Coronavirus (COVID-19 Outbreak) (53 Viewers)

Ronn

Senior Member
May 3, 2012
20,924
Part of the problem was the misleading initial messaging that vaccination would prevent 95% of transmission which it clearly doesn’t do. But it is still ~90% effective at preventing the most serious outcomes so I’m not sure how anyone looks at that in anything but a positive light.
It wasn’t wrong. Some vaccines were that effective in the clinical trials. But scientists should’ve expected new variants and waning protection, and not let vaccine manufacturers and politicians run with misleading claims that the pandemic is over.
 

Dostoevsky

Tzu
Administrator
May 27, 2007
89,031
It wasn’t wrong. Some vaccines were that effective in the clinical trials. But scientists should’ve expected new variants and waning protection, and not let vaccine manufacturers and politicians run with misleading claims that the pandemic is over.
But people (politicians and scientists) were saying it would all end once vaccines are out. And it didn't happen.

What trials? You mean those couple of months in a rushed production? I don't know how scientists couldn't predict this, makes me wonder how much knowledge they have themselves when even random people predicted new variants and troubles we're seeing.
 

Ronn

Senior Member
May 3, 2012
20,924
But people (politicians and scientists) were saying it would all end once vaccines are out. And it didn't happen.

What trials? You mean those couple of months in a rushed production? I don't know how scientists couldn't predict this, makes me wonder how much knowledge they have themselves when even random people predicted new variants and troubles we're seeing.
You should realize that a scientist can only draw conclusions based on available data. Anything outside of that is guess work. And if the data is not abundant mistakes are bound to happen. This doesn’t necessarily mean a nefarious motive.
are you suggesting clinical data for vaccine efficacy did not exist? It most certainly did. Long term data obviously did not, which makes anybody who makes long term predictions about this pandemic look like a fool.
 

Dostoevsky

Tzu
Administrator
May 27, 2007
89,031
You should realize that a scientist can only draw conclusions based on available data. Anything outside of that is guess work. And if the data is not abundant mistakes are bound to happen. This doesn’t necessarily mean a nefarious motive.
are you suggesting clinical data for vaccine efficacy did not exist? It most certainly did. Long term data obviously did not, which makes anybody who makes long term predictions about this pandemic look like a fool.
I think they had plenty of clinical data surely. However, I don't know if that was enough because even at the beginning I don't think many mentioned we'll need boosters too.
 

Ronn

Senior Member
May 3, 2012
20,924
I think they had plenty of clinical data surely. However, I don't know if that was enough because even at the beginning I don't think many mentioned we'll need boosters too.
What is enough? Waiting for 10 years to get enough data for a global emergency kind of defeats the purpose. How exactly should they know if you need a booster? Even if they anticipated this by looking at other viral diseases that still wouldn’t be accurate because every virus is different.
 

DAiDEViL

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2015
64,779
First we gonna see if the Bundesverfassungsgericht is gonna let that happen in the first place.

But if it happens it happens. Like I said, I'm no anti vaccine or corona hoax person. I just don't think I need it. That is pretty much it.

...I will however never get that stupid booster shot all 6 months as they plan it. That's just absolute bullshit for young and healthy people.
 

AFL_ITALIA

MAGISTERIAL
Jun 17, 2011
31,834
Before that data came out, based on what were you speaking?

But what you bolded is true, no? Boosters are not of a one time use? It's not like people who took 3 vaccines ended their job with it.
I'm not sure what you mean by the first sentence.

I think the problem for you is that you seem to me to expect definitive answers now on an evolving situation in this case. Everything has an evolutionary limit, maybe with omicron it turns out that it is extremely mild and becomes the dominant strain ( :xfingers: ) and nothing further really needs to be done. Maybe it becomes Spanish flu level instead and we need another vaccine as soon as possible. Not a single person on this Earth can tell you for sure. I personally had a very strong belief that we would end up needing AT LEAST one booster due to some sort of new variant, which is why I wanted to be sure to get one of the mRNA vaccines as they were already looking into the possibility of putting out variant specific boosters back at the beginning of the year. Until omicron though it looked like I would've been wrong, but now we just have to wait and see how the situation develops and then act accordingly.

Part of the problem was the misleading initial messaging that vaccination would prevent 95% of transmission which it clearly doesn’t do. But it is still ~90% effective at preventing the most serious outcomes so I’m not sure how anyone looks at that in anything but a positive light.
100%, I don't understand how people can look at this negatively. Some of these you see, especially on social media, I swear they almost want these things to fail. People are sick.

Are we talking about the same thing here?
:boh:
 

ALC

Ohaulick
Oct 28, 2010
46,545
You becoming more of a slave by the minute. Not willing to martyr yourself for freedom. Poor form, old boy.
agreed. The smart thing would be for lgor to take all the vaccines, multiple times. That way he would inevitably have a negative effect, perhaps even serious, and then that would pave the way for him to sue the companies for billions and even appear on tv. Not on Fox tho, everyone there is vaccinated. Maybe OAN
 

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
Jun 25, 2003
39,351
Before that data came out, based on what were you speaking?

But what you bolded is true, no? Boosters are not of a one time use? It's not like people who took 3 vaccines ended their job with it.
We don't know that yet. It's possible that three shots suffice a lifetime.

But even if they don't, I don't really understand your argument.

The vaccines clearly keep mortality rates lower, while the virus will become more manageable or at least tolerable in the future.

No one is saying you'll have to get a shot the next fifty years (and even if you would, it's still only a minor inconvenience).

What I don't understand either is that peple distrust doctors over vaccines, but do trust them to treat them when they are sick. Be consistent.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk
 

AFL_ITALIA

MAGISTERIAL
Jun 17, 2011
31,834
Out of curiosity now, how many of you would take the antiviral that Pfizer is going to release if you did end up getting sick? Particularly interested in those who have not or are reluctant to get the vaccine. Keep in mind, treatment would need to begin within 3 days of symptom onset (as far as I know) so you may not be able to fully determine severity of your illness.
 

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
Jun 25, 2003
39,351
First we gonna see if the Bundesverfassungsgericht is gonna let that happen in the first place.

But if it happens it happens. Like I said, I'm no anti vaccine or corona hoax person. I just don't think I need it. That is pretty much it.

...I will however never get that stupid booster shot all 6 months as they plan it. That's just absolute bullshit for young and healthy people.
One thing I will say is that with the new variants younger people get sick as well. They don't die, but they do get flulike symptoms.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk
 

Dostoevsky

Tzu
Administrator
May 27, 2007
89,031
We don't know that yet. It's possible that three shots suffice a lifetime.

But even if they don't, I don't really understand your argument.

The vaccines clearly keep mortality rates lower, while the virus will become more manageable or at least tolerable in the future.

No one is saying you'll have to get a shot the next fifty years (and even if you would, it's still only a minor inconvenience).

What I don't understand either is that peple distrust doctors over vaccines, but do trust them to treat them when they are sick. Be consistent.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk
Dude, there's no way 3 vaccines are going to end this shit. Nobody said but there's no way. They will ask for 4th one possible as soon as winter ends.

And again, I'm not against the vaccines generally, but this one. Ever since this started it's shady as fuck and it's horrible to see it being forced to people, making life restrictive for those who don't kiss governments feet.
 

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
Jun 25, 2003
39,351
Dude, there's no way 3 vaccines are going to end this shit. Nobody said but there's no way. They will ask for 4th one possible as soon as winter ends.

And again, I'm not against the vaccines generally, but this one. Ever since this started it's shady as fuck and it's horrible to see it being forced to people, making life restrictive for those who don't kiss governments feet.
There are several vaccines which need three shots.

But even if you have to get one every six months for a year or two, what's the downside?

People munch on pills all weekend, but get crazy about this.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk
 

Dostoevsky

Tzu
Administrator
May 27, 2007
89,031
There are several vaccines which need three shots.

But even if you have to get one every six months for a year or two, what's the downside?

People munch on pills all weekend, but get crazy about this.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk
Pills were made over time. This experimental drug came out after less than a year since virus broke out and such vaccines never happened before. But yeah "medicine nowadays is amazing and much faster". Medicine is so amazing it couldn't predict virus to continue after vaccines are out.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 35)