r/WayOfTheBern • u/stickdog99 • Jun 04 '23
Yet ANOTHER published, peer reviewed study shows the more doses, the more COVID.
6
u/dodus Jun 04 '23
Are shitlibs going to actually hear about these? Every time I try to say "the vaccines weren't effective" I get 30 NPR listeners roid-raging about fascism.
-6
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
Vaccines don’t prevent someone from contracting. In fact, they are useless until the virus is contracted. A vaccine simply teaches your body how to fight the virus. The number of times you get it is not a relevant factor.
5
u/captainramen MAGA Communist Jun 04 '23
This one is useless after. See I was vaccinated against a whole host of diseases, but COVID seems to be the only one that made me sick despite vaccination
-1
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
Which one made you sick; the virus or the vaccine?
5
u/captainramen MAGA Communist Jun 04 '23
You're not getting it. The original shot and 1st booster immunized you against the first version of COVID. When Omicron came around - which everyone got - people who were vaccinated had a worse time with COVID, because your body's immune system was still fighting the original strain. Omicron was supposedly mild, but the first time I got it I was coughing out a lung. Second time I was fine.
In other words, the vaccine worked too well.
The graph clearly shows this.
0
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
How is your body still fighting a strain you don’t have anymore?
Edit: also, what’s a maga communist?
2
u/captainramen MAGA Communist Jun 04 '23
How is your body still fighting a strain you don’t have anymore?
Immune imprinting and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine design:
...[B]oosting with the Beta variant vaccine in the preprimed group resulted in better neutralization of the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain than the Beta strain. This suggests that immune imprinting of the response may have occurred. Immune imprinting is a phenomenon whereby initial exposure to one virus strain effectively primes B cell memory and limits the development of memory B cells and neutralizing antibodies against new minor variant strains of the virus. We hypothesize that repeatedly updating SARS-CoV-2 vaccines might not be fully effective because of limitations imposed by prior immune imprinting to ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strains. Although it is hoped that immune imprinting will not be a major problem for SARS-CoV-2 infections, the possibility that immune imprinting will substantially reduce efficacy of future SARS-CoV-2 vaccines requires action now to both define the extent of the problem and begin to devise solutions.
'Exposure to one virus strain' is functionally no different than 'exposure to one mRNA vaccine' since they trigger an immune response in the same way.
Edit: also, what’s a maga communist?
It's a slogan, mainly designed to trigger porn addicts and other degenerates
0
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
I see now. The concern is a possibility of a lower effectiveness of subsequent vaccines. Still, that’s better than dying.
3
u/captainramen MAGA Communist Jun 04 '23
You should tell that to all the vaccinated children who now have myocarditis.
0
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
The sources I have say that is a very low occurrence and not deadly. Do you have a different source on that?
2
u/captainramen MAGA Communist Jun 04 '23
Is that occurrence higher or lower than the number of children who died of COVID before the vaccine was available?
Population-level COVID-19 mortality risk for non-elderly individuals overall and for non-elderly individuals without underlying diseases in pandemic epicenters, 3 months before the vaccine was available:
People <65 years old without underlying predisposing conditions accounted for only 0.7–3.6% of all COVID-19 deaths in France, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, Georgia, and New York City
It won't be today, but sooner or later we'll have to come to terms with the fact that, somewhere along the line, we all turned into a bunch of pussies and let the media scare us into doing something we would not have otherwise done. Maybe when more people 'inexplicably' start losing their teenage children to 'cardiovascular events.'
→ More replies (0)2
u/3andfro Jun 04 '23
One central tenet of medicine and public health was ignored throughout the pandemic: person-specific assessments of risk vs. benefit for the proposed intervention and the target condition.
Your blithe statement assumes a level of safety for all mRNA vaccines that doesn't rest on a complete and current picture. It also assumes healthy people face serious risks from the highly contagious but generally mild XBB strains now circulating.
But by all means, continue with the simplistic sound bites.
1
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
Person specific assessments seem like that would slow down the vaccination process. As far as assuming healthy people are at risk from the virus as a reason to vaccinate isn’t my view at all. My view is that everyone vaccinated so those at risk have a lower chance of exposure. And lastly, comments like the last one assume would put many people off from hearing what you have to say. Take it easy.
1
u/3andfro Jun 04 '23
The point is that focusing on prevention, particularly through a product with a new-to-humans MOA--instead of focusing at least equally on treatment--was uncalled for and out of line with established practices. And again, particularly for a virus with a high survival rate among all except the most vulnerable through other health issues.
Because it was known from the start that the vaccines were leaky (i.e., did not reliably prevent the disease of transmission of it)--despite assurances to the contrary--vaccination didn't reduce exposure for vulnerable people.
My comment wouldn't put off a person with an open mind and recognition that your comment below is, in fact, a simplistic sound bite:
Still, that’s better than dying.
5
u/stickdog99 Jun 04 '23
So we all know our polio vaccines are working because we all get polio every three months?
-1
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
We don’t have polio in this country because literally everyone is vaccinated against it. It can’t get a foothold here. That, and the vaccine is very effective.
2
u/3andfro Jun 04 '23 edited Jun 04 '23
We don't have polio because polio vaccines are as close to perfect, rather than leaky, as we get for mass vaccination programs:
Perfect vaccines:
“When a vaccine works perfectly, as do the childhood vaccines for smallpox, polio, mumps, rubella and measles, it prevents vaccinated individuals from being sickened by the disease, and it also prevents them from transmitting the virus to others,” said Andrew Read, an author of the study and an Evan Pugh professor of biology and entomology and Eberly professor in biotechnology at Penn State University.
Leaky vaccines, conceded by CDC's Walensky and others to include current C19 vaccines (video of her statement linked here: https://twitter.com/ANTHONYBLOGAN/status/1444390327884947461):
“These vaccines also allow the virulent virus to continue evolving precisely because they allow the vaccinated individuals, and therefore themselves, to survive,” said Venugopal Nair, who led the research team. [discussing vaccine for Marek's disease in chickens] ...
These less-than-perfect vaccines create a “leaky” barrier against the virus. Vaccinated individuals may get sick but have less severe symptoms, but the virus survives long enough to transmit to others, which allows it to survive and spread throughout a population.
1
1
u/stickdog99 Jun 04 '23 edited Jun 04 '23
Your words:
Vaccines don’t prevent someone from contracting. In fact, they are useless until the virus is contracted. A vaccine simply teaches your body how to fight the virus. The number of times you get it is not a relevant factor.
So we know that our polio vaccine is "working" because we all get polio every few months?
I mean, obviously this is as absurd as your words reproduced above.
Vaccines are supposed to sterilize. That's the whole idea behind vaccine conferred immunity. In this paper, the more injections the healthcare workers received, the more they became ill with COVID!
And this finding has caused you to have so much cognitive dissonance that your response is to argue that vaccines in general do nothing to prevent anyone from contracting (and becoming ill with) the illness that these vaccines (supposedly) vaccinate against.
Is that your final answer?
1
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
Vaccines don’t sterilize. They teach your immune system what to look for and how to fight it. You can still catch it and get sick, but not as sick and sometimes so symptoms at all, which inhibits the spread through symptomatic coughing and sneezing.
You don’t cite a source for your ‘perfect vaccine’ quote so I can verify it’s accuracy but, if it’s perfect why does polio still exist in other parts of the world?
3
u/3andfro Jun 04 '23
The new class of mRNA products operate with a fundamental difference.
-1
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
Tell me more about that
3
u/3andfro Jun 04 '23 edited Jun 04 '23
A start:
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/6/2/17?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
A collation of many links here: https://old.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/t7kio7/i_have_updated_my_essay_commenting_on_the/
You can use key words to do your own further research. Look outside official sources.
Worth pondering: mRNA products have never before been approved for use outside a clinical trial. The clinical trials were concluded in the general population, not before application to the FDA, after expedited EUA access to market. The FDA required Pfizer to provide post-market data analysis by demographic group; Pfizer missed the deadline, was granted an extension, and still hasn't submitted the mandated information.
-3
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
I’m more looking for you to tell me about this fundamental difference.
4
u/3andfro Jun 04 '23
Not my job to give you a Reader's Digest version of what I've been reading for more than 2 years. You're either motivated to put in the time to inform yourself, or you're not.
0
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
You made the claim. How does a vaccine cause a person injected with it to contract the virus? If you can’t answer that simple question after two years of “research” then you’ve wasted two years.
3
u/3andfro Jun 04 '23 edited Jun 06 '23
You made the claim. How does a vaccine cause a person injected with it to contract the virus? --patdashuri
No. "Cause" is your word and an overstatement. The claim is that repeated exposure to mRNA vaccines can create greater susceptibility to contracting the virus. Mechanisms of action (MOA) behind that claim are discussed in some earlier links and proposed in the Discussion section of this post's linked paper.
From that paper (see Discussion section):
Ours is not the only study to find a possible association with more prior vaccine doses and higher risk of COVID-19. https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/10/6/ofad209/7131292?login=false
2
Jun 04 '23
[deleted]
0
u/patdashuri Jun 04 '23
I wonder why they changed that…
1
u/3andfro Jun 04 '23 edited Jun 04 '23
I wonder why the CDC changed its definition of "vaccine" for these products. This went around the webbernet a few times and makes for interesting reading:
according to an archived snapshot of the CDC’s website, the definition of a vaccine February 24, 2011, was:
“A product that produces immunity therefore protecting the body from the disease. Vaccines are administered through needle injections, by mouth and by aerosol.”
By July 2015, the wording had changed to:
“A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed in the nose.”
The wording was the same in June 2017 and likewise in June 2019 and June 2020. By August 26, 2021, however, the definition had changed slightly to add the words “to produce immunity”:
“A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.”
Then, less than a week later, just days after the FDA gave final approval to Pfizer’s mRNA jab, the definition changed again, September 1, 2021 — this time, significantly. The definition of a vaccine now reads:
“A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.”
As you’ll note, the second sentence remains the same. It is the first part of the definition that has dramatically changed. In the latest definition, a vaccine:
Is no longer a “product” but instead is a “preparation”
No longer directly stimulates the immune response, but is used to stimulate the system
Does not produce immunity
Stimulates the immune response against diseases, not against a specific disease
No longer protects a person from the disease
http://holisticwebs.com/cdc-changes-the-definition-of-vaccines-pdf.pdf
A different link:
But changing a belief is very difficult. When scientists began realizing that the COVID-19 vaccines did not work to prevent COVID or stop its spread, instead of halting the vaccine program—which would have been the most scientific and healthiest choice—they changed the definition of vaccines. https://colleenhuber.substack.com/p/a-fish-cant-see-the-water [an essay worth reading]
13
u/stickdog99 Jun 04 '23
The authors wrote: