Posted on 05/03/2021 11:31:34 AM PDT by Cathi
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has just released brand-new data on the percentage of people who have become infected with COVID-19 despite being fully vaccinated.
In those totals, released on Friday, April 30, more than 95 million Americans were fully vaccinated as of Monday, April 26. Of those nearly 100 million fully vaccinated people, only 9,245 became infected with so-called vaccine breakthrough cases. That's an efficacy rate of 99.999.
A total of 5,827 (63 percent) of the cases were women, and 4,245 (45 percent) were adults age 60 and over.
"It is important to note that reported vaccine breakthrough cases will represent an undercount," the CDC said in a statement after the newest results were released. "This surveillance system is passive and relies on voluntary reporting from state health departments which may not be complete.
"Also, not all real-world breakthrough cases will be identified because of lack of testing. This is particularly true in instances of asymptomatic or mild illness. These surveillance data are a snapshot and help identify patterns and look for signals among vaccine breakthrough cases."
The CDC said it will now be releasing data on the number of breakthrough cases on a weekly basis.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailyvoice.com ...
” Rhetorical setup by me. Trap SPRUNG.”
You think you’re so clever. It’s adorable.
“What is the death rate by age cohort from COVID?”
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html
“But the young don’t get infected as often.”
You have no evidence of this. The available evidence is that younger people (particularly children) are more often asymptomatic, which means they would never even know they had it based on outward symptoms. There’s no evidence that I’ve seen that says they don’t become infected as often.
“You need to compare, age segment-by age-segment, BMI-quintile by BMI-quintile, the risks of death from catching covid, and the risks from the jabs.”
Each individual should be doing that for themselves. I’m not making medical decisions for other people; they’re doing so for themselves. That’s called being a responsible adult.
“Except that the jabs SPECIFICALLY HAVVE NOT BEEN STUDIED for the youth, or pregnant women.”
They’re being studied right now for the youth. I hear a lot of objections for the fact that clinical trials are proceeding for children, but that’s literally how every medicine intended for all age groups is tested: first on adults, then on younger and younger groups of children. That’s how we know what’s safe to give to young children: it was tested. And clinical trials are almost never performed on pregnant women, and for very good reason. Rather, the data is collected from women who either became pregnant while taking the medication or who chose to take it while pregnant. The data collected so far from thousands of woman says that the COVID-19 vaccines cause ZERO problems for pregnant women or their babies. (https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-advisory/articles/2020/12/vaccinating-pregnant-and-lactating-patients-against-covid-19)
From the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: “no differences have been seen when comparing pregnant women participating in the v-safe pregnancy registry with the background rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes.”
“that’s just going by the published stats from VAERS”
Except according to the people who operate VAERS: “The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.” - Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data (https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html)
So you are misusing VAERS data.
“No, you fascist. (Fascism is “govt.-private partnership” to take over people’s lives.)”
Well I guess that makes you, what? Anti-fascist?
Thank you for calling yourself out as Antifa. Have fun burning a major US city to the ground next time you get together with your buddies.
Here is the CDC’s case definition for COVID-19: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/case-definition/2020/
It has not changed substantively in over a year. Your false narrative is exposed.
Childish name-calling aside, US courts have not had jurisdiction over civil vaccine liability cases since the passage of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. That came about because a bunch of anti-vaccine fanatics launched so many nuisance suits against vaccine makers that Congress feared we wouldn't be able to get vaccines for things like polio anymore.
So you're complaining about something that's been in effect for 35 years as though it just appeared yesterday. That's dishonest.
Clinical Criteria
At least two of the following symptoms: fever (measured or subjective), chills, rigors, myalgia, headache, sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s)
OR
At least one of the following symptoms: cough, shortness of breath, or difficulty breathing
OR
Severe respiratory illness with at least one of the following:
Clinical or radiographic evidence of pneumonia, OR
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
AND
No alternative more likely diagnosis
Epidemiologic Linkage
One or more of the following exposures in the 14 days before onset of symptoms:Close contact** with a confirmed or probable case of COVID-19 disease; OR
Close contact** with a person with:
clinically compatible illness AND
linkage to a confirmed case of COVID-19 disease.
Travel to or residence in an area with sustained, ongoing community transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
Member of a risk cohort as defined by public health authorities during an outbreak.
**Close contact is defined as being within 6 feet for at least a period of 10 minutes to 30 minutes or more depending upon the exposure. In healthcare settings, this may be defined as exposures of greater than a few minutes or more. Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of exposure that constitutes prolonged exposure and thus a close contact.
Criteria to Distinguish a New Case from an Existing Case
Not applicable (N/A) until more virologic data are available.
Case Classification
Probable
Meets clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19.
Meets presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence.
Meets vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19.
...from your http above.
Close contact with a probable, is enough to make you a probable.
As long as you have symptoms.
Even without confirmatory lab testing.
And all you need for. that is fever & headache or sore throat (no alternative more likely diagnosis).
(HEY WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE DIAGNOSED CASES OF THE FLU? WENT TO DAMN NEAR ZERO.)
My god this is like shooting fish in a barrel.
You seem to have missed “No alternative more likely diagnosis”.
In other words, based on the individual’s symptoms, personal medical history, and prevailing disease profile for the specific area, the doctor makes a diagnosis based on their training and experience as to the most likely cause.
We usually just call that “practicing medicine”.
No, you’re wrong again.
Moderna has admitted in public, in official government filings, that its jab is an experimental gene therapy.
That’s NOT a vaccine for those of you Pharmbots losing badly on this thread.
So the National Childhood VaccineInjury Act doesn’t apply.
And my question is, since it’s not a vaccine, if it’s so safe, how come you’re not in favor of the FreeMarket?
Oh, by the way. If Congress is so concerned about our safety, how come they allowed the offshoring of so much vaccine manufacture to India and RED China?
Oh, by the way, “Childhood Vaccine Injury Act”. Why does that apply, in the case of, say, a 30-year-old getting cardiomypathy as a presumptive result of the jab (doctors found no other possible proximate causes)?
Oh, by the way. You ducked the question again. Children are largely immune to the coof. Who cares if kids can’t get the jab? So the 1986 Act shouldn’t matter. It’s not like KIDS are ending up in Iron Lungs from the coof.
Oh, by the way. If you’re so concerned about public health, why not prosecute Cuomo for putting the infected in nursing homes, instead of using the purpose-built convalescent centers (in Madison Square Garden, right?) which sat empty, along with a dedicated Navy Hospital ship.
This isn’t even a moderate challenge anymore.
Whatever they’re paying you, you’re getting ripped off.
Moderna has not admitted that its jab is an experimental gene therapy. I’ve read the document you’re referring to, and it doesn’t say what you wish it did.
Your fantasy isn’t real. Your narrative is false.
Which means if they're not even sick enough to notice, they're not DYING. Which tends to be noticeable, even to medical geniuses like you.
I don't think you noticed, btw, but you just holed your own argument beneath the waterline.
If they don't get sick enough to notice, why jab them with an untested, experimental agent whose long term effects are unknown, but which is rapidly (by VAERS death rate) proving more unsafe than any prior vaccination in US history? Remember the MD earlier with over 600 literature citations to his credit, who pointed out that prior *real* vaccinations got pulled after 25 deaths reported.
The mRNA is over 3000 in the States, and over 3000 in Europe, even with the slow-walking into VAERS, like the FBI avoiding Hunter's laptop.
You’re lying.
To prove you are merely mistaken, give me the link to the document I’m referring to.
And when you do, I’ll post the page number for the entire thread and all of FR to read.
Parents get to decide which vaccines their children receive; not you. Clinical trials with children are already underway, with the consent of the parents.
You have no say in any of this. It’s happening whether you like it or not.
Look at my post. I included those words explicitly. You're lying or your reading skills are deteriorating.
Weren't you the one saying nobody was being forced?
Yes I'm deliberately just toying with you now.
You’re making the claim, so prove it. If you can’t prove your claim, then retract it (no, I know, you never will, you’ll move on to something else entirely to avoid admitting you’ve ever made a mistake).
But you won’t post the link and the quote because you don’t have the facts on your side. I do. What you have is a false narrative that you defend with intellectually bankrupt rhetoric totally devoid of any reality. But the problem you face is that the real world marches on. For all your wild claims and name-calling, the world marches on. Hundreds of millions are getting vaccinated with the Trump vaccines and it’s stopping the pandemic.
And there’s nothing that you or the tiny group of anti-vaccine people can do to stop it. Not a thing.
No one is being forced. They’re CHOOSING to do it despite your intellectually bankrupt rhetoric.
In other words, you have zero power.
Jean Marc Benoit MD @JeanmarcBenoit
Emergency Physician, amateur covid data analyst. Clinical medicine, evidence-based medicine, data-based reporting·
Apr 24
Vaccine suspected death reports in US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, from 1990 up to April 24, 2021.
Something is very wrong in 2021
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ezy8oOnWYAI0IiJ?format=png&name=medium
I think the above chart probably has a lot to do with the following one. When looking at it realize that it is only through April 24th. If you update it with the current CDC reported numbers it is 800 additional deaths (3,848)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E0eTQcGXEAQW0If?format=jpg&name=900x900
Keep in mind, only about 10-20% of those who COVID ever even notice that they’ve had it. So multiply that number by five or ten.
why should anyone believe that the self proclaimed “medical professionals” that spend all day every day spewing cdc statistics on these threads are really “medical professionals”???...
But you won’t post the link and the quote because you don’t have the facts on your side.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1682852/000168285220000017/mrna-20200630.htm
And they also admit to being over $1 billion in debt.
From pp. 69-70.
We are creating a new class of medicines based on mRNA, to improve the lives of patients. From the beginning, we designed our strategy and operations to realize the full potential value and impact of mRNA over a long time horizon across a broad array of human diseases. We have made investments in our platform, infrastructure, and clinical capabilities that have enabled us to establish a large pipeline of development candidates, of which many are in clinical trials or have an open IND. As our development candidates and investigational medicines progress, we or others may determine that: certain of our risk allocation decisions were incorrect or insufficient; we made platform level technology mistakes; individual programs or our mRNA science in general has technology or biology risks that were unknown or under-appreciated; our choices on how to develop our infrastructure to support our scale will result in an inability to manufacture our investigational medicines for clinical trials or otherwise impair our manufacturing; or we have allocated resources in such a way that large investments are not recovered and capital allocation is not subject to rapid re-direction. All of these risks may relate to our current and future programs sharing similar science (including mRNA science) and infrastructure, and in the event material decisions in any of these areas turn out to have been incorrect or under-optimized, we may experience a material adverse impact on our business and ability to fund our operations and we may never realize what we believe is the potential of mRNA. *No mRNA drug has been approved in this new potential class of medicines, and may never be approved as a result of efforts by others or us. mRNA drug development has substantial clinical development and regulatory risks due to the novel and unprecedented nature of this new class of medicines. As a potential new class of medicines, no mRNA medicines have been approved to date by the FDA or other regulatory agency. Successful discovery and development of mRNA medicines by either us or our strategic collaborators is highly uncertain and depends on numerous factors, many of which are beyond our or their control. We have made and will continue to make a series of business decisions and take calculated risks to advance our development efforts and pipeline, including those related to mRNA technology, delivery technology, and manufacturing processes, which may be shown to be incorrect based on further work by us, our strategic collaborators, or others. Prior to the Phase 3 trial for mRNA-1273 and that of one other company, there had never been a Phase 3 trial in which mRNA is the primary active ingredient, and there has never been and there may never be a commercialized product in which mRNA is the primary active ingredient. Our mRNA investigational medicines that appear promising in the early phases of development may fail to advance, experience delays in the clinic, experience clinical holds, or fail to reach the market for many reasons, including:
•discovery efforts at identifying potential mRNA medicines may not be successful; •nonclinical or preclinical study results may show potential mRNA medicines to be less effective than desired or to have harmful or problematic side effects; •clinical trial results may show potential mRNA medicines to be less effective than expected (e.g., a clinical trial could fail to meet one or more endpoint(s)) or to have unacceptable side effects or toxicities; •adverse effects in any one of our clinical programs or adverse effects relating to our mRNA, or our lipid nanoparticles, or LNPs, may lead to delays in or termination of one or more of our programs; •the insufficient ability of our translational models to reduce risk or predict outcomes in humans, particularly given that each component of our investigational medicines and development candidates may have a dependent or independent effect on safety, tolerability, and efficacy, which may, among other things, be species-dependent; •manufacturing failures or insufficient supply of cGMP materials for clinical trials, or higher than expected cost could delay or set back clinical trials, or make mRNA-based medicines commercially unattractive; •our improvements in the manufacturing processes for this new class of potential medicines may not be sufficient to satisfy the clinical or commercial demand of our investigational medicines or regulatory requirements for clinical trials; •changes that we make to optimize our manufacturing, testing or formulating of cGMP materials could impact the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of our investigational medicines and development candidates; •pricing or reimbursement issues or other factors that delay clinical trials or make any mRNA medicine uneconomical or noncompetitive with other therapies;
69
Table of Contents
•failure to timely advance our programs or receive the necessary regulatory approvals or a delay in receiving such approvals, due to, among other reasons, slow or failure to complete enrollment in clinical trials, withdrawal by trial participants from trials, failure to achieve trial endpoints, additional time requirements for data analysis, data integrity issues, Biologics License Application, or BLA, or the equivalent application, discussions with the FDA or EMA, a regulatory request for additional nonclinical or clinical data, or safety formulation or manufacturing issues may lead to our inability to obtain sufficient funding; and •the proprietary rights of others and their competing products and technologies that may prevent our mRNA medicines from being commercialized.
Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA. Unlike certain gene therapies that irreversibly alter cell DNA and could act as a source of side effects, mRNA-based medicines are designed to not irreversibly change cell DNA; however, side effects observed in gene therapy could negatively impact the perception of mRNA medicines despite the differences in mechanism. In addition, because no product in which mRNA is the primary active ingredient has been approved, the regulatory pathway for approval is uncertain. The number and design of the clinical trials and preclinical studies required for the approval of these types of medicines have not been established, may be different from those required for gene therapy products, or may require safety testing like gene therapy products. Moreover, the length of time necessary to complete clinical trials and to submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one pharmaceutical product to the next, and may be difficult to predict. *We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception in 2009, including net losses of $514.0 million, $384.7 million and $255.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. As of June 30, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $1.74 billion.
In 2021, we started mass-vaccinating the elderly. We normally give vaccinations to children. And those children go on to live long lives.
If you give a glass of water to millions of elderly folks and then watch them like a hawk, some of them will die. Does that mean the glass of water killed them?
Every death after a vaccine is recorded in VAERS no matter what the cause is. By law. (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/300aa-25)
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.