.

"Just like common colds, from one year to the next you may get re-infected with the same virus. The difference is that, during its emergence in this pandemic, Covid-19 has proven to be much more deadly," Townsend said.

"Due to the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to evolve and re-infect, it, too, is likely to transition from pandemic to an endemic disease," added Dornburg.

That Article is bullshit. I'm going on 19 months and haven't had so much as a cold. What a deadly virus!! I should be dead by now according to you and your pseudo science bullshit. No mask, no social distancing, no vaccine, I'm out of the house everyday in the Gym, High School wrestling room (high contact area with Middle School and High School kids), restaurants, stores, you name it. IF ANYONE would have gotten covid again, it would be someone like me. But here I am in my natural immunity glory living life without a care to what you and your ilk say about this bullshit. It's all lies.

 

[oneforthebus]

Here, try this on for size. Don't want you to cramp your brain trying to figure it out.

Unvaccinated people at higher COVID-19 reinfection: Study

A recent story published in in the journal The Lancet Microbe sheds light on the uncertainty about how long immunity lasts after someone who is unvaccinated is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

www.timesnownews.com

New York: Immunity gained after natural infection is short-lived and remaining unvaccinated can increase the risk of getting re-infected with Covid-19, suggests a study published in the journal The Lancet Microbe. Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, there has been much uncertainty about how long immunity lasts after someone who is unvaccinated is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

"Re-infection can reasonably happen in three months or less," said lead author Jeffrey Townsend, Professor of Biostatistics at the Yale School of Public Health.

"Therefore, those who have been naturally infected should get vaccinated. Previous infection alone can offer very little long-term protection against subsequent infections," Townsend added.

The team analysed known re-infection and immunological data from the close viral relatives of SARS-CoV-2 that cause "common colds" -- along with immunological data from SARS-CoV-1 and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. Leveraging evolutionary principles, the team was able to model the risk of Covid-19 re-infection over time. Re-infections can and have happened, even shortly after recovery. And they will become increasingly common as immunity wanes and new SARS-CoV-2 variants arise.

"We tend to think about immunity as being immune or not immune. Our study cautions that we instead should be more focused on the risk of re-infection through time," said Alex Dornburg, Assistant Professor of bioinformatics and genomics at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

"As new variants arise, previous immune responses become less effective at combating the virus. Those who were naturally infected early in the pandemic are increasingly likely to become re-infected in the near future," he added.

The team's data-driven model reveals striking similarities to the re-infection risks over time between SARS-CoV-2 and endemic coronaviruses.

"Just like common colds, from one year to the next you may get re-infected with the same virus. The difference is that, during its emergence in this pandemic, Covid-19 has proven to be much more deadly," Townsend said.

"Due to the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to evolve and re-infect, it, too, is likely to transition from pandemic to an endemic disease," added Dornburg.

"Reinfection can happen in 3 months or less" yet after more than 18 months, it remains rare. Meanwhile reinfection after vaccines is increasingly common. I'm not anti-vax but I don't understand why there is no real world data on how many previously-infected people have been reinfected, and how many of them have been hospitalized or died.

 

[Troglodyte]

FlipFlog, that is your opinion. Argue for people getting the vaccine all you want to. Don't make it political, which is your modus operandi.

The fact that you have to have facts shoved into your corneas for you to acknowledge them shows your lack of critical thinking ability. Which is why you get so much **** here. That, and your ability to flip on every fact presented.

It’s not my m.o. It is what it is…

Political orientation predicts science denial – here's what that means for getting Americans vaccinated against COVID-19

Republicans are four times as likely as Democrats to say they’re not going to get the COVID-19 vaccine. What’s behind the polarization of who trusts or denies science?

theconversation.com

 

[Steeltime]

Much like you ignore the fact that your own son’s natural immunity failed him.

Wow, you've convinced me. TSF's son's one case = proof.

160 dead pregnant women, 178,000 VAERS reports? Nada. Irrelevant. Anecdotal.

TSF's son? PROOF!

 

[Steeltime]

"Reinfection can happen in 3 months or less" yet after more than 18 months, it remains rare. Meanwhile reinfection after vaccines is increasingly common. I'm not anti-vax but I don't understand why there is no real world data on how many previously-infected people have been reinfected, and how many of them have been hospitalized or died.

Yep. Tibilo also conveniently forgets to note a key point in the study:

Our estimated times to reinfection are consistent with the low numbers of validated cases of reinfection.

 

[oneforthebus]

OFTB, Are you suggesting that the large spike in VAERS reporting recently is somehow different than the VAERS reporting in the past, or just that so many people have recently been vaccinated compared to a couple years ago that actual percentage of miscarriages is about the same?
If the latter, then what of the flu shots plus other vaccines that folks have taken over the recent years.....is the number that small to render the new VAERS peak uninteresting?

I think there are numerous reasons VAERS reports have spiked, as I listed.

I'm not sure I understand the rest of your question. There has not been a "spike in miscarriages" that I am aware of. That would imply more miscarriages overall than usual. Haven't seen any data that suggests that. Let's say the normal miscarriage rate is 10 per a hundred pregnant women. If a million pregnant women get vaccinated and 100,000 have miscarriages, that means we had a 100,000 spike in "miscarriages after vaccine". It also means the rate of miscarriage is the same after the vaccine as it was before the vaccine. It's the normal rate of miscarriage we would expect in pregnant women. If there's some data out there showing that's not the case I'd be happy to look at it.

 

[Confluence]

I think there are numerous reasons VAERS reports have spiked, as I listed.

I'm not sure I understand the rest of your question. There has not been a "spike in miscarriages" that I am aware of. That would imply more miscarriages overall than usual. Haven't seen any data that suggests that. Let's say the normal miscarriage rate is 10 per a hundred pregnant women. If a million pregnant women get vaccinated and 100,000 have miscarriages, that means we had a 100,000 spike in "miscarriages after vaccine". It also means the rate of miscarriage is the same after the vaccine as it was before the vaccine. It's the normal rate of miscarriage we would expect in pregnant women. If there's some data out there showing that's not the case I'd be happy to look at it.

In the most recent Flu season, almost 170M flu shots were given:
Flu vaccine is produced by private manufacturers, so supply depends on manufacturers. For the 2018-2019 season, manufacturers have projected they will provide as many as 163 to 168 million doses of injectable influenza vaccine for the U.S. market. (Projections may change as the season progresses.)

2018-19 Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Total Doses Distributed | CDC

Influenza vaccine distribution information for the 2018-2019 season is posted here

www.cdc.gov

That is about half the US population.

If the new vaccines had no effect on miscarriages, would we not expect the VAERS data to reflect only difference between usually flu vaccinated and Covid flu vaccinated.....or about 25% above the half that are usually vaccinated for flu? From my POV, that would indicate, all other things being equal, that the miscarriage rate should be about 50% higher now, reflecting a 50%(ish) increase in the number of people vaccinated, and assuming that pregnant women are equal parts of both groups.

While VAERS does not show causation, the data clearly shows that miscarriages are far above expected values in this time of Covid flu vaccinations.

Do we know if any of the vaccination safety studies, still incomplete, included pregnant women?

You are correct about the overall rates of miscarriages being the important data not known. It seems analogous to the increased death rates from Covid recently.

 

[oneforthebus]

I would also venture to guess that millions of women probably got flu vaccines over the years and then had a miscarriage some days or weeks afterwards, because once again, miscarriages are very common. Highly unlikely many of them were reported to VAERS. Likewise if they got any other common vaccines and then subsequently had a miscarriage.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

"Miscarriages after eating turkey" will be more frequent in late November early December than "miscarriages after eating turkey" in other months because so many more people eat turkey. Your chart doesn't show that miscarriages were up in general. It just shows that as numbers of vaccines increased, numbers of "miscarriages after getting a vaccine" increased. Which makes perfect sense because miscarriages are common. The more pregnant women who get vaccines, the more "miscarriages after getting a vaccine" there will be. If all pregnant women were vaccinated, every single miscarriage would be a "miscarriage after a vaccine". Which again wouldn't mean the vaccines caused them. The important number is whether miscarriage is more likely in vaccinated women than unvaccinated women. Several studies show that not to be the case.

Here is what is unclear to me from the OpenVAERS data.

When you look at the chart for mortality, there is no confusion. They compare ALL (100%) of reported fatalities suspected to be tied to a vaccine since 1990. For instance, this chart. They clearly state on the site this compares all suspicious reported fatalities for all vaccines for all years.

In 2019, there were 605 suspicious deaths reported to VAERS for all vaccines. This year, in just 9 months, 16,210 suspicious deaths reported, a 2,579% increase. This is certainly cause for concern, especially given this doesn't reflect all instances, CMS data reported, etc.

However...



This chart is not depicted clearly on the site, so I will concede it is not clear. They do not show a baseline of ALL vaccines and reported miscarriages in prior years, so there is no compare. One is left to assume what happens to the left of the chart - were miscarriages reported for all vaccines? No clue.

I've searched for miscarriage data by year in the USA. There are no concise reports I can find.

Like comparing 2020 overages in deaths to Covid deaths, it would be good to compare miscarriages seen this year to prior years' rates. I can't find the data.

 

[Confluence]

I would also venture to guess that millions of women probably got flu vaccines over the years and then had a miscarriage some days or weeks afterwards, because once again, miscarriages are very common. Highly unlikely many of them were reported to VAERS. Likewise if they got any other common vaccines and then subsequently had a miscarriage.

Likewise, all the Covid stats are over-reported because of the sensitivity to issues, when in the past, the flu was not really even talked about until death totals were very negative. I think all these "statistics" around Covid are highly suspect because they lack clear comparables, with definitions, to past experiences, and have clearly been differently reported in almost every jurisdiction.

 

[oneforthebus]

In 2019, there were 605 suspicious deaths reported to VAERS for all vaccines. This year, in just 9 months, 16,210 suspicious deaths reported, a 2,579% increase. This is certainly cause for concern, especially given this doesn't reflect all instances, CMS data reported, etc.

There's no doubt it's "cause for concern" However how many people (especially elderly people) die every year within weeks or months of getting a flu vaccine? Tens of thousands probably. Are they likely to be reported to VAERS? Of course not. I think you are heavily discounting the reasons for the extraordinarily high rate of reporting of things that happened after getting these vaccines.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Tim, for your reading pleasure. Stay safe, man!

Those who've had COVID but didn't get vaccinated afterwards may not be as immune as earlier thought.

Your *bulletproof* opinion of natural immunity seems to be on thin ice.

The durability of immunity against reinfection by SARS-CoV-2: a comparative evolutionary study
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/...5247(21)00219-6/fulltext#.YVyd2UbFgYI.twitter

Tiblio, did you bother to read the study?

First, we have provided loads of studies showing otherwise on natural immunity. So consider this yet another opinion.

Second, the article you supply does nothing to dispel findings from the other studies. Nothing. It is a lab test to "estimate" expected declines in antibodies over time. No humans infected with Covid involved. As compared to studies we have provided where they actually are analyzing real people infected with Covid.

The article states, word for word:

• Reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 under endemic conditions would likely occur between 3 months and 5·1 years after peak antibody response, with a median of 16 months.
• This protection is less than half the duration revealed for the endemic coronaviruses circulating among humans
  • 15 months to 10 years for HCoV-OC43,
  • 31 months to 12 years for HCoV-NL63, and
  • 16 months to 12 years for HCoV-229E.
  • For SARS-CoV - 4 months to 6 years, whereas the 95% quantiles for MERS-CoV were inconsistent by dataset.

Now I could go full Floggy here and say you can get up to 5.1 years of natural antibody immunity from natural immunity compared to 4-6 months of protection from the vax, with is 1400 times greater protection.

In addition, they "estimate" you get between 3 months and 5.1 years. Yet every single study done on humans who've had Covid shows they overwhelmingly carry antibodies still to this day (some infected early show antibodies lasting 18 months). So do you go with the lab theory or actual, to-date results?

How did they come up with the results?

We conducted phylogenetic analyses of the S, M, and ORF1b genes to reconstruct a maximum-likelihood molecular phylogeny of human-infecting coronaviruses. This phylogeny enabled comparative analyses of peak-normalised nucleocapsid protein, spike protein, and whole-virus lysate IgG antibody optical density levels, in conjunction with reinfection data on endemic human-infecting coronaviruses. We performed ancestral and descendent states analyses to estimate the expected declines in antibody levels over time, the probabilities of reinfection based on antibody level, and the anticipated times to reinfection after recovery under conditions of endemic transmission for SARS-CoV-2, as well as the other human-infecting coronaviruses.

So just great. They estimate that natural antibodies will decrease after maybe 3 months, when actual patients who've had Covid show antibodies lasting up to 18.

Finally, and I don't fully understand Tcell and Bcell memory, but your antibodies aren't your only line of defense. When infected with Covid, you not only develop antibodies but Tcell and Bcell memory.

Not just antibodies: B cells and T cells mediate immunity to COVID-19 - Nature Reviews Immunology

Here, Cox and Brokstad briefly discuss T cell- and B cell-mediated immunity to SARS-CoV-2, stressing that a lack of serum antibodies does not necessarily equate with a lack of immunity to the virus.

www.nature.com

Recent reports that antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are not maintained in the serum following recovery from the virus have caused alarm. However, the absence of specific antibodies in the serum does not necessarily mean an absence of immune memory.

The induction of SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T cells and B cells (as opposed to circulating antibodies) is important for long-term protection. In particular, T follicular helper (TFH) cells indicate maturation of the humoral immune response and the establishment of a pool of specific memory B cells ready to rapidly respond to possible reinfection. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells are recruited from a randomly formed and pre-constituted T cell pool capable of recognizing specific viral epitopes. Specific CD4+ T cells are important for eliciting potent B cell responses that result in antibody affinity maturation, and the levels of spike-specific T cells correlate with serum IgG and IgA titres7. Robust immune responses with spike-specific neutralizing antibodies, memory B cells and circulating TFH cells have been found in patients who have recovered from COVID-19 infection8. Although spike-specific CD4+ T cells are found in patients with COVID-19, 30–50% of healthy people with no detectable COVID-19 infection also had SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ T cells and 20% had CD8+ cytotoxic T cells7. These T cells are probably cross-reactive with other HCoVs, but whether they can provide protection from COVID-19 disease remains to be determined. Furthermore, CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells specific for SARS-CoV-2 were found in the convalescent phase after mild COVID-19 and these T cells were shown to recognise peptides derived from the viral spike, nucleoprotein and matrix as well as other viral proteins7.

So even if your antibodies disappear, you still have these cells that know how to mobilize the body's immune system to combat a new infection of Covid.

Natural immunity is not just about antibodies.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Much like you ignore the fact that your own son’s natural immunity failed him.

How so? Natural immunity worked exactly as it should have.

His first bout with Covid, he was sick for 7 days. Like a very bad flu.

The next time he got it, Delta...he had the sniffles for 2 days. Zero other symptoms.

Why? See my prior post. Antibodies, Tcells and Bcells let him defeat it quickly.

 

[Superman]

It’s not my m.o. It is what it is…

Political orientation predicts science denial – here's what that means for getting Americans vaccinated against COVID-19

Republicans are four times as likely as Democrats to say they’re not going to get the COVID-19 vaccine. What’s behind the polarization of who trusts or denies science?

theconversation.com

IDEOLOGY its name is Flog

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Here, try this on for size. Don't want you to cramp your brain trying to figure it out.

Unvaccinated people at higher COVID-19 reinfection: Study

A recent story published in in the journal The Lancet Microbe sheds light on the uncertainty about how long immunity lasts after someone who is unvaccinated is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

www.timesnownews.com

New York: Immunity gained after natural infection is short-lived and remaining unvaccinated can increase the risk of getting re-infected with Covid-19, suggests a study published in the journal The Lancet Microbe. Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, there has been much uncertainty about how long immunity lasts after someone who is unvaccinated is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

"Re-infection can reasonably happen in three months or less," said lead author Jeffrey Townsend, Professor of Biostatistics at the Yale School of Public Health.

"Therefore, those who have been naturally infected should get vaccinated. Previous infection alone can offer very little long-term protection against subsequent infections," Townsend added.

The team analysed known re-infection and immunological data from the close viral relatives of SARS-CoV-2 that cause "common colds" -- along with immunological data from SARS-CoV-1 and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. Leveraging evolutionary principles, the team was able to model the risk of Covid-19 re-infection over time. Re-infections can and have happened, even shortly after recovery. And they will become increasingly common as immunity wanes and new SARS-CoV-2 variants arise.

"We tend to think about immunity as being immune or not immune. Our study cautions that we instead should be more focused on the risk of re-infection through time," said Alex Dornburg, Assistant Professor of bioinformatics and genomics at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

"As new variants arise, previous immune responses become less effective at combating the virus. Those who were naturally infected early in the pandemic are increasingly likely to become re-infected in the near future," he added.

The team's data-driven model reveals striking similarities to the re-infection risks over time between SARS-CoV-2 and endemic coronaviruses.

"Just like common colds, from one year to the next you may get re-infected with the same virus. The difference is that, during its emergence in this pandemic, Covid-19 has proven to be much more deadly," Townsend said.

"Due to the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to evolve and re-infect, it, too, is likely to transition from pandemic to an endemic disease," added Dornburg.

So you post a reprint summary of the same article you originally posted which regurgitates the same points OFTB and I have discussed.

The team analysed known re-infection and immunological data from the close viral relatives of SARS-CoV-2 that cause "common colds" -- along with immunological data from SARS-CoV-1 and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome.

Zero study whatsoever on people infected with Covid. None. The whole study was a laboratory-based estimate based on compares to past similar and not so similar viruses that said "we think" immunity will be X.

Yet it says natural immunity would be 3 months to over 5 years. Yet those who have had Covid for 18 months still have antibodies.

Yeah, I'm going with the real world data for now till proven otherwise.

And don't forget your Tcell and Bcell friends, ignored in their analysis.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

There's no doubt it's "cause for concern" However how many people (especially elderly people) die every year within weeks or months of getting a flu vaccine? Tens of thousands probably. Are they likely to be reported to VAERS? Of course not. I think you are heavily discounting the reasons for the extraordinarily high rate of reporting of things that happened after getting these vaccines.

I'm rationalizing data and theories. As you just did.

You're providing what you "think" is the reason. You believe that in the past that the medical community just didn't use VAERS much. Now you assume they use it a whole lot more. Can you prove this change in reporting?

I, nor you, know enough about VAERS data, how often events are reported, if more or less are reported now than before, etc.

I would certainly hope, and would be enraged if this was not the case, that if my grandmother got the flu vaccine in 2018 and 3 days later perished of a heart ailment that it was not reported then. It should have been. I believe it would have been. I can't imagine why it would not have been. Otherwise, why have the system....

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

There's no doubt it's "cause for concern" However how many people (especially elderly people) die every year within weeks or months of getting a flu vaccine? Tens of thousands probably. Are they likely to be reported to VAERS? Of course not. I think you are heavily discounting the reasons for the extraordinarily high rate of reporting of things that happened after getting these vaccines.

I stand corrected. Healthcare providers are required by law to report certain adverse events. https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html

Healthcare providers are required by law to report to VAERS:

• Any adverse event listed in the VAERS Table of Reportable Events Following Vaccination that occurs within the specified time period after vaccinations
• An adverse event listed by the vaccine manufacturer as a contraindication to further doses of the vaccine

Healthcare providers are strongly encouraged to report to VAERS:

• Any adverse event that occurs after the administration of a vaccine licensed in the United States, whether it is or is not clear that a vaccine caused the adverse event
• Vaccine administration errors

Vaccine manufacturers are required to report nearly all adverse events to VAERS within guidelines like these:



The adverse events required by law to be reported include Tetanus, pertussis, measles, mumps, rubella, polio, hepatitis B, haemophilus influenzae, varicella, rotavirus, pneumococcal conjugate (pneumonia), hepatitis A, seasonal influenza, meningococcal (meningitis), HPV, and any new vaccine recommended by The CDC for routine administration to children.

So...I have purported, because OpenVAERS states (and I've read this elsewhere) that only 1% of adverse events are reported. On the contrary, it's apparently against the law NOT to report adverse events for basically every vaccine used for nearly every malady we suffer.

This data doesn't really support an argument, but reading it...I'm prone not to believe your theory that there is now an "over abundance of reporting" now and that there was a complete abandonment of reporting prior.

I would like to know the deal though on how 1% of events are supposedly reported if it is mandated by law that all of these events be reported, including Flu vaccine adverse events.

 

[Troglodyte]

IDEOLOGY its name is Flog

Read the article… or keep being anti-intellectual.

 

[Troglodyte]

Tim loves “the latest data” but he won’t like this…

What to know about how well natural COVID immunity works against the Delta variant

Vaccines are "one-million percent" the best protection against COVID, an infectious disease expert told Newsweek.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Troglodyte]

Damn, this is a family of Steeler fans, one was vaccinated, one wasn’t…

His dad was vaccinated and his son was not. He lost them both to Covid-19

A Pennsylvania restaurant owner says he's been overwhelmed by the community support for his family after both his father and son died within about 36 hours of each other from Covid-19.

www.cnn.com

 

[madinsomniac]

Are all the vaccines waning? If so I hadn't seen that. I have seen the data on Pfizer. It falls apart pretty much at 4-6 months. I have seen nothing similar on J&J or Moderna.

Moderna lasts a little longer, as does JnJ… though the j&j uses a different method of delivery, they all utilize the same spike protein plan for antibody response so it stands to reason they all would have similar degradation paths…

An increase in miscarriage reports to VAERS because tens of millions of people were all vaccinated in a very short period of time! That's a massive increase in numbers of vaccinations over that time period! Obviously VAERS reports of ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING are going to massively increase too. This is how the misinformation masters twist things. Show the data that miscarriage is more common in vaccinated people than in unvaccinated ones. You can't because it doesn't exist. Your theory is they are just purposely keeping it from us. Yet they have informed us of other adverse events that ARE slightly more common in vaccinated people than unvaccinated ones. How do you explain this? Do they just have it in for pregnant women? Devious population control?

I swore I would not keep beating this "VAERS reports are not data" drum because it's futile. But when you attempt to convince pregnant women not to get vaccinated that is irresponsible and dangerous.

There are concerns about why it’s affecting menstrual cycles which is being researched

They did a small scale clinical trial of 45 guys to see if it affected sperm behavior or count… it doesn’t

All of the other data is observational or older data from previous mrna attempts… everything dated from july, so there is virtually nothing on vaccines the organization the cdc quotes has a ton of links to its sources and it explicitly states that no clinical trials on pregnant women have taken place

This was the basis for the usa today op ed that pregnant vaccine hesitant woman need more actual data to make a decision ( its behind a pay wall)

The miscarriage issue is weird… out of one side of the cdc’s mouth they state that the Covid infection has caused a higher than normal miscarriage rate, but then they are saying the vaccinated rate isn’t any different from the unvaccinated rate… so we aren’t sure if they mean that the higher than normal miscarriages are being seen in both groups or not…

And again its all observational data mostly self reported… some stuff is supposition… theoretically there was a scenario where a toxin could be absorbed into the amniotic fluid…and another where the spike protein could cause some issues… the cdc stance is that while the antibiotic response is passed down the spike protein and delivery mechanism stays localized in the muscle it is inserted in…

I haven’t seen data one way or another on that… the theoretical adverse effects were highly unlikely but extremely bad if they happened .


I really think they should have done more testing before they gave tge green light to pregnant women getting it… they almost always lag that approval for years behind regular public releases… its why its always a disclaimer on newer drugs

Has there been any case of a woman being vaxxed, carrying a child to term, and making sure the child was ok after birth?


It’s just odd that they are only now doing the research on why its affecting womens reproductive cycles… this is listed as a primary concern on that list i posted about everything the cdc and fda check for on medicine and vaccines…

This isn’t misinformation saying something bad is happening … its curiosity about why they didn’t do their due diligence early on … again the cdc is being abundantly clear that they believe the vaccines are safe for the pregnant women getting them but aren’t being clear about what they have substantiated and what they are just using a very small window of observational data to clear a 9 month process and the child that is carried afterwards…

 

[madinsomniac]

Here is what is unclear to me from the OpenVAERS data.

When you look at the chart for mortality, there is no confusion. They compare ALL (100%) of reported fatalities suspected to be tied to a vaccine since 1990. For instance, this chart. They clearly state on the site this compares all suspicious reported fatalities for all vaccines for all years.

In 2019, there were 605 suspicious deaths reported to VAERS for all vaccines. This year, in just 9 months, 16,210 suspicious deaths reported, a 2,579% increase. This is certainly cause for concern, especially given this doesn't reflect all instances, CMS data reported, etc.

However...

View attachment 6594

This chart is not depicted clearly on the site, so I will concede it is not clear. They do not show a baseline of ALL vaccines and reported miscarriages in prior years, so there is no compare. One is left to assume what happens to the left of the chart - were miscarriages reported for all vaccines? No clue.
View attachment 6593
I've searched for miscarriage data by year in the USA. There are no concise reports I can find.

Like comparing 2020 overages in deaths to Covid deaths, it would be good to compare miscarriages seen this year to prior years' rates. I can't find the data.

Now you see a long term ***** about government data being flawed and faulty … its not covid specific… they are terrible at figuring out how to get good comparables and bias adjustment data out to the public… they have these generic lump numbers that can be politically tweaked by everyone to fit agendas… just close the loops.. its really not hard to do it

I get that they probably want the flexibility to either scare people or ease the minds of people as they see fit, but lets be honest, a quarter of us cynical ******** aren’t going to accept half assed data

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Now you see a long term ***** about government data being flawed and faulty … its not covid specific… they are terrible at figuring out how to get good comparables and bias adjustment data out to the public… they have these generic lump numbers that can be politically tweaked by everyone to fit agendas… just close the loops.. its really not hard to do it

I get that they probably want the flexibility to either scare people or ease the minds of people as they see fit, but lets be honest, a quarter of us cynical ******** aren’t going to accept half assed data

I've been impressed with Israel's health department and how they share data. Seems thorough and complete and they have nothing to hide. Why can't we do that? We are the USA.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Tim loves “the latest data” but he won’t like this…

What to know about how well natural COVID immunity works against the Delta variant

Vaccines are "one-million percent" the best protection against COVID, an infectious disease expert told Newsweek.

www.newsweek.com

Oh for ***** sake. You really do suck at this. Can you understand the difference between a propaganda/marketing piece and a science paper? Seriously, can you?

You call this "latest" data but clearly didn't read the article, realizing this "doctor" references old data....pay attention.

For ***** sake man, think instead of reading headlines. You do realize this is OLD, dated data??

Dr. Sabrina Assoumou cautioned against relying on natural immunity as protection against COVID. "There are still questions about the protection of natural immunity against variants. A recent study showed that the likelihood of re-infection was higher among unvaccinated persons when compared to vaccinated individuals."

She questions natural immunity (admitting she does not KNOW if it truly works or not) then references the CDC study in Kentucky of "hundreds of people".....

The CDC study that Assoumou referred to shows that individuals in Kentucky who had already had COVID and had not been vaccinated against the virus were over twice as likely to be reinfected in comparison with people who were fully vaccinated.

She's such a good doctor. From Boston Medical Center. An infectious diseases person. You'd think she'd have been aware of the largest study of its kind, done in Israel with 800,000 people (not hundreds like Kentucky) that showed the vaccinated are 13.2x more likely to contract Covid than those naturally immune?

Is it not odd that she leans towards a "hundreds of people" study vs one of "millions?"

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1.full.pdf

Would you mind sharing this link with this esteemed doctor who speculates that natural immunity might not work?

Meanwhile, you still suck at this. If you're going to try to compete, don't provide links to new articles that reference old studies based on 12 people.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Damn, this is a family of Steeler fans, one was vaccinated, one wasn’t…

His dad was vaccinated and his son was not. He lost them both to Covid-19

A Pennsylvania restaurant owner says he's been overwhelmed by the community support for his family after both his father and son died within about 36 hours of each other from Covid-19.

www.cnn.com

So you're saying the vaccines don't work?

Posting articles like this is NOT the proper way for you to campaign for everyone to get the jabby jab.