Omicron Booster and Pandemic-weary Thailand

[AsianAtHeart]

1 minute ago, LatPhrao said:

Because it protects one from getting infected AND SPREADING IT TO OTHERS.  Even the dim who lack understanding of how transmissable diseases work.

If the vaccine protects one from getting infected, why are so many of the vaccinated getting covid?

 

[rattlesnake]

3 hours ago, Eleftheros said:

I kind of like not being sick or dead, so I avoided all the shots and boosters that are recommended by the "experts".

 

My strong suspicion is that those who avoided the vaccines, opposed lockdowns and mask-wearing, stood up for the UN's Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights are going to be seen, in the near future, to have been on the right side of history.

Amen.

[transam]

14 minutes ago, LatPhrao said:

Because it protects one from getting infected AND SPREADING IT TO OTHERS.  Even the dim who lack understanding of how transmissable diseases work.

No it doesn't....????

[rattlesnake]

6 hours ago, alyx said:

I only got vaccinated because it has allowed me to travel.

Last year, in Europe I have had Janssen and, six months later, Pfizer before being vaccinated with  Moderna in Thailand earlier this year.

I thought that was it but, planning to go to a country where an under 9 month proof of vaccination  is required, I had a 4th vaccine a couple of weeks ago, Novavax, in Europe again. 

It also seems that i will go for the latter again in a couple of weeks.

Hopefully they will stop this nonsense and this Covid will be forgotten as it should be

I only got vaccinated because it has allowed me to travel.

Where did you travel to? I am unvaccinated and travelled from Thailand to Europe and back (as well as within Thailand and Europe) in late 2021 and early 2022 with no issues.

 

… planning to go to a country where an under 9 month proof of vaccination is required…

Just out of curiosity, what country is that?

 

Cheers.

Edited September 26, 2022 by rattlesnake

[alyx]

36 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

I only got vaccinated because it has allowed me to travel.

Where did you travel to? I am unvaccinated and travelled from Thailand to Europe and back (as well as within Thailand and Europe) in late 2021 and early 2022 with no issues.

 

… planning to go to a country where an under 9 month proof of vaccination is required…

Just out of curiosity, what country is that?

 

Cheers.

Hello 

France to go to Italy ( actually there was no border screening)to Croatia 

this year planning a trip to Algeria (not the usual leisure trip I reckon)

Of course there was the alternative to get a covid test but the organisation was challenging

[vandeventer]

4 hours ago, nobodysfriend said:

It seems that those who predicted that the virus will wane or fade away were finally right ... luckily .

Still , the reasons why it appeared in the first place have to be eliminated .

I know  guy that has been jabbed 5 times with 5 different vaccines to be sure that it would work. He's had covid twice after his 5th shot. Too much of a good thing?

[GroveHillWanderer]

On 9/26/2022 at 7:44 AM, AsianAtHeart said:

 

A vaccine is simply a medical preparation that exposes the recipient to antigens from a known disease-causing pathogen, thereby stimulating an immune system response.

 

Ideally yes, a vaccine would confer sterilizing immunity meaning a person would not become infected on exposure to the relevant pathogen but that is not a requirement for something to be called a vaccine.

 

Perhaps the most easily recognised example of this are the flu vaccines that many people get every year. They do not provide 100% protection against catching the flu either - by they are still vaccines.

 

All a product needs to do to qualify as a vaccine is what I laid out in the first paragraph above.

 

So by what measure or logic, is a CoVid-19 vaccine "not a true vaccine"?

[AsianAtHeart]

4 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

A vaccine is simply a medical preparation that exposes the recipient to antigens from a known disease-causing pathogen, thereby stimulating an immune system response.

 

Ideally yes, a vaccine would confer sterilizing immunity meaning a person would not become infected on exposure to the relevant pathogen but that is not a requirement for something to be called a vaccine.

 

All it needs to do to qualify as a vaccine is what I laid out in the first paragraph above.

 

So by what measure or logic, is a CoVid-19 vaccine "not a true vaccine"?

It's an unfortunate digression, in my opinion, to even call it a vaccine; however, people do call it that.  The reality is that many have titled it a "leaky vaccine" because it does not intend to confer immunity (as ordinary vaccines would), only help to alleviate symptoms.  The same vaccination theory (leaky vaccine, PCR testing, etc.) is applied to the Marek's vaccine given to chickens; it helps them survive, whilst still being vulnerable to the virus and thereafter carriers of it, spreading it to others.  It's most unfortunate, in my opinion, that scientists have not learned the lesson from the Marek's vaccine, which failed, and ended up exposing virtually all the chickens on the planet to a deadly virus, now requiring the (leaky) vaccine for all of them to ensure survival.  When all people must have the covid vaccine for survival, will we then realize our great mistake?  The old saying regarding making the same mistake twice seems applicable.

[Eleftheros]

12 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

A vaccine is simply a medical preparation that exposes the recipient to antigens from a known disease-causing pathogen, thereby stimulating an immune system response.

 

Ideally yes, a vaccine would confer sterilizing immunity meaning a person would not become infected on exposure to the relevant pathogen but that is not a requirement for something to be called a vaccine.

 

All it needs to do to qualify as a vaccine is what I laid out in the first paragraph above.

 

So by what measure or logic, is a CoVid-19 vaccine "not a true vaccine"?

Because the definition of a vaccine always used to be, according to the CDC itself: “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”

 

That definition was conveniently changed by the CDC in September 2021 to read: "A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”

 

Once more, the official Covid narrative requires that we must rewrite history.

 

[GroveHillWanderer]

16 minutes ago, Eleftheros said:

Because the definition of a vaccine always used to be, according to the CDC itself: “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”

 

That definition was conveniently changed by the CDC in September 2021 to read: "A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”

 

Once more, the official Covid narrative requires that we must rewrite history.

They only changed that because too many people were (possibility deliberately) misconstruing "immunity" to mean "sterilizing immunity" - which it does not mean, and should never have been taken to mean.

 

As Dr. Ryan Langlois, a microbiology and immunology professor at the University of Minnesota points out in the AP fact-checking article below, earlier CDC definitions did not always use the word "immunity" (though later ones did).

 

Quote

Their first definition had protection, and ultimately that’s what a vaccine is supposed to do,” he explained. “Then their second definition used the word ‘to generate immunity’ which is how the protection is derived. But immunity can be a misleading term, because people think if they’re immune it’s all or none.

 

Immunity is not that simple and I think that’s what they tried to do with their third definition. They went back to this protection idea because that’s really what vaccines do.

CDC definition of a vaccine

[Bkk Brian]

17 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:

It's an unfortunate digression, in my opinion, to even call it a vaccine; however, people do call it that.  The reality is that many have titled it a "leaky vaccine" because it does not intend to confer immunity (as ordinary vaccines would), only help to alleviate symptoms.  The same vaccination theory (leaky vaccine, PCR testing, etc.) is applied to the Marek's vaccine given to chickens; it helps them survive, whilst still being vulnerable to the virus and thereafter carriers of it, spreading it to others.  It's most unfortunate, in my opinion, that scientists have not learned the lesson from the Marek's vaccine, which failed, and ended up exposing virtually all the chickens on the planet to a deadly virus, now requiring the (leaky) vaccine for all of them to ensure survival.  When all people must have the covid vaccine for survival, will we then realize our great mistake?  The old saying regarding making the same mistake twice seems applicable.

Its called a vaccine because that's exactly what it is. When they first started being developed the WHO and the FDA outlined the approval process for future COVID-19 vaccines, stating that any product will need to prevent or decrease the severity of the disease by at least 50 percent. 

 

That was achieved well over and above the requirements in all approved covid vaccines for the original strain. New covid variants then came along that could evade antibodies that neutralize original virus.

 

However even to this day they still provide excellent protection for severe disease and death although obviously Omicron specific are coming out now for those at risk.

[AsianAtHeart]

19 minutes ago, Eleftheros said:

Because the definition of a vaccine always used to be, according to the CDC itself: “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”

 

That definition was conveniently changed by the CDC in September 2021 to read: "A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”

 

Once more, the official Covid narrative requires that we must rewrite history.

 

They need to add a new "smiley" to the repertoire here: A gold trophy!  Well, you've earned it with this one.  "Thanks" seems inadequate.

[AsianAtHeart]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

When they first started being developed

Just curious...do you know when that was?

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, AsianAtHeart said:

Just curious...do you know when that was?

Yes and you can to if you google it

[AsianAtHeart]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Yes and you can to if you google it

Oh, I'm not unaware of the details...but most are, and you may be, too.  Look for the patents to the SARS-CoV-2 virus.  Follow the trail.  See who owns the patents, when they were obtained, and when the patents on the PCR tests to identify it were secured.  Then you'll be more aware of when this all began.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, AsianAtHeart said:

Oh, I'm not unaware of the details...but most are, and you may be, too.  Look for the patents to the SARS-CoV-2 virus.  Follow the trail.  See who owns the patents, when they were obtained, and when the patents on the PCR tests to identify it were secured.  Then you'll be more aware of when this all began.

???? nah I will leave you in your own black hole

[GroveHillWanderer]

17 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:

They need to add a new "smiley" to the repertoire here: A gold trophy!  Well, you've earned it with this one.  "Thanks" seems inadequate.

Except that prior CDC definitions of a vaccine did not always say that vaccines conferred "immunity", as that AP fact checking article points out.

 

Only some later ones did, and it was on the understanding that anyone familiar with immunology would be aware of, that "immunity" is a relative term and is never 100%.

[AsianAtHeart]

7 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

Except that prior CDC definitions of a vaccine did not always say that vaccines conferred "immunity", as that AP fact checking article points out.

 

Only some later ones did, and it was on the understanding that anyone familiar with immunology would be aware of, that "immunity" is a relative term and is never 100%.

So, if the covid "vaccines" do not provide immunity at all--and one is just as likely to contract the virus as a non-vaccinated person, should it still be called a vaccine?

 

That's why the CDC was forced to update their definition, isn't it?

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:

So, if the covid "vaccines" do not provide immunity at all--and one is just as likely to contract the virus as a non-vaccinated person, should it still be called a vaccine?

 

That's why the CDC was forced to update their definition, isn't it?

Even the flu vaccine doesn't completely prevent the flu, it may lessen the severity of your illness, and reduce the risk of serious complications and death, same as covid vaccine

[AsianAtHeart]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Even the flu vaccine doesn't completely prevent the flu, it may lessen the severity of your illness, and reduce the risk of serious complications and death, same as covid vaccine

Thank you for your testimony.  I wouldn't know, as I have never gotten a flu shot.

[digger70]

It doesn't matter now , If your last vaccination was more than 6 months ago and one hasn't ben sick you are lucky .

Now you can start again or forget about it .  They say the vaccines give only immunity at the most for 6 months.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, AsianAtHeart said:

Thank you for your testimony.  I wouldn't know, as I have never gotten a flu shot.

You don't have to have one to know what it provides people

[transam]

9 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:

So, if the covid "vaccines" do not provide immunity at all--and one is just as likely to contract the virus as a non-vaccinated person, should it still be called a vaccine?

 

That's why the CDC was forced to update their definition, isn't it?

No vaccine for any problem is 100%....

[Photoguy21]

7 hours ago, khunjeff said:

I kind of like not being sick or dead, so I get all the shots and boosters that are recommended by the experts. Since I knew it would take Thailand months to discuss and debate and dilly-dally the new bivalent booster, I went ahead and got it last week in the US. Hopefully that should keep me for a while. 

What about if you get ill from the vaccination? I know a few people who had no problems before but had problems after a booster.

[Sharp]

I feel for those who were made to take the jab due to employment or travel commitments. 

 

 Patience won out in the end for others. 

[transam]

3 minutes ago, Sharp said:

I feel for those who were made to take the jab due to employment or travel commitments. 

 

 Patience won out in the end for others. 

Did for me, had 3 jabs and no C19 that I know of....☺️

[GroveHillWanderer]

25 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:

So, if the covid "vaccines" do not provide immunity at all--and one is just as likely to contract the virus as a non-vaccinated person, should it still be called a vaccine?

 

That's why the CDC was forced to update their definition, isn't it?

Again, you're making the mistake that the CDC was trying to avoid people making - that immunity is an all or nothing proposition, and that it only comes in one flavour. 

 

Immunity is a relative term and you can have different levels of immunity.

 

You can have partial immunity and it can be a high level of immunity or a low level of immunity.

 

Covid vaccines do provide a level of immunity from CoVid-19 - however it was never complete immunity and unfortunately has got lower as each of several newer variants with higher transmissibility has come along.

 

With Omicron, the level of immunity conferred by the vaccine is probably lower than with any previous variant but it still does confer a certain level of immunity. 

[rattlesnake]

2 hours ago, alyx said:

Hello 

France to go to Italy ( actually there was no border screening)to Croatia 

this year planning a trip to Algeria (not the usual leisure trip I reckon)

Of course there was the alternative to get a covid test but the organisation was challenging

Thanks for the clarification. So you got the jab because you found it to be the best option for you, not because it was mandatory to do it.

 

It is important to be specific as there is an ongoing myth (prevalent on this forum) that it was not possible to travel, both domestically and internationally, without being vaccinated against Covid and as far as I know this is simply false.

Edited September 26, 2022 by rattlesnake

[sqwakvfr]

I was back in Los Angeles for a couple weeks and was able to get vaccinated for the Omicron Variant(Bivalent) at a local CVS pharmacy.  The only difference this time was I had no side effects at all (I felt no pain in the injection and my arm did not feel sore unlike the first three times).  

[poskat]

just say no