Posted on 06/09/2021 7:06:20 AM PDT by definitelynotaliberal
NO ONE EXPECTED the first Covid-19 vaccine to be as good as it was. “We were hoping for around 70 per cent, that’s a success,” says Dr Ann Falsey, a professor of medicine at the University of Rochester, New York, who ran a 150-person trial site for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in 2020.
Even Uğur Şahin, the co-founder and CEO of BioNTech, who had shepherded the drug from its earliest stages, had some doubts. All the preliminary laboratory tests looked good; since he saw them in June, he would routinely tell people that “immunologically, this is a near-perfect vaccine.” But that doesn’t always mean it will work against “the beast, the thing out there” in the real world. It wasn’t until November 9, 2020, three months into the final clinical trial, that he finally got the good news. “More than 90 per cent effective,” he says. “I knew this was a game changer. We have a vaccine.”
“We were overjoyed,” Falsey says. “It seemed too good to be true. No respiratory vaccine has ever had that kind of efficacy.”
The arrival of a vaccine before the close of the year was an unexpected turn of events. Early in the pandemic, the conventional wisdom was that, even with all the stops pulled, a vaccine would take at least a year and a half to develop. Talking heads often referenced that the previous fastest-ever vaccine developed, for mumps back in 1967, took four years. Modern vaccines often stretch out past a decade of development. BioNTech – and US-based Moderna, which announced similar results later the same week – shattered that conventional timeline.
(Excerpt) Read more at wired.co.uk ...
“Falsy”.
Hoo boy.
OH, well in that case.............. Still a firm NO! Willin’ to “pay the price” as pedo joe warned us.
>>Perspectives on the Pandemic | “Blood Clots and Beyond”<<
In February, 2021, Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, M.D. and a number of his colleagues warned the European Medicines Agency about the potential danger of blood clots and cerebral vein thrombosis in millions of people receiving experimental gene-based injections.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyPjAfNNA-U&ab_channel=ThinkingSlowThinkingSlow
While I may seem an anti-vaxxer, I’m really an mRNA agnostic.
It’ll probably work out in the long run.
We just can’t be perfectly sure yet. Cancers and birth defects pop up much later.
A “vaccine” that’s 90% effective for a disease in which for most people the body is over 99% effective. What a world.
If I’m still around in a couple of years, I sure don’t want to be the one that says: “We tried to tell you.”. But I will. :-} Then again I hope it doesn’t come to that.
And, I’ll say it again: it ain’t a vaccine if it does not immunize you against catching the disease so that you can pass it on to others. That is half of the purpose of a vaccine, to make it safe for you (the infected one) to come out again into society. If it doesn’t do that, doesn’t protect those who perhaps can’t take the vaccine; then I don’t want any of my tax dollars paying for it for anyone. Lacking this 2nd feature it is just a cash cow.
As to mRNA tech, great idea on targeting individual diseases, like cancer or MS or etc.
Incredibly impressive. Plus I get 5G now wherever I go.
And, thanks to President Trump, the vaccines were ready to rock and roll. Biden would have had us locked down like criminals forever.
The mRNA vaccine revolution is just beginning
Yeah, I saw that coming and that is my fear. If you want zombies that is how you get zombies.
You’re saying that 99% of the people exposed to Covid-19 did not catch the virus. That’s big if true, I’d love to know more about what the flock you’re talking about.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think that 99% figure might refer to the # of people who recover from the virus. My husband, one child, one grandchild, my father (90) and his wife are among those.
Moderna’s (Mode RNA) EAU - was the result based on 5 people’s reaction to getting the vaccine.
When you control who gets the vaccine and don’t include high risk people who will be getting it anyways, you can probably see or find the kind of “success” you are looking for.
The wife’s and my thought exactly. Even in the beginning before the shots were even developed.
I’d have to do some digging to find the source, but I recall reading not that long ago that on average, you have about a 0.8% chance of actually contracting the virus if exposed to it, and then even if you get it, your chance of dying from it is a further 0.5% *with variance for age). The “vaccine” reduces that initial 0.8% down to 0.05%, which is where the “95% effective” claim comes from.
The purpose of ALL VACCINES that have ever existed is to reduce the amount of time for your immune system to mount a counterattack against a pathogen, thus reducing of time you are contagious and reducing the amount of pathogens you shed.
ALL vaccines have a “leakage rate” where vaccinated individuals can pass on contagion, but at a much lower risk level.
As for being safe to come out again into society, that’s exactly what these vaccines are accomplishing. There will ALWAYS be risk to vulnerable individuals, especially unvaccinated ones. The purpose of the mRNA vaccines is to reduce that risk to the point where the pandemic fizzles out and risk becomes manageable.
ONLY TWO pathogens have ever been actually eradicated - smallpox and rinderpest. For ALL OTHER pathogens against which vaccines have been developed, we have only been able to reduce risk to manageable levels.
Are mRNA vaccines perfect? NO
Will a tiny fraction of those vaccinated be harmed by the vaccine? Sadly yes, there are no perfect answers in this life.
Will they save millions of lives (maybe billions over coming years)? YES
Are they worth funding? ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, 1000% YES
Let’s revisit this in two or three years after the human trials are done. Until then, and perhaps afterwards, NO vaccine for me.
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.