| The latest G20 meeting. on 17:17 - Nov 18 with 1065 views | Treforys_Jack |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 08:50 - Nov 18 by A_Fans_Dad |
Does that mean you are another one of those who caught it after vaccination, like scotia, catullus, virtually my whole extended family, that is another 8 people, except one Grandson and my Brother.
A lot of people have also had it more than once after vaccination.
It appears the point of this International Health Passport being pushed by the WHO/UN is that they make the decisions on what is acceptable and not the various countries. |
Sorry no, not had it to my knowledge. I accepted the vax to minimise or reduce any impact should I have caught it. I never, nor anyone I know was under the premise it shielded you from catching covid. |  | |  |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 17:31 - Nov 18 with 1057 views | Sandanista |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 16:34 - Nov 18 by A_Fans_Dad |
"They are right to an extent about transmission but wrong about efficacy. "
Yes they were right about Transmission, which is what this Thread is all about.
Supposedly controlling Transmission which is why you will need a vaccine passport to travel.
However although you won't admit it you are wrong on efficacy.
The ONS data proves that efficacy has reduced to Zero with waning effectiveness, hence the need for yet another Booster shot.
Remember this chart, extolling the virtues of the Booster shot?
Back in March, well it got worse than that. |
Because I'm not
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/monitoring-reports-of-the-effectiveness-of-covid-19-
Fill your boots rather than some newspaper graphic
And that's prior to the bivalent booster,
Cherry picking again.
The vaccines work and are safe (indeed safer than the majority of vaccines)
Hundreds of thousands of lives saved in the UK. |  | | |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 19:27 - Nov 18 with 1039 views | A_Fans_Dad |
So you prefer the Government propaganda to the Government's own ONS data.
OK, no problem.
The "newspaper graphic" of course is the Government's own ONS data.
So let's be clear on this, you are accusing the Daily Mail of misrepresenting ONS data in this article
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10618723/Omicron-death-rates-14-TIMES-l
Which is showing that Omicron death rates are 14 TIMES lower after a booster vaccine? | | | |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 23:56 - Nov 18 with 1026 views | Sandanista |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 19:27 - Nov 18 by A_Fans_Dad |
So you prefer the Government propaganda to the Government's own ONS data.
OK, no problem.
The "newspaper graphic" of course is the Government's own ONS data.
So let's be clear on this, you are accusing the Daily Mail of misrepresenting ONS data in this article
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10618723/Omicron-death-rates-14-TIMES-l
Which is showing that Omicron death rates are 14 TIMES lower after a booster vaccine? |
Not looked then? Just propaganda?
It’s just links to the evidence base of publications some via UKHSA but mostly independent data. And you quote the Mail. A step up from ‘ We love Trump’ I guess. He is quite a nice bloke the Mail’s
Science and Heath editor too.
Yet you cite any old tripe. | | | |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 23:59 - Nov 18 with 1024 views | Jack123 |
'It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled' -Mark Twain. |  |
| |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 15:14 - Nov 19 with 988 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 23:56 - Nov 18 by Sandanista |
Not looked then? Just propaganda?
It’s just links to the evidence base of publications some via UKHSA but mostly independent data. And you quote the Mail. A step up from ‘ We love Trump’ I guess. He is quite a nice bloke the Mail’s
Science and Heath editor too.
Yet you cite any old tripe. |
"It’s just links to the evidence base of publications some via UKHSA but mostly independent data."
Oh what a wicked web we weave when we set out to decieve.
Did you actually read all those studies/reports, or even look closely?
Of the first 20, 12 are either funded by the UK Government or the authors work for the NHS/PHE, especially Nick Andrews and Sarah Foulkes.
2 more very poor reports with no authors and little data must have also been written by someone on the Gov.UK site
3 were by independents,
3 had no funding data at all
2 were funded by Vaccine manufacturers.
Some are not Peer reviewed, ie preprints.
Most of them used UK NHS/PHE/ONS data, not indpendent data.
But there is some interesting data in there, especially confirming that efficacy wanes quite quickly.
One study also demonstrates that that those Unvaccinated infected with COVID (convalescent sera) have far longer lasting immunity (RocheS seropositive) than those vaccinated.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27410-5/tables/1
Some studies only used PCR positive/negative test data to make estimates of effectiveness ie no real control group.
Some of the studies have small sample sizes, in particular the study "Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 against SARS-CoV-2 household transmission: a prospective cohort study in England" only used 195 households and 278 contacts.
But even that showed the difference between the effectiveness against the Alpha variant and the Delta variant only 6 month later.
Quote "Protection against infection with Alpha was higher than for Delta, 71% (12%,95%) vs 24% (−2%, 64%) respectively for BNT162b2 and 26% (−39%, 73%) vs 14% (−5%, 46%) respectively for ChAdOx1."
Another study "1
Effectiveness of 3 doses of COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic COVID-19" doesn't even quote a sample size. But it does have some very interesting information.
Not only does it show serious waning of effectiveness it shows it going negative for double doses of Pfizer vaccines, just like the Daily Mail ONS data showed.
Whereas of course the DM ONS data contains everybody who died in England, by age group and vaccination status. Other ONS/NHS data gives the outcome by cases, hospitalisations and death.
Of course the government stresses that you can't use that data for evaluating effectiveness, but they accepted the aweful incomplete Vaccine manufacturers studies.
So thanks for getting me to look at the data, but sorry no cigar for you.
I never did get an answer to how COVID Vaccines prevent the progress of every other deadly illness, but I don't suppose I ever will from the likes of you. | | | |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 22:00 - Nov 19 with 956 views | Catullus |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 08:50 - Nov 18 by A_Fans_Dad |
Does that mean you are another one of those who caught it after vaccination, like scotia, catullus, virtually my whole extended family, that is another 8 people, except one Grandson and my Brother.
A lot of people have also had it more than once after vaccination.
It appears the point of this International Health Passport being pushed by the WHO/UN is that they make the decisions on what is acceptable and not the various countries. |
vaccination was never going to stop anyone catching it but only mitigate the effects.
In my case I was asymptomatic, I didn't feel ill at all whereas without it and my medical issues at the time I may well have ended up in ITU.
That is totally missing the rather large point, vaccination is to orevent serious illness, not the spread. How many times were you told that? | |
| |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 00:51 - Nov 20 with 945 views | Sandanista |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 22:00 - Nov 19 by Catullus |
vaccination was never going to stop anyone catching it but only mitigate the effects.
In my case I was asymptomatic, I didn't feel ill at all whereas without it and my medical issues at the time I may well have ended up in ITU.
That is totally missing the rather large point, vaccination is to orevent serious illness, not the spread. How many times were you told that? |
No point telling him anything. Only listens to what he wants to hear.
I’ve had a nice day at a Christmas market. I have a life. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The latest G20 meeting. on 14:55 - Nov 20 with 919 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The latest G20 meeting. on 22:00 - Nov 19 by Catullus |
vaccination was never going to stop anyone catching it but only mitigate the effects.
In my case I was asymptomatic, I didn't feel ill at all whereas without it and my medical issues at the time I may well have ended up in ITU.
That is totally missing the rather large point, vaccination is to orevent serious illness, not the spread. How many times were you told that? |
You appear to have a short memory, as does Mr sandinista.
Let me remind you that the Vaccines were originally touted as "ending the pandemic by bringing about herd immunity" because their efficacy was so high.
Don't believe me?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/12/scientist-behind-biontech-pfizer-c
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/11/vaccines-end-covid-19-pandemi
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/16/dr-scott-gottlieb-moderna-covid-vaccine-could-he
https://theconversation.com/we-cant-banish-covid-19-but-we-can-end-the-pandemic-
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/12/anthony-fauci-offers-a-timeline-f
Even late in 2021 we had this bull, which was ripped apart by more knowledgable people.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/08/13/newsom-unvaccinated-can-end-covid-pandemi
Did they impart herd immunity?
Did they stop the pandemic?
But let's move closer to home and jog your memory.
Do you remember my discussion with the professor over the use of medical intervention with drugs as well as vaccinations?
Do you remember the Cost Benefit analysis that I did comparing treating only those that were actually ill compared to everybody in the UK and the world?
Do you remember his responses at that time?
You can't stop a virus pandemic with drugs, only vaccines can do that because they impart immunity.
Drugs can't cure a virus illness, but vaccines prevent it.
And last the often repeated "prevention is better than cure", vaccines are the only answer, which everybody on this forum who responded agreed with.
What do you think the professor meant by prevention?
a. Do you think he meant vaccines prevent you getting COVID by imparting immunity?
b. Do you think he meant vaccines prevent you getting ill by imparting immunity?
c. Or do you think he meant vaccines only prevent you getting seriously ill?
If you think c. is what he actually meant and they don't even do that in the longterm then they are just another treatment instead of an immunising vaccine.
That is exactly what they have shown to do due to waning efficacy and new variants, in fact now they don't even stop you gettting seriously ill without continual boosters.
Don't believe that either?
Well the ONS data proves it, of course it only goes up to May 2022 because they were critisized for putting out data that those horrible anti-vaxxers could use to show the vaccines weren't working as advertised and getting worse.
First it showed a loss of efficacy in preventing cases, then it showed a loss in preventing hospitalisation and now it shows that since January 2022 it no longer works to prevent mortality.
Of course the government says we can't use real world data to establish those things, we have to rely on crappy incomplete studies by the manufacturers which didn't even test for them and studies by those they pay.
The real conspiracy theorists and deniers on here are those who refuse to even look at, let alone accept what the real world data tells them. [Post edited 20 Nov 2022 14:57]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
