Posted on 02/03/2021 4:48:11 PM PST by ransomnote
Uh, have you ever been with someone coming this close || to dying on a ventilator? I have, and you are full of it.
Almost all the teachers at the school my wife works at were vaccinated with the 1st shot of the Moderna vaccine several days ago. No untoward reactions so far. Slight soreness in her arm, my wife said, the 1st couple days.
“Sneakily”?
I thought that was the plan all along. Vaccinate high risk populations 1st, then moderately high, then moderate, then anyone who wants it.
In my area, in IL, IN, and MO, vaccinations have been opened up to anyone over 65 for some time. In KY it’s over 70. However, at least in IL where my Mom lives, supplies are extremely short. She’s 90, went into a rehab facility recently, and she’s over 2 weeks out to get a 1st shot. No probs at this facility though (which has a large nursing home section.) My wife has multiple friends working @ LTC facilities in KY - I’ll ask her if they’ve heard of any problems.
Well, I’m enthusiastic about mRNA technology too, esp. combatting pathogens in livestock (swine flu, anyone?)
But, BATS? How do you propose to vaccinate BATS in the wild? Stun them with wide-field phasers, 1st?
Neither is getting the sniffles and feeling slightly headache-y for a few days - which is what more than 99% of all persons suffering Covid-19 experience.
And that doesn't even account for those persons suffering absolutely NO symptoms.
Regards,
Oh, for God’s sake. This is not “gene therapy” any more than COVID is a genetic disease. However, if you do consider COVID a genetic disease, then you might as well just give up, because sooner or later, without a vaccine, COVID is gonna get you and do it’s thing, maybe slowed a bit by zinc or whatever.
mRNA CANNOT change your DNA.
The trials on HUMANS (the “final word”) went quickly partially because we had a LOT of disease running around to work with. When doing clinical trials on humans for, say, the next year’s flu variants, one does not have pandemic level likely cases developing to work with. So, trials to determine efficacy and safety take a lot of time to build up statistically solid results with a large margin for improbabilities.
With COVID, the researchers had large populations to work with, to build data quickly.
And so on.
What IS possible are some allergic reactions to the fluid carrying the mRNA. But, hey, a few years ago I was clobbered(!) by an allergic reaction to a binder component in a new to me brand of Ester-C I was trying. I was off my feet for two days. It happens. That doesn’t mean I don’t avoid all Vitamin C, I just avoid that brand - which I leave unmentioned because the next 10,000 people can likely take it without issue. The problem was ME.
Where are you getting 99%?
Present data shows a CFR of around 1.7%. CDC estimates infections at around 80 million, including asymptomatics, so, that’d be an IFR of 0.567%. But, that’s just the fatalities. Serious cases will be MUCH higher. Probably 5x or more.
Then look at the resolved case fatality rate. That’s been hanging at ~3% for some time. Again, probably divide by 3 for a resolved IFR rate, but again, serious cases will be much higher.
A big fly in the ointment is unresolved cases. There are roughly 9.5 million of them out there. Obviously some of these are case tracings lost, and some are in-progress non-severe cases. Trying to estimate how many non-severe cases are active is quite difficult, but I came up with a generous, I think, case length of 15 days for mild cases, multiplied by ~200k cases per day, recently, resulting in 3 million non-severe unresolved active cases. I’m guessing some of the “lost” cases are mild and therefor included in “non-severe unresolved cases”, but, what the heck, I’ll toss in another 2.5 million to combine the categories, and subtract that from the 9.5 million. That leaves us with 4 million severe cases yet to be resolved, which by itself is 5% of the 80 million infected so far.
Other usually fairly reliable web sources estimate 10-20% of infections result in serious or worse illness. Some of that (WebMD) is old data, but surveying what I’ve been able to come up with from a couple church congregations, and adjusting for their older demographic, 10% is not an unreasonable figure. In addition, every person I personally know of who has had serious symptoms has had serious effects lasting 2 months or more.
Sources: Worldometers, CDC, John’s Hopkins, various long time / well known health websites (Harvard Health, WebMD, etc.), personal local observations of an area with modest case rates.
Now, you can dismiss all that published data, or how I interpret it, but I can’t dismiss what I see around me happening to actual people with names. No way is this remotely close to plague, etc., but, it IS considerably nastier than any recent flu.
They are only approved under emergency/rushed/exceptional means approval.
That's true. They are approved under an FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). I think that was necessary to get the vaccine delivered at "warp speed". The vaccine still underwent rigorous testing prior to the EUA and if there were concerns of serious side effects, it wouldn't have been granted.
Oh, and saying that anyone who ‘begrudges’ these trials/experimental agents are being ‘paranoid’, is very leftist of you.
It's just a word. I didn't mean it to be offensive. I think paranoia is a healthy these days. Trust is not my default position but I had to make a choice with the vaccine and so I did. I was in the front of the line on day 1 of availability. It didn't do me any immediate harm. I'm not to worried about 10 years down the road. I only have 10-20 years left with or without the vaccine.
Animal studies (the PRELIMINARY process) were inconclusive, on overall safety. In fact, many/most of the animals tested for this and the SARS/COVID 1 trials, died, immediately....to months later.
My limited understanding is that the body rejected it and attacked it in the initial animal trials (back in the 90s) until Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman figured out how to use modified nucleosides to get the mRNA into the cell without eliciting an undesirable immune response.
“The side effect, dubbed “Covid arm”, appears around a week after receiving a dose and affects very few patients, doctors say.”
I’m no anti-vacc’r, but when I see something like “very few patients”, it reminds me of the fake wonder-drugs called Statins (fake, because they harm far more people than they help). In the case of Statins, the claim is that side effects are very rare. Then ask 10 people on Statins about side effects and 9 will say they have them. The medical community will write off 99% of the people claiming side effects, essentially blaming it on their imaginations...hence very rare side effects.
Thank you.
An older sister got the vaccine (1st shot) and more than a week later cannot use the arm in which she received the shot. It is so sore she cannot lift her arm.
“Your talking points are misleading however. The vaccine was adequately tested for safety prior to distribution.”
The fact that it was rushed into production in only a few months disputes your assertion that it was “adequately tested”.
The fact that all the FDA did was to grant an Emergency Use Authorization further disputes your assertion of ‘adequately testing” it as its actually still experimental. Read the FDA, EUA Report in which they warn about strictly monitoring participants closely for adverse side effects also take note of their conclusion which makes clear that they have no idea of what the long term side effects will be.
If it was adequately tested the FDA would have approved it.
Seems like your talking point is a bit misleading as to what is adequate testing.
BTW, what were the result of the animal trials?
RC, I hate to be morbid but how are you doing? I think anecdotal information is invaluable.
I hope this years later post finds you well!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.