Seems the Unvaccinated Topic hit home, 50/50 in response

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, catturd said:

as expected. Now, armed with that knowledge, how many "multiple vaccines" or boosters are required for covid?

See the difference, are you paying attention yet?

Asked/answered previously.

The UK-HSA has reported the death’s by vaccine status. The report can be accessed here.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1054071/vaccine-surveillance-report-week-6.pdf
See Table 12(a), p. 42

In summation: of the 5,978 who died of/with Covid during the reporting period, 911 were unvaccinated,  4,827 were double/booster vaccinated. In addition there were another 208 single vaccinated that died. So, based on the latest Covid death numbers presented in Table 12 there are more than 5 times as many vaccinated that died than unvaccinated.

Case rates aside, 80% of pandemic covid deaths (in the reporting period) are in the fully vaccinated?? That's totally bizarre. If the vaccines were efficacious would you expect that level of performance? I think not!

India just told phizer no to their license application.

Your linked documents shows that vaccination is 90% effective against mortality. I guess that’s not important for you.

 

[JustAnotherHun]

12 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

T and B cell memory tends to last a very long time but neither you, the scientists or myself can predict the future can we?

In case of AZ it did not last that long after shot 2. 120 days later the protection against infection was ZERO.

True, we don't know. As we did not know the 95% (even reported in the early stages of the vaccination campaign) would decline more or less fast, according to the brand one took.

Edited February 14, 2022 by JustAnotherHun

[Danderman123]

4 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

I am vaccinated and boostered ????

The not vulnerable have a very little risk to die from Covid. 85% of all victims are 70+.

How often do I have to repeat that until even a vaxxiban does understand?

 I guess you have written off the 15%.

[JustAnotherHun]

Just now, Danderman123 said:

 I guess you have written off the 15%.

Reduce the 15% by those with underlying contitions and you come close to the risk a healthy man or woman faces to die from Covid.

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, JustAnotherHun said:

And in simple words so even you might understand:

What has this to do with the facts I wrote and you quoted?

You wasted our time with drivel about 2 shots of AZ being ineffective against Omicron, while ignoring the existence of boosters.

 

what point were you trying to make?

[Danderman123]

3 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

What am I "making up"? Facts are not really your thing, right?

But sorry, the data is evident since the Swedish study many months ago.

Sorry, I took “!20 days” to mean 20 days, not 120 days.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, JustAnotherHun said:

In case of AZ it did not last that long after shot 2. !20 days later the protection against infection was ZERO.

True, we don't know. As we did not know the 95% (even reported in the early stages of the vaccination campaign) would decline more or less fast, according to the brand one took.

Yet we're not talking about infection here are we. The string of posts has been about mortality protection which is 95%. The below table is also for AZ

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1054071/vaccine-surveillance-report-week-6.pdf

 

Personally I'd be happy to have a top up booster every year, same as a flu shot, infact there is talk about a new vaccine combining the two.

Moderna eyes combined Covid-19, flu booster by 2023

 

For those younger and healthy then didn't Fauci say a vaccine booster every 3 to 4 years?

[Danderman123]

6 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Reduce the 15% by those with underlying contitions and you come close to the risk a healthy man or woman faces to die from Covid.

And multiply those percentages by the billions of potential infections, and the problem becomes obvious.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

Scientists said we’d take annual COVID jabs like flu shots. Now Fauci says it might be only every 5 years

 

The U.S. Chief Medical Adviser Anthony Fauci said Wednesday that the world is nearly over the full-blown first phase of the pandemic and that the worst may be behind us. He also added that annual vaccine boosters might not be needed as we once thought.

 

“It will depend on who you are,” Fauci told the Financial Times, “but if you are a normal, healthy 30-year-old person with no underlying conditions, you might need a booster only every four or five years.” 

 

https://fortune.com/2022/02/09/scientists-said-wed-take-annual-covid-jabs-like-flu-shots-now-fauci-says-it-might-be-only-every-5-years/

[JustAnotherHun]

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You wasted our time with drivel about 2 shots of AZ being ineffective against Omicron, while ignoring the existence of boosters.

 

what point were you trying to make?

Teh zero protection after just 120 days was not related to omicron, but to delta.

The protection level of around 90% ore more was at 14 days after the 2. shot. 

[JustAnotherHun]

5 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Sorry, I took “!20 days” to mean 20 days, not 120 days.

My fault. The "!" was wrong written, I noticed it too late.

[catturd]

mRNA VE against omicron, tertiary numbers for booster performance vary by report. I don't claim by how much they wane and in what timeline so I included the following link. There are 100's more, draw your own conclusion.

https://www.deseret.com/coronavirus/2022/2/11/22929464/covid-19-booster-shot-effectiveness-timeline

[Danderman123]

12 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Teh zero protection after just 120 days was not related to omicron, but to delta.

The protection level of around 90% ore more was at 14 days after the 2. shot. 

What’s your point?

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, catturd said:

mRNA VE against omicron, tertiary numbers for booster performance vary by report. I don't claim by how much they wane and in what timeline so I included the following link. There are 100's more, draw your own conclusion.

https://www.deseret.com/coronavirus/2022/2/11/22929464/covid-19-booster-shot-effectiveness-timeline

What’s your point?

[Scott]

23 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

In case of AZ it did not last that long after shot 2. !20 days later the protection against infection was ZERO.

True, we don't know. As we did not know the 95% (even reported in the early stages of the vaccination campaign) would decline more or less fast, according to the brand one took.

Please provide a citation for the '20 days later the protection against infection was zero'.  I don't believe that is correct.  

 

Antibodies in the blood may decrease substantially, but 20 days is pretty short.  Antibodies from any vaccine or infection will wane over time.  Once they are no longer needed, they start to die off.   The memory cells, however, do remember the specific proteins in the virus and can be reproduced.  That takes a bit of time, however.  

 

[onthedarkside]

A post that presented Australia vaccine effectiveness data in an intentionally misleading way has been removed, along with a reply.

 

[JustAnotherHun]

8 minutes ago, Scott said:

Please provide a citation for the '20 days later the protection against infection was zero'.  I don't believe that is correct. 

You're right. It was a typing error. I corrected it already to 120

[JustAnotherHun]

10 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

What’s your point?

The point is that now, exactly like before, the 95% are the protection level right after the booster (plus 14 days, I think). It means close to nothing and it does, cannot, show how long the booster will provide an acceptable protection.

 

Don't get me wrong: I would recommend the booster for each vulnerable person. The elderly and those with underlying conditions.

But it does not make sense to booster (and maybe rebooster after 120 days - according to Biontech's Ugur Sahin) those with a very low risk of an infection with severe symptoms or even death. 

 

When I left Germany in Nov.21 after 1.5 years on the frontline, I swore not to discuss Covid on non-medical platforms anymore,  because many of the self entitled experts have a sadly limited capacity of remembering:

 

In 09 or 10/21 I reported from my practice of an outbrake in one of the homes for elderly where we provide medical services. I do not recall the numbers exactly. But the tenor was:

From 23 elderly, all of them doubble vaxxed by Biontech, some of them already boostered, 19 were infected, 3 transfered to an ICU and one died.

I was called a liar and defamed by a few fanatics, because at this time the myth was still alive that it would be very unlikely that "fully immunized" people could catch the virus and even get heavy symptoms. I don't know if my post survived the "fake news" and "misleading"-chants.

What I reported then is common sense now and I broke my oath, though knowing it better ????

 

[Danderman123]

3 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

The point is that now, exactly like before, the 95% are the protection level right after the booster (plus 14 days, I think). It means close to nothing and it does, cannot, show how long the booster will provide an acceptable protection.

 

Don't get me wrong: I would recommend the booster for each vulnerable person. The elderly and those with underlying conditions.

But it does not make sense to booster (and maybe rebooster after 120 days - according to Biontech's Ugur Sahin) those with a very low risk of an infection with severe symptoms or even death. 

 

When I left Germany in Nov.21 after 1.5 years on the frontline, I swore not to discuss Covid on non-medical platforms anymore,  because many of the self entitled experts have a sadly limited capacity of remembering:

 

In 09 or 10/21 I reported from my practice of an outbrake in one of the homes for elderly where we provide medical services. I do not recall the numbers exactly. But the tenor was:

From 23 elderly, all of them doubble vaxxed by Biontech, some of them already boostered, 19 were infected, 3 transfered to an ICU and one died.

I was called a liar and defamed by a few fanatics, because at this time the myth was still alive that it would be very unlikely that "fully immunized" people could catch the virus and even get heavy symptoms. I don't know if my post survived the "fake news" and "misleading"-chants.

What I reported then is common sense now and I broke my oath, though knowing it better ????

 

Okay, now I understand your point: let young people walk around infected, and if they happen to infect the “vulnerable”, well, that’s their tough luck.

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, JustAnotherHun said:

What am I "making up"? Facts are not really your thing, right?

But sorry, the data is evident since the Swedish study many months ago.

Sweden's Health Agency recommended on Monday that people aged 80 or above should receive a second booster shot of COVID-19 vaccine, the fourth jab in total

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/sweden-recommends-fourth-covid-19-jab-elderly-2022-02-14/

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been removed. 

 

[ozimoron]

15 hours ago, JustAnotherHun said:

 

Unvaccinated are the main hosts for new variants. Vaccinated people generally carry a lower viral load and clear the virus quicker. No one demanded that we should be jailed for drink driving either.

[JustAnotherHun]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

Okay, now I understand your point: let young people walk around infected, and if they happen to infect the “vulnerable”, well, that’s their tough luck.

And your point? Let the vaccinated who can catch and provide the virus walk around infected?

You have to accept that the virus will not disappear, no matter how many people are vaccinated. Life includes risks and ends with death.

If one wants to rule out even the last minimal risk, he will have to lock himself in permanently and avoid any social contact.

[catturd]

4 hours ago, placeholder said:

 

As for India, I noted you didn't mention why India refused to certify the Pfizer vaccine. Did you think it wouldn't get checked? Nothing to do with effectiveness.

 

India govt won't buy Pfizer, Moderna vaccines amid local output -sources

India's government will not buy COVID-19 shots from Pfizer (PFE.N)/BioNTech (22UAy.DE) and Moderna (MRNA.O), three government sources told Reuters, mainly because domestic output of more affordable and easier-to-store vaccines has jumped.

 

That essentially means the globally popular vaccines, which their makers have pledged not to sell to private parties during the pandemic, will not be available for now in the world's two most populous countries - China and India.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-govt-wont-buy-pfizer-moderna-vaccines-amid-local-output-sources-2021-09-21/

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Pfizer Inc said on Friday it had withdrawn an application for emergency-use authorisation of its COVID-19 vaccine in India, after failing to meet the drug regulator’s demand for a local safety and immunogenicity study.

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-india-pfizer/pfizer-drops-india-vaccine-application-after-regulator-seeks-local-trial-idUSKBN2A50GE

[catturd]

18 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

What’s your point?

19 hours ago, JustAnotherHun said:

And for how long will that 95% protection last until the next booster has to be done?

95% protection of a risk that does only exist on a minimal level for people outside the vulnerable groups really makes much sense ????

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.14.21267615v1.full-text

 

[TropicalGuy]

On 2/13/2022 at 5:48 PM, JustAnotherHun said:

vaxxed or not, the risk to die from covid is minimal outside the vurnerable group. Even less with Omicron.

Except that Unvaxxed Covid Deaths are 30X vax dead ( UK ONS) ????

[Scott]

I think a big factor that is largely being ignored is the fact that in order to drastically slow the spread of the infection, we have to reach some sort of herd immunity.  Vaccines are the best way of doing that. 

 

Anyone that is involved with farming/ranching knows that when you vaccinate livestock, you vaccinate the entire herd.  Many vaccines have a much lower efficacy than the Covid vaccines but still work when the entire herd is immunized.  In some instances, that also means neighboring herds as well -- depending on how it is spread.  

If a very, very large number of the entire herd is immunized, even with less effective vaccines, then the outbreak is drastically slowed and, depending on the virulence of the virus, stopped.  

 

The reality is, that one way or another we will have to try and reach herd immunity, either through vaccination or actual infections.  Once we have significantly slowed the spread, then we will have a better idea of how the virus is going to function once it has a limited number of people to infect.  Will it become seasonal?  Will it be year around with sporadic outbreaks here and there?   Will young people develop sufficient immunity to have only minor health problems?

 

Older adults will have to either be vaccinated and boosted periodically or they will be at great risk from the disease.  As we age, the immune system simply functions much less efficiently.

 

As a species, we have done a poor job of tackling this virus.  We had places and groups who masked immediately and others who didn't.  We had places that locked down quickly and efficiently and others that didn't.  Once vaccines were available, we had some who took them and some who didn't.  In many respects, we viewed each other as the enemy and not the virus.   As of now, it's clear the virus is winning the war while we battle with one another.

 

[placeholder]

14 minutes ago, catturd said:

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Pfizer Inc said on Friday it had withdrawn an application for emergency-use authorisation of its COVID-19 vaccine in India, after failing to meet the drug regulator’s demand for a local safety and immunogenicity study.

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-india-pfizer/pfizer-drops-india-vaccine-application-after-regulator-seeks-local-trial-idUSKBN2A50GE

Right. Because India isn't strongly protectionist?  After all the hundreds of millions of doses of Pfizer administered, there's a rational need for more phase 3 trials?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

15 hours ago, catturd said:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.14.21267615v1.full

Nice to see that what scientists have been telling the public for months now is borne out by that study -- that to be well protected against Omicron, people need to have that third dose of an mRNA booster like Pfizer or Moderna.

 

Vaccine effectiveness in preventing symptomatic Omicron infection after two AZ doses and a Pfizer booster - 71.4%

 

Vaccine effectiveness in preventing symptomatic Omicron infection after two Pfizer doses and a Pfizer booster -- 75.5%

 

"Among those who received ChAdOx1 as the primary course, from 2 weeks after a BNT162b2 booster dose, vaccine effectiveness increased to 71.4% (95%CI: 41.8 to 86.0%). Vaccine effectiveness increased to 75.5% (95%CI: 56.1 to 86.3%) after the booster among those who had received BNT162b2 as the primary course."

 

 

Anybody who's even remotely been paying attention in recent months would be well aware that the medical experts and scientists have clearly been advising that TWO shots alone of COVID vaccination is not enough to effectively prevent Omicron, and that a third booster dose is required.  And the chart above shows the value of that advice!

 

Edited February 14, 2022 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[catturd]

9 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

India cancelled their Pfizer order for cost reasons.

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Pfizer Inc said on Friday it had withdrawn an application for emergency-use authorisation of its COVID-19 vaccine in India, after failing to meet the drug regulator’s demand for a local safety and immunogenicity study.

If you say so, but before everyone calls you a liar, you should back your statements up with more than your good word and the echo's of other comments above. So, do as you see fit but stop lying and misleading.

Edited February 14, 2022 by catturd