ADVERTISEMENT

OT: COVID Science - Pfizer/Moderna vaccines >90% effective; Regeneron antibody cocktail looks very promising in phase II/III trial and more

Status
Not open for further replies.
The link below is to a 2019 WHO study on Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza.

Table 35 on page 100 of the pdf says with respect to masks:
"Ten RCTs were included in meta-analysis, and there was no evidence that face masks are effective in reducing transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza."

Sorry if this has been covered here, but other than Covid-19 being much more easily transmitted, is there something different about Covid-19 vs. influenza that the authorities have seen or know about with respect to Covid-19 that shows masks are effective for Covid-19.

Yes, plenty. Search the board for the term "masks" under my username and you'll find a ton. The WHO and CDC both dropped the ball on masks and came out with recommendations on masks way later than leaders in the field did (and me in early March, as I've published internal papers at work on removal of infectious agents by filtration/masks and knew masks were very likely protective in keeping virus-laden droplets in from infected wearers and out for non-infected wearers).
 
  • Like
Reactions: scripts
Why do some of you think the vaccine should be madatory for everyone? Most people I know who are educated and somewhat to very successful do not want to take it. Even the nurses i know who are being forced to take it.
See you hit it right on the head ...Educated ... with no common sense... plenty of those in DC...plenty in private business... not all people lacking a Degree are stupid.
 
Yes, plenty. Search the board for the term "masks" under my username and you'll find a ton. The WHO and CDC both dropped the ball on masks and came out with recommendations on masks way later than leaders in the field did (and me in early March, as I've published internal papers at work on removal of infectious agents by filtration/masks and knew masks were very likely protective in keeping virus-laden droplets in from infected wearers and out for non-infected wearers).
So a 100 page document published by the WHO in the Spring of 2019 is complete garbage and not to be believed? How could they be so far off the mark, and if they were, why should they be trusted?
 
So a 100 page document published by the WHO in the Spring of 2019 is complete garbage and not to be believed? How could they be so far off the mark, and if they were, why should they be trusted?
Knight, the paper you cited was based on a meta-analysis of ten other studies. It showed a benefit to mask wearing but not one of statistical signififance.

Lots to unpack there. Many of these studies, I think k it was 7 but I'm several deep at this point, looked at individual households. Eg you get confirmed with the flu, either you or your family is assigned to wear a mask, and then they see if your family gets sick. That's quite different than wearing a mask at the super market...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
Knight, the paper you cited was based on a meta-analysis of ten other studies. It showed a benefit to mask wearing but not one of statistical signififance.

Lots to unpack there. Many of these studies, I think k it was 7 but I'm several deep at this point, looked at individual households. Eg you get confirmed with the flu, either you or your family is assigned to wear a mask, and then they see if your family gets sick. That's quite different than wearing a mask at the super market...
And paper aside, the WHO hasn't looked good throughout this whole thing...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
So a 100 page document published by the WHO in the Spring of 2019 is complete garbage and not to be believed? How could they be so far off the mark, and if they were, why should they be trusted?
I've posted about all of this before and am not inclined to dig it all up again, but the WHO and CDC, from everything I recall simply relied on weak flu studies where "control" was poor. If masks didn't work to prevent doctors and nurses from infecting their patients, why would they all wear them? Because they work. What wasn't known as well, however, was the extent of people who were asymptomatic or even very mildly symptomatic, but infectious for COVID, which is usually not the case with flu and was absolutely not the case with SARS/MERS, where patients typically weren't highly contagious until they were fairly sick.

And the post below, from 3/7, citing an amazing study among health care workers in Hong Kong early in the pandemic, where none of the masked workers got infected, is what really convinced me around that time to become a champion for masks to "keep the virus in" (for infected wearers) and to "keep the virus out" for the general public. There's no reason I (and many others) should have been weeks ahead of the CDC and 2 months ahead of the WHO on this.

I can't tell you why it took them so long to come around. And there have been countless studies in the last 9 months showing the benefits of masking - they're far from perfect, but they're much better than nothing (but not as good as distancing).

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...es-interventions-and-more.191275/post-4432618
 
Fantastic article on the speed of development of the Moderna vaccine and how we actually could've gone far faster in hindsight. I love the part about pre-developing vaccines for a host of virus classes now and doing the animal and then early clinical testing in healthy volunteers and then manufacture at least millions of doses at risk, so that if it looks like one of these viruses could take off in a pandemic, we could be ready to do phase III trials very soon after the risk was identified.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/12/moderna-covid-19-vaccine-design.html

For COVID, if this approach had been taken, it's possible we could've had the vaccine ready for rollout in April. Most of us have been just amazed at even getting to emergency approval in 11 months vs. the typical 4+ years, but reading this makes it clear we can go even faster - if we pre-invest, which is not something we tend to do well, unfortunately. The article also reiterates something I've tried to remind people of - that without doing the fundamental research on viruses, genetics, vaccines, immunology, etc., as well as how those all applied to SARS and MERS (where vaccines were developed but never deployed as the outbreaks died out), there's simply no way we would've gotten this and other vaccines developed in anywhere near a year.

I also love the story of how Dr. Fauci and his staff at NAIAD were talking to Moderna R&D leads within a day after first getting the genetic sequence of the virus from the Chinese and saying they needed to get an mRNA vaccine going ASAP. I think a lot of people don't really know what a distinguished scientific leader Fauci is. I've read a few of his papers and he's done some amazing work.

https://www.contagionlive.com/view/anthony-fauci-how-covid19-vaccines-progressed-quickly-safely

The Chinese published the sequence of SARS-CoV-2 in a public database on January 10,” he explained. “I got my team together on the 11th (of January) and said, ‘We’ve got to partner with Moderna and put this in an mRNA platform.’ By the 15th, we started doing it. Sixty-five days later, we were in a phase 1 trial. And 7 months later, we’re in a phase 3 trial. That process would normally take a few years, but we didn’t compromise anything.”
In a follow-up to the post above, for anyone wondering how the hell these COVID vaccines were developed, tested, and approved so fast and especially for those who worry that corners were cut, this Reddit COVID forum FAQ is superb. The whole thing is worth reading.

Merry Christmas and best wishes for a happy and healthy New Year for everyone in these trying times.

 
Last edited:
The question of mandatory vaccination is interesting to me. I have no issue with mandatory vaccinations for school age kids for measles and the other diseases.

When my kid had to get the meningitis vaccine to live on campus I had no issue at all.

So now we have a vaccine that could stop our economic ruination and I am not sure the government should mandate it but maybe private companies like airlines could make it a condition of service.
 
The question of mandatory vaccination is interesting to me. I have no issue with mandatory vaccinations for school age kids for measles and the other diseases.

When my kid had to get the meningitis vaccine to live on campus I had no issue at all.

So now we have a vaccine that could stop our economic ruination and I am not sure the government should mandate it but maybe private companies like airlines could make it a condition of service.
The only people talking about mandatory vaccinations are on this board.

But for sake of argument, "mandatory" is misleading because in practicality its really more like an opt-out model. No one forces people with religious beliefs or health situations to get a shot - they basically need a note - and that's for established vaccines in well-supported programs like schools.
 
Does anyone have a report on how many people have been hospitalized or have died from the regular flu this year so far or is everything lumped in as Covid 19?
 
Does anyone have a report on how many people have been hospitalized or have died from the regular flu this year so far or is everything lumped in as Covid 19?

Flu numbers are way down due to increased vaccinations, social distancing and masking.

Not everything is lumped into Covid since there is clear testing for each.


 
Flu numbers are way down due to increased vaccinations, social distancing and masking.

Not everything is lumped into Covid since there is clear testing for each.


Flu numbers are always wonky / estimates. I'd expect positive flu tests to be down for the reasons you cited, but also because people with flu are more likely to stay home / avoid doctors offices or just get tested for covid this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LETSGORU91
Flu numbers are way down due to increased vaccinations, social distancing and masking.

Not everything is lumped into Covid since there is clear testing for each.


Not everything but a lot is lumped in.
And since the Flu season is just starting now how can you say it's way down??
 
As an answer to the distribution of the vaccine in NJ I feel our state was totally unprepared and did and still does not have a proper plan in place as they are leaving the distribution of the vaccine up to each county and these counties are not sure themselves how many and when they are receiving their allotment of vaccines but Murphy will blame it on the federal government. As someone in the 1A group I should be getting the vaccine no later than this week and of course still have no idea when I will be receiving it
 
As an answer to the distribution of the vaccine in NJ I feel our state was totally unprepared and did and still does not have a proper plan in place as they are leaving the distribution of the vaccine up to each county and these counties are not sure themselves how many and when they are receiving their allotment of vaccines but Murphy will blame it on the federal government. As someone in the 1A group I should be getting the vaccine no later than this week and of course still have no idea when I will be receiving it


Do you discuss getting it with your doctor?
 
Don't recall any warnings on this:

"The recent allergic reactions linked to Pfizer’s very similar vaccine prompted heated discussions during advisory panel discussions held this month by the F.D.A. and the C.D.C., with experts noting that anaphylaxis seemed to be occurring at an unusual frequency so soon into distribution."

"Boston Doctor Develops Severe Allergic Reaction After Getting Moderna Vaccine - The New York Times" https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/25/health/Covid-moderna-vaccine-allergies.html
 
Last edited:
I've posted about all of this before and am not inclined to dig it all up again, but the WHO and CDC, from everything I recall simply relied on weak flu studies where "control" was poor. If masks didn't work to prevent doctors and nurses from infecting their patients, why would they all wear them? Because they work. What wasn't known as well, however, was the extent of people who were asymptomatic or even very mildly symptomatic, but infectious for COVID, which is usually not the case with flu and was absolutely not the case with SARS/MERS, where patients typically weren't highly contagious until they were fairly sick.

And the post below, from 3/7, citing an amazing study among health care workers in Hong Kong early in the pandemic, where none of the masked workers got infected, is what really convinced me around that time to become a champion for masks to "keep the virus in" (for infected wearers) and to "keep the virus out" for the general public. There's no reason I (and many others) should have been weeks ahead of the CDC and 2 months ahead of the WHO on this.

I can't tell you why it took them so long to come around. And there have been countless studies in the last 9 months showing the benefits of masking - they're far from perfect, but they're much better than nothing (but not as good as distancing).

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...es-interventions-and-more.191275/post-4432618
There are reasons it took them such a long time to come along. You do understand why the general public may be confused from (and skeptical of) the advice of experts?




EqH-xADXAAIaBb6
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bac2therac
Keep fighting the good fight

The way Numbers and others just out of hand dismiss prior studies is bonkers..doesnt sound like good science
 
Don't recall any warnings on this:

"The recent allergic reactions linked to Pfizer’s very similar vaccine prompted heated discussions during advisory panel discussions held this month by the F.D.A. and the C.D.C., with experts noting that anaphylaxis seemed to be occurring at an unusual frequency so soon into distribution."

"Boston Doctor Develops Severe Allergic Reaction After Getting Moderna Vaccine - The New York Times" https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/25/health/Covid-moderna-vaccine-allergies.html

It's been discussed for at least a month as a possibility, but wasn't seen in the clinical trials, since anyone with a history of known/suspected anaphylaxis to ingredients in the vaccine was excluded from the trials, while thousands in the trial with allergies to all kinds of other agents were included (and no obvious allergic responses were noted). For the vast majority of people this is a non-issue and for the tiny minority that have some history of anaphylactic responses, they should be getting their vaccines under medical supervision, just in case and even if they have an event, they're scary, but not difficult to treat (and have no lasting effects).

This is the kind of thing that can happen when "only" 15-20K receive a vaccine - even though that sounds like a very large number it won't "find" adverse events that are on the order of 1 in 50K or 500K. Obviously, we're now seeing somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 per 1MM or 1 in 100K (6 in 556K vaccinations as of Sunday) severe allergic responses in people generally with a history of severe allergic responses (like the doc in the article) vs. the more typical ~1 in 1MM severe allergic response to vaccines.

However, people who have these kinds of reactions are usually aware of them and should discuss the risks with their doctor, although the FDA/CDC still thinks that highly allergic people can safely get the vaccine, as per below, but people with suspected anaphylactic responses to ingredients in the mRNA vaccines (with PEG being the only likely culprit and this has only been seen on very rare occasions, so it's not "proven" yet) might consider not getting the vaccine, as per the excerpt from that Times article, below. The NIH is also looking into doing a study with such highly allergic people under very controlled conditions (link below).

After the initial cases accompanying the Pfizer shots, the C.D.C. issued advice that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines might not be appropriate for people with a history of anaphylaxis to ingredients in either injection. Anaphylaxis, which typically happens within minutes after exposure to a triggering substance, can impair breathing and cause precipitous drops in blood pressure, potentially becoming life-threatening.

The agency recommended that people with other allergies should still get their shots and wait the standard 15 minutes post-injection before leaving the vaccination site. Anyone who previously had an anaphylactic reaction to a substance, including another vaccine or injectable drug, should be monitored for an extra 15 minutes.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/heal...1001d2-431a-11eb-b0e4-0f182923a025_story.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
There are reasons it took them such a long time to come along. You do understand why the general public may be confused from (and skeptical of) the advice of experts?




EqH-xADXAAIaBb6

There have always been concerns with any regulatory or advisory group like the WHO, CDC, FDA, etc. and influnece over them from both corporations and government leadership. It's why so many people were so upset with the Administration's clearly political pressures on CDC/FDA throughout the pandemic to date. And as per the report you linked, there are real concerns over undue influence of Pharma, although from what I recall the WHO did change some of their rules on transparency and declarations of involvement. These things can obviously lead to lack of trust in these bodies, which is a real problem.

Having said that, I don't think the WHO and CDC being slow to come around to changing their positions on the effectiveness of masks had anything to do with Pharma, but were much more likely the result of not wanting to change positions until they had enough data to do so. Personally, as I posted above, I thought the case was pretty compelling by early March as did many experts in the field. Politics has also played a role, at least in the CDC's case, but I'd rather not go into that in this thread.

You also are spending a lot of time questioning the efficacy of masks. Again, I've provided numerous sceintific articles on their efficacy from a fundamental particluate/droplet transport and removal perspective and from an epidemiological/country/region perspective - have you not read any of them? Here's one additional argument: hospitalizations in NJ for this current wave are peaking at about half what they were in the spring and hospitalizations are a far better indicator of the extent of an outbreak than cases (we know we had at least 2-4X as many cases in the spring vs. what was reported, due to far lower testing rates back then). To me the most obvious difference explaining the halving of transmissions between March/early April and now is that now we have most people wearing masks vs. not many at all back then (and they'd be a lot lower if ~30% of the population weren't ignoring masks in many situations and weren't still having indoor gatherings).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
Keep fighting the good fight

The way Numbers and others just out of hand dismiss prior studies is bonkers..doesnt sound like good science
If you actually understood how science worked, you'd know that research done with one virus years ago (influenza) might be a good starting point, but that research done in the actual virus we're dealing with is far more relevant and the vast majority of that research since the pandemic started has shown that masks afford some protection for the wearer and reduce viral load emitted by an infected wearer and that when both are wearing masks the reduction is synergistic. New, more relevant research outweighs older, less relevant research. That's how scientific understanding evolves.
 
It's been discussed for at least a month as a possibility, but wasn't seen in the clinical trials, since anyone with a history of known/suspected anaphylaxis to ingredients in the vaccine was excluded from the trials, while thousands in the trial with allergies to all kinds of other agents were included (and no obvious allergic responses were noted). For the vast majority of people this is a non-issue and for the tiny minority that have some history of anaphylactic responses, they should be getting their vaccines under medical supervision, just in case and even if they have an event, they're scary, but not difficult to treat (and have no lasting effects).

This is the kind of thing that can happen when "only" 15-20K receive a vaccine - even though that sounds like a very large number it won't "find" adverse events that are on the order of 1 in 50K or 500K. Obviously, we're now seeing somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 per 1MM or 1 in 100K (6 in 556K vaccinations as of Sunday) severe allergic responses in people generally with a history of severe allergic responses (like the doc in the article) vs. the more typical ~1 in 1MM severe allergic response to vaccines.

However, people who have these kinds of reactions are usually aware of them and should discuss the risks with their doctor, although the FDA/CDC still thinks that highly allergic people can safely get the vaccine, as per below, but people with suspected anaphylactic responses to ingredients in the mRNA vaccines (with PEG being the only likely culprit and this has only been seen on very rare occasions, so it's not "proven" yet) might consider not getting the vaccine, as per the excerpt from that Times article, below. The NIH is also looking into doing a study with such highly allergic people under very controlled conditions (link below).

After the initial cases accompanying the Pfizer shots, the C.D.C. issued advice that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines might not be appropriate for people with a history of anaphylaxis to ingredients in either injection. Anaphylaxis, which typically happens within minutes after exposure to a triggering substance, can impair breathing and cause precipitous drops in blood pressure, potentially becoming life-threatening.

The agency recommended that people with other allergies should still get their shots and wait the standard 15 minutes post-injection before leaving the vaccination site. Anyone who previously had an anaphylactic reaction to a substance, including another vaccine or injectable drug, should be monitored for an extra 15 minutes.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/heal...1001d2-431a-11eb-b0e4-0f182923a025_story.html
You seem to have a tendency to minimize any problems with the vaccine. For those with anaphylaxis to a variety of things, this is a big deal, and it seems to have been swept under the carpet. Someone in my family had planned to go early for one of the available vaccines as was completely unaware of this. They had not talked to their doctor. This person was on the list to get an early vaccine, and none of this information was provided. A review of the vaccine consent form does lists the ingredients and asks if the person receiving the vaccine if they have had an allergic reaction to the ingredients listed, but the average person is not going to know if they are or are not allergic to the laundry list of chemical moieties listed.

But you give sound advice, each person should consult their doctor first, especially if they have any issues with anaphylaxis (they carry an epi pen) or other potential issues discussed such as immunocompromised.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bac2therac
There have always been concerns with any regulatory or advisory group like the WHO, CDC, FDA, etc. and influnece over them from both corporations and government leadership. It's why so many people were so upset with the Administration's clearly political pressures on CDC/FDA throughout the pandemic to date. And as per the report you linked, there are real concerns over undue influence of Pharma, although from what I recall the WHO did change some of their rules on transparency and declarations of involvement. These things can obviously lead to lack of trust in these bodies, which is a real problem.

Having said that, I don't think the WHO and CDC being slow to come around to changing their positions on the effectiveness of masks had anything to do with Pharma, but were much more likely the result of not wanting to change positions until they had enough data to do so. Personally, as I posted above, I thought the case was pretty compelling by early March as did many experts in the field. Politics has also played a role, at least in the CDC's case, but I'd rather not go into that in this thread.

You also are spending a lot of time questioning the efficacy of masks. Again, I've provided numerous sceintific articles on their efficacy from a fundamental particluate/droplet transport and removal perspective and from an epidemiological/country/region perspective - have you not read any of them? Here's one additional argument: hospitalizations in NJ for this current wave are peaking at about half what they were in the spring and hospitalizations are a far better indicator of the extent of an outbreak than cases (we know we had at least 2-4X as many cases in the spring vs. what was reported, due to far lower testing rates back then). To me the most obvious difference explaining the halving of transmissions between March/early April and now is that now we have most people wearing masks vs. not many at all back then (and they'd be a lot lower if ~30% of the population weren't ignoring masks in many situations and weren't still having indoor gatherings).
You don't read my posts so well. I'll tell you the same thing you tell me. Check my posting history-LOL. Yeah, who has time to do that? I'm fully on board with masks. My only point is the WHO has very questionable integrity. And the CDC is probably further behind. Just look at the advice the CDC gives to diabetics for diet, which would put many diabetics in a diabetic coma. Big Food and Big Pharma have too much influence over people and agencies who are supposed to be providing unbiased advice. Have said this before, it's almost as if they want people to be sick so more pharmaceuticals can be peddled. I'm sure you will disagree. Few of us have the time and the scientific background or ability to sift through all of the medical and scientific jargon to figure this stuff out, and they take the advice of the WHO and CDC at face value. It's very unfortunate and needs to change.

 
  • Like
Reactions: RU_DIO
If you actually understood how science worked, you'd know that research done with one virus years ago (influenza) might be a good starting point, but that research done in the actual virus we're dealing with is far more relevant and the vast majority of that research since the pandemic started has shown that masks afford some protection for the wearer and reduce viral load emitted by an infected wearer and that when both are wearing masks the reduction is synergistic. New, more relevant research outweighs older, less relevant research. That's how scientific understanding evolves.

Does science involve going on national television and emphatically telling America...MASKS DON'T WORK...maybe stops one droplet
 
If you actually understood how science worked, you'd know that research done with one virus years ago (influenza) might be a good starting point, but that research done in the actual virus we're dealing with is far more relevant and the vast majority of that research since the pandemic started has shown that masks afford some protection for the wearer and reduce viral load emitted by an infected wearer and that when both are wearing masks the reduction is synergistic. New, more relevant research outweighs older, less relevant research. That's how scientific understanding evolves.

Danish mask study..can you tell me why it got suppressed for 3 months
 
  • Like
Reactions: Postman_1
You seem to have a tendency to minimize any problems with the vaccine. For those with anaphylaxis to a variety of things, this is a big deal, and it seems to have been swept under the carpet. Someone in my family had planned to go early for one of the available vaccines as was completely unaware of this. They had not talked to their doctor. This person was on the list to get an early vaccine, and none of this information was provided. A review of the vaccine consent form does lists the ingredients and asks if the person receiving the vaccine if they have had an allergic reaction to the ingredients listed, but the average person is not going to know if they are or are not allergic to the laundry list of chemical moieties listed.

But you give sound advice, each person should consult their doctor first, especially if they have any issues with anaphylaxis (they carry an epi pen) or other potential issues discussed such as immunocompromised.

Nothing is being swept under the rug. It’s been widely reported and CDC issued guidance on it. Over a million people have been vaccinated and this has only happened to a handful of people.

If somehow a person is unaware of the allergic risks going into being vaccinated (i.e. they do no research and don’t speak to a doctor) they will be educated upon arrival.

 
Nothing is being swept under the rug. It’s been widely reported and CDC issued guidance on it. Over a million people have been vaccinated and this has only happened to a handful of people.

If somehow a person is unaware of the allergic risks going into being vaccinated (i.e. they do no research and don’t speak to a doctor) they will be educated upon arrival.

Do you mean by the educated...advanced degree educated or... the superior ,highly sophisticated, WHO EDUCATED?
 
Nothing is being swept under the rug. It’s been widely reported and CDC issued guidance on it. Over a million people have been vaccinated and this has only happened to a handful of people.

If somehow a person is unaware of the allergic risks going into being vaccinated (i.e. they do no research and don’t speak to a doctor) they will be educated upon arrival.



If it can save one life with he reactions stop it!!!!! Poor souls.
 
Sorry you understand EXACTLY what I mean... the superiority syndrome with some of you science / pharma nerds is sickening... the “ we’re just trying to educate you “ , has become comical especially from YOU...

I was simply stating everyone who gets vaccinated should be educated about possible allergic reactions and kept onsite for 15min afterwards.

Sounds like you have some anger and insecurity issues you need to work out.
 
I was simply stating everyone who gets vaccinated should be educated about possible allergic reactions and kept onsite for 15min afterwards.

Sounds like you have some anger and insecurity issues you need to work out.
Trust me Aristotle I’m not angry nor insecure with issues... the only issue I have and many others have is your inordinate number of posts which defend your position when someone CHOOSES to disagree or question the so called updates on covid19 ... not all is factually proven ...within 5-10 years we will learn much more about how the covid19 pandemic was mishandled starting with the WHO,CDC Federal Government and Medical professionals in charge... conspiracy theory? Maybe ...maybe not... “ if something sounds too good it probably isn’t”... What seems to be the issue in South Korea with the virus? They have done ALL the suggested safeguards from tracking, isolating, mask wearing and social separation yet the experts claims they can’t understand why it is spreading again.
 
I was simply stating everyone who gets vaccinated should be educated about possible allergic reactions and kept onsite for 15min afterwards.

Sounds like you have some anger and insecurity issues you need to work out.
BTW: I believe everyone on this board has known and read about the possible adverse reactions from the two vaccines... this is exactly what makes people laugh with you assuming the average lay person is uneducated or unable to understand about Anaphylaxis reactions caused by these vaccines... Nice to help but some do these postings not to help but actually to promote their unabashed superior intellectual ( in their minds) knowledge...unless you are part of actually stopping the viral spread then it’s not worth anything... almost can visualize some issues being the same 1-2-5 years in the future...
 
Last edited:
I was simply stating everyone who gets vaccinated should be educated about possible allergic reactions and kept onsite for 15min afterwards.

Sounds like you have some anger and insecurity issues you need to work out.
And who should they be educated by? By the very educated, ie doctors, scientists et el.

In case it's not clear I'm on your side here.
 
BTW: I believe everyone on this board has known and read about the possible adverse reactions from the two vaccines... this is exactly what makes people laugh with you assuming the average lay person is uneducated or unable to understand about Anaphylaxis reactions caused by these vaccines... Nice to help but some do these postings not to help but actually to promote their unabashed superior intellectual ( in their minds) knowledge...unless you are part of actually stopping the viral spread then it’s not worth anything... almost can visualize some issues being the same 1-2-5 years in the future...
Isn't the problem that people are not aware of these issues? Otherwise it would not be news right?

I mean how do the unaware learn of these issues if not for the aware? Is that not typically how knowledge is passed along?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
Isn't the problem that people are not aware of these issues? Otherwise it would not be news right?

I mean how do the unaware learn of these issues if not for the aware? Is that not typically how knowledge is passed along?
No I would be quite confident in saying EVERYDAY TKR posters are aware of the Covid 19 updates... most read other articles...listen to the MSM and are educated and In 11-12 months we all should have a very good understanding of available treatments, vaccines, protective measures and where the probability lies of where this virus originated... it was not a virus jumping from animal to humans... so when people have stated their doubts and concerns with information being given to the public the “ science block” on the board and news reacted in an overt display of dismay ...some posts bordering on ridicule for being uneducated, not science oriented or possibly politically motivated while they defended others from the WHO, CDC, NIHI ... hell they defend China but criticize the public ... the unaware on this board?... Why don’t you have a poll where the unaware can say yeah or nay ... I need more information on covid19...
 
No I would confident in saying EVERDAY TKR posters are aware... fairly educated and I 11-12 months have a very good understanding of available treatments, vaccines, protective measures and where the probability lies of where this virus originated... and it was not a virus jumping from animal to humans... so when people have stated their doubts and concerns with information being given to the public the “ science block” on the board reacted in an overt display of dismay ...some were bordering on ridicule for being uneducated, not science oriented or possibly politically motivated while they defended others from the WHO, CDC, NIHI ... hell they defend China but criticize the public ... the unaware on this board? Why don’t you have a poll which the unaware can say yeah or nay?
So 3 weeks ago you were aware that anaphylaxis was a concern with these vacinnes? I wasn't. I don't even know what anaphylaxis is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg2020
So 3 weeks ago you were aware that anaphylaxis was a concern with these vacinnes? I wasn't. I don't even know what anaphylaxis is.
Believe this or not a common issue of moderate to severe reaction was anticipated or expected ... it has happened I’m sure with other vaccines and when something is injected into the body there is a chance of adverse effects... example : not a vaccine but certain dyes were stopped being injected during procedures do to reactions... 40 years ago they would ask? Are you allergic to shell fish? Now to think these vaccines were going to be reaction free shows the narrow mindedness for some of the educated... I maintain do not make light of people who don’t have advanced degrees in science or medicine... Thankfully not all people are sheep or unintelligent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT