I ask you a very simple question in a very civil way and you come back with a condescending smart ass response. Which is even worse since I did exactly that before I even replied to you, and again after this response here, and turned up nothing about any increase in prevalence. It seems like you just threw that out and didn't think anyone would dispute you on it.
Ok, so I did some more reading and it looks like the core premise of Geert Vanden Bossche's argument about stopping vaccination is actually incorrect, since by reducing the incidence of the virus in the population, we will also be reducing the chance of future mutations.
www.politifact.com
Why Herd Immunity Is Slipping Away (Published 2021)
Achieving widespread resistance to the coronavirus has long been a North Star for exiting the pandemic. Some experts now believe the U.S. may never get there.www.nytimes.com
A science and global health reporter consults numerous experts (including Dr. Fauci) on why reaching herd immunity in the US may not be achievable for some time. The transcript isn't up yet probably because it's the weekend, but they typically appear a day or two after publication of the podcast.
ktla.com
Seriously? You think if you get hit by a car after taking the Covid vaccine it's the vaccine's fault? Any death after taking the vaccine is attributable to the shot?
In fairness, a lot of places hit early in the pandemic like New York had near zero cases from like July-October last year, and it still came back with a vengeance after that. We can't assume vaccine-based herd immunity just because the numbers are low right now, particularly if they had already been sliding down the curve at the start of the vaccination push.
www.bbc.com
Well, if you give something, doesn't matter what, could be just water, to millions of people, some are still going to die, so just dying after taking something doesn't prove one died from something (people get all kinds of shit occasionally, right)
This argument kind of falls apart after the recent J&J thing where they suspended the vaccine over six incidents of VITT reported in VAERS. Clearly they do investigate these things and treat them very seriously even when they are very rare.
It turns out 100% of people who get Covid would have eventually died anyway.
I think the point is that you can't determine whether the vaccine is contributing to deaths based on individual claims. You need a large quantity of collective claims, or data. And you need some kind of control group. And the people equipped to make this kind of analysis are statisticians, not ordinary members of the public.
There is a lot of mounting evidence that their are adverse effects. The media is spinning it that it is bad actors who are blowing up the database.
It looks like VAERS intended more as an early warning system than anything that can determine causal factors.
Like the EMA reviewing reports of heart inflammation, rare nerve disorder after Pfizer and AstZeneca shots? This was announced today.
Correct. John Oliver showed a VAERS report saying the shot turned them into the hulk, which was accepted and left up.
I think that happens because no one wants the title of being anti-vaccine, even if you really are anti-vaccine. So, everything starts with "I'm not anti-vaccine, but..."
The problem with this statement is that the world will never get back to normal with that line of thinking. Vaccines are our only chance of conquering this. We have 3 choices here:
It's not a matter of if, it's just a matter of when. If we believe that vaccine numbers will approach the levels we need in the near future, then getting there first seems smart.
It’s a virus that is mutating at a rate that strongly suggests annual vaccines will be necessary and some are suggesting that the vaccine effectiveness drops starting in the 6th month. By the time we “get there,” we’ll have to essentially restart the entire process. We will never “get there” as “there” is a goalpost that is constantly being pushed back by a mutating virus. At some point states have to decide that now is good enough and we will continue pushing forward after we are reopened.
Bold claim. How do you know this?
The problem here isn’t even the dipping effectiveness of the shot. We are constantly being told that this vaccine is less effective against the UK variant, or the South African, or Indian variant. I think I heard that the AZ shot is something like 20% effective against one of the variants and the Chinese vaccine may only be 50-60% effective in the first place. Every new varient puts us further behind in the race to these clear goals. I’m arguing that these goals are reasonable in the first place. There will be new variants every few months and each of them is a step hibachi for these goals. At some point, we have to accept that covid is here to stay and that no vaccination program is going to provide a solution.
If we assume that the effectiveness of the vaccine begins to wane after 6 months, then that starts to put the first people to be vaccinated in that category by mid June. With this in mind, I may be up for a booster shot as soon as mid October.
1. What justifies an assumption of a 6 month window of effectiveness?
There are at least 8 known variants at this point with some ranging as much as 161% more transmissive than the first known strain (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variants_of_SARS-CoV-2). Half of them are believed to be at least somewhat resistant to a preexisting immunization. This is in little more than a year. I’m describing a 6 month window as a bit of a worst case scenario. This is a timeframe that the US government has offered as a point that vaccine effectiveness begins to decrease. My point is that between decreasing effectiveness and the introduction of new variants, herd immunity in any form is simply impossible. Permanent, nationwide immunity is a fleeting goal that cannot realistically be achieved in a country with a large population. We are going to live with some form of covid for the rest of our lives. We need to move away from treating this as a disease that can be eradicated and move towards living in spite of it.
Way too early for this fear porn.
They did? I don't recall seeing anything like that, unless you can link something.
That's why I asked if you think we're at our max capacity of production. If so, we can't make any more than we currently are, and demand will always exceed supply. However, I find that unlikely because there's no reason we can't build more factories or repurposed existing factories for vaccine production.
Okay but that's irrelevant to whether or not we can or can't reach full vaccination levels before their immunity effectiveness starts to wane.
Does this mean that your "we can't achieve full vaccination levels" claim is not necessarily because we can't make enough, but because too many people will opt out of it?
In June of last year, Fauci suggested it might not last very long (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/02/dr-...e-may-not-provide-immunity-for-very-long.html). While the current data is looking positive on this front, there has still been a decrease in effectiveness after 6 months with the effectiveness being likely lower in many variants. As an example, the AZ vaccine is ineffective against the South African variant. “The B.1.351 variant is more troublesome. Studies have shown that the AstraZeneca vaccine was 86 times less effective against this variant, which was first detected in South Africa.” (https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covi...-do-covid-vaccines-stand-against-the-variants). The mRNA vaccines are better, but still struggle against this variant at 6-8 times less effective against this particular variant.
www.webmd.com
Your source is a quote from Fauci from last year? A lot has changed in a year. There's also many unknowns in your webmd link, and you don't reference any of the stories that say the duration might be as long as a year.
apnews.com
This has nothing to do with what we're talking about. Why bring it up?
It is the first time in human history that we got vaccine during a pandemic.
www.euronews.com
These are different issues though. First of all, not all new variants are a problem for the vaccines first of all. Even though the vaccines are less effective against the UK variant, for example, that's not because of an antibody incompatibility, it's just because that variant is more virulent.
Again, I think that's a kind of poor understanding of things. Vaccine immunity probably lasts a couple years, but it might get weaker over time.
Well, I agree with your conclusion.
news.yale.edu
theconversation.com
