Posted on 11/01/2021 8:57:01 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A new Lancet study about the transmission of Covid-19 among the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated is raising questions for some about vaccine mandates.
The study on “Community transmission and viral load kinetics” of the Delta variant in both the vaccinated and unvaccinated in the UK found the former were just as likely as the latter to spread Covid-19 among those in their household.
The vaccinated also had a similar viral load as the unvaccinated.
“Although vaccines remain highly effective at preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19, our findings suggest that vaccination is not sufficient to prevent transmission of the delta variant in household settings with prolonged exposures,” noted the paper, which studied 621 symptomatic participants over a year.
Significantly, the research found the vaccine was much more effective at reducing transmission of the alpha variant in a household, rather than the delta variant.
For some, the findings raise serious questions about vaccine mandates and lockdown efforts that governments around the world have pursued in an effort to contain the pandemic.
According to a new study published in the Lancet, vaccinated people spread the Virus in their home as easily as the unvaccinated
It also confirms households are the site of most COVID transmission globally
So why are we locking people in their homes and mandating vaccines?
??— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) October 29, 2021
IMPORTANT TO KNOW: Community transmission and viral load kinetics of the SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) variant in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in the UK: a prospective, longitudinal, cohort study https://t.co/WN9Kuc53TY pic.twitter.com/9v0wcVtMRI— Lynne Falconer (@workwithLynne) November 1, 2021
The researchers also noted booster shots and increasing the rate of vaccination among younger populations will help but the focus ought to remain on those most vulnerable.
“Increasing population immunity via booster programmes and vaccination of teenagers will help to increase the currently limited effect of vaccination on transmission, but our analysis suggests that direct protection of individuals at risk of severe outcomes, via vaccination and non-pharmacological interventions, will remain central to containing the burden of disease caused by the delta variant,” the researchers wrote.
*PING*
How many ways and how many times must it be said that the vaccines do little or nothing to stop either the spread or infection rate by the ‘rona; or that the vaccine may only reduce the severity and mortality of an already significantly survivable infection?
The vaccine is insurance against loss but will not prevent loss. Therefore, just like insurance, it must be discretionary. It is not liability insurance either which is mandatory since it does not prevent either spread or infection to others.
Vaccination is insurance at the cost of what can be severe adverse reactions including death. That cost of adverse reaction compared to the scant benefits of vaccination is not worth it me.
Aren’t we worn out with this and can’t e put it down and move on with life as it has left us?
OOPS!
“Vaccination is insurance at the cost of what can be severe adverse reactions including death.”
The lies about a “vaccine” are just getting worn out! The story has changed about 1000 times since the so-called vaccines were introduced at the end of last year.
The BIG LIE is it is not a vaccine if all it does is make the effects of the virus less intense.
Here is what Mr. Webster has to say about a vaccine and this crap does none of it!
VACCINE DEFINITION
....a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases....
I can not find evidence that there is such a thing as corona virus 19. A statistician requested that 104 laboratories and public health agencies around the world provide evidence that C-19 was isolated and sequenced and their replies were there was no such evidence.
The treatment (vaccines, ventilators, antibiotics, and even lethally high Ivermectin doses) is what is deadly.
In the 1918 Spanish Flu, those who went to sanitariums for sunlight, water, fasting all survived. But those who went to hospitals or took vaccine resulted in 60 million deaths world wide. Soldiers returning from WWI, and many civilians, were emaciated, lacking essential nutrients, had bacterial infections, and were susceptible to death by vaccines. The drug companies at that time labeled the epidemic the Spanish Flu to associate it with Spain, a Catholic country where religion, not modern medicine, was dominant. But the epidemic started in Kansas by vaccinations.
It certainly does not provide immunity.
The terms to justify this monstrosity change like the weather.
Read
Do you have a source that can be quoted as to “But the epidemic started in Kansas by vaccinations?”
So much for, “Pandemic of the unvaccinated!”
The latest variations are getting pathetic:
“Well, we didn’t really mean that people with _this_ medical condition should use it...
or _this_ medical condition
or _that_ health status
or _this_ situation...
Come on—the vaxxes are dangerous and need to be banned.
More division! Separate families.
Who’s taking lethally high Ivermectin doses?
No one that I’ve read about....except for in fake news reports and CDC tweets.
Where are you getting this misinformation about ivermectin? It’s turned out to be a near-wonder drug in countless studies around the world. You should be really careful about spreading falsehoods.
SARS-CoV-19 is sequenced all the time, all over the place.
Just how stupid would you have to be to take a whole horse dose of ivermectin — or any other drug. But I’m sure someone has done just that. Not ivermectin’s fault.
This is a most interesting article, not because of the content, but it indicates SOMEBODY (Lancet) in the medical field has begun to realize that without integrity they might as well go home because physicians are burning the public trust like it was a Kwakiutl Potlatch. Just because they hated Trump.
When literally EVERYTHING that is tested is a “cure for the disease” is it really a disease?
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.
