Posted on 08/27/2021 3:46:12 AM PDT by iontheball
Scientists have discovered that fully vaccinated individuals carry 251 times the viral load of Covid in their nostrils compared to the unvaccinated.
The researchers, who detailed their findings in a paper by the prestigious Oxford University Clinical Research Group published Aug. 10 in The Lancet, found that while the jab moderates symptoms of infection, it also allows vaccinated individuals to carry unusually high viral loads without becoming ill at first, potentially transforming them into pre-symptomatic superspreaders.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldtribune.com ...
“...as everyone recovered.”
LOL! What planet you from? Uranus?
The PCR test cannot differentiate between a non-existent virus, the flu, and the common cold.
The CDC is recalling the test for the end of the year and not using it.
Ergo, the test cannot differentiate a supposed “variant.”
There are no variants.
How many people do the Vaxxers infect before they “recover”?
Talk about “being selfish”!
It does NOT study unvaccinated people at all. Hence the article’s title is incorrect, and is probably incorrect on purpose to mislead.
__________________________________________
That begs the question - Where did they come up with the number if they did not have anything to compare it against? Furthermore, are you saying this is another Lancet fake medical report? Perhaps you are a medical expert and Dr. Peter McCullough is also guilty of spreading false information.
But why risk infecting family, friends, and coworkers at the funeral with the FRANKENSTEIN biohazard?
That’s fine and obviously your choice.
I only object to these dishonest articles, designed to deceive.
Life is risk.
There are risks with the virus and risks with the vaccines.
Sometimes there are no good choices, only bad ones made with imperfect information.
With that attitude I’m going to have to mask up before reading your posts.
Good morning.
> Where did they come up with the number if they did not have anything to compare it against? <
The Oxford study mentioned here compares different virus strains among vaccinated people. They are saying that the a Delta variant is much more prevalent than the older strains among vaccinated people. From that study:
“Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020.”
> Furthermore, are you saying this is another Lancet fake medical report? <
No, not at all. I’m simply saying that the report is being misinterpreted.
Were not just dealing with imperfect information.
We’re dealing with lies and liars.
We’re dealing with medical providers who can be bought off with promises of liability protection if the providers only prescribe certain things and refuse to prescribe others.
CoupFlu has NEVER been about public health.
And that is the real issue.
Did u read the PDF?
The NFL forced all the players, coaches, aides, etc to be vaccinated. Yesterday, Titans coach and 5 players tested positive for Covid.
I always assume everyone is lying—the burden of proof is on them to convince me they are not.
In the case of vaccines I assume they are all dangerous, and the burden of proof is to convince me they are not.
The vaxxers have totally failed that burden of proof.
> Did u read the PDF? <
Yes. And please take a look at line 299 there. The researchers explicitly state that they are studying vaccinated people only.
“299 In summary, we report the transmission SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among vaccinated health care workers.”
One problem here is this statement is buried deep in the report. The researchers should have made that crystal clear from the get-go.
I dont think so
remember this? We’ve come full circle. Does viral load equate to infectivity? Well, asymptomatics were considered low infectivity. Why would breakthroughs be any different, especially if their breakthrough symptoms are milder?
“Conclusion: Approximately one-fifth of the individuals without severe symptoms were asymptomatic, and their viral loads were comparable to those in symptomatic patients. A large proportion of mildly symptomatic patients with COVID-19 or asymptomatic individuals with SARS-CoV-2 showed persistent positive upper respiratory RT-PCR results at follow-up.”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32963115/
However u want to slice their headline the fact is they chose this language in the report:
In summary, we report the transmission SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among vaccinated
300 health care workers. Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral
301 loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of neutralizing antibodies after vaccination
302 and at diagnosis. These factors coupled with poorly ventilated indoor settings and without
303 mask wearing might have facilitated presymptomatic and/or asymptomatic transmission
304 among the vaccinated workers.
that clearly suggests if not reports that breakthrough loads are higher. If they were on par with non-vaccinated they would have not worded their conclusions as such.
IF this is the paper I’m thinking of, the older strain was from before there WERE any jabs, so it’s a distinction without a difference.
It is a good question and this article (that others point out has been misrepresented) doesn’t address.
My personal experience is a vaccinated co-worker along with 10 other people working in his other office location were infected by an unvaccinated person. All 11 had been vaccinated and got ill with COVID symptoms. He started feeling bad while in our office with other vaccinated people. He kept getting worse through the day and finally left to get tested after several hours in what should have been an infectious state. He did get worse and like a bad flu for a couple of days. No one in our office got sick, there was no transmission from him or the other 10 vaccinated breakthrough cases. It all boiled back to one unvaccinated person who in my opinion was the selfish one, he knew he had been exposed but went to work anyway while unsymptomatic .
I know you will disparage me and call me a vaxxer at a minimum. I actually put my life on the line by participating in the Moderna study and getting the shot a year ago. So maybe I am biased a little. But I try to be objective. If someone doesn’t want the shot(s), they shouldn’t be forced. There may be valid reasons for some to avoid it. I personally think that is few. A friend who had prior very bad reactions to vaccines and no longer has them was advised it should be okay as not a traditional vaccine, but he ended up in the ICU. Ok now thankfully.
And yes, the shots aren’t 100% effective, but do increase your chances of survival. It’s pretty clear comorbidities are a huge factor. Another co-worker’s ex and his dad both died recently from breakthrough cases. Both had diabetes and other issues.
Bottom line, the rare risk of complications are far outweighed by the improved chance of survival.
I will agree with you that the study’s wording is odd, and so can easily lead to confusion. But note that even in your post only vaccinated health care workers are mentioned. There is no mention of studying any unvaccinated folks.
And since unvaccinated folks weren’t studied, it is not proper to draw anything conclusions about them - based on this study, that is.
As a side note, it would have been nice if the researchers had also studied a few unvaccinated people while they were at it. That would have been most interesting.
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.