The “vaccine” was never tested to see if it stoped transmission of the virus. The 95% effective was at reducing hospitalization which means you created asymptomatic carriers of the virus. They were absolutely correct in using caution since transmission is possible in the vaccinated. To ridicule them for using caution is cowardly. I am ashamed for you Paul.
The “vaccine” was never tested to see if it stoped transmission of the virus. The 95% effective was at reducing hospitalization which means you created asymptomatic carriers of the virus. They were absolutely correct in using caution since transmission is possible in the vaccinated. To ridicule them for using caution is cowardly. I am ashamed for you Paul.
You clearly don’t know the difference between viral transmission and acquisition of the “lethal” spike proteins through the ridiculously implausible concept of “shedding”.
Total bullshit. People who have received all of their mRNA boosters are MORE likely to contract the disease and spread it to others. It’s not “caused” by the jab, but the jab has negative efficacy in this regard.
Aren't you going to give me your citation before you ask me for one on something quite different?
OK then, I'll assume you cannot support your claim, and want me to do your homework?
Here's just one paper on vaccine and booster effectiveness on transmission including Delta and Omicron
"Vaccine effectiveness against transmission (VET) of SARS-CoV-2-infection can be estimated from secondary attack rates observed during contact tracing. We estimated VET, the vaccine-effect on infectiousness of the index case and susceptibility of the high-risk exposure contact (HREC)...
...Initial VET of booster-vaccination (mRNA primary and booster-vaccination) was 87% (95%CI 86–89) against Delta and 68% (95%CI 65–70) against Omicron. The VET-estimate against Delta and Omicron decreased to 71% (95%CI 64–78) and 55% (95%CI 46–62) respectively, 150–200 days after booster-vaccination."
So effectiveness of Boosters against transmission of Omicron was 55% after 200 days post vax (as compared to no vax)
The bivalent-vaccinated group had a slightly but statistically significantly higher infection rate than the unvaccinated group in the statewide category and the age ≥50 years category.
As for the Cleveland clinic study (which is often cited by antivaxers as showing there were more infections in the vaccinated), again you are looking at subgroups with different behaviour characteristics. Those staff who were vaxed were the frontline clinical care providers who had high covid exposures. The staff who weren’t vaxed had jobs not involving contact. So finding a higher rate of infections is explicable. The vaxed staff are also likelier to have been tested more, so you’d pick up more asymptomatic infections.
Again, I’d point out that the study authors don’t state vaccination increases infection; this was an anomalous correlation and not causation. In fact the overall study did conclude that vaccination was associated with a 30% REDUCTION in covid infections.
Please stop cherrypicking and misrepresenting studies to try and prove your fallacious point.
There are multiple other population and epidemiological studies that demonstrate vaccination reduces the risk of infection. Of course, it can’t prevent all transmissions, but even a small reduction can be important particularly in the vulnerable.
With the Omicron variant we see overall milder infections, so the role of vaccines in preventing infection is less relevant, what is important is that vaccination can avert SERIOUS infections and death from Covid which it still does.
I dont need freaking studies to show that there are infections among the vaccinated. I’ll give you the benefit of a doubt and say at best, a 30% reduction in transmission. For a respiratory virus that 100% of the population has had at this point. We haven’t even touched the adverse effects from the mRNA “cure”.
And this was was the cure that the corrupted white coats supported taking away people’s jobs and right to life over? Every single ”scientist” or politician or media talking head that scolded us that the virus “stops with each vaccinated person” deserves to be in jail for misinformation. No, you sir are on the wrong side of this.
You do not refute the findings of my study, I note. It is not an analysis of a cherrypicked subgroup, but looks at the whole population.
I note your Cureus study is on prison inmates, who likely have very differing behaviour to the general population and I’d hesitate to extrapolate. They found a non-significant difference between vaxed and unvaxed inmates, and only teased out a small significant difference when analysing different age ranges. In research terms this is known as p-hacking, looking at subgroups until hey presto you find one which is different. Here we have a subgroup of a subgroup … certainly not generalisable and the study authors don’t do so and don’t draw firm conclusions, so neither should you.
1. You have once again you have replied to yourself....apparently correctly making comments is just too difficult for you.
2. You continue to deflect from the fact your claim:
"The “vaccine” was never tested to see if it stoped transmission of the virus. "
Is still a still a lie predicated on folks being too stupid to read.
3. You are welcome: I will keep doing what I do--I post the links so everyone can see that then anti-vaccs stupidity lie about ~everything.
Speaking of stupidity....it was staggeringly foolish of you to think posting in binary would make it difficult to read....apparently...intellectually you just can't do any better.
Perhaps you and Paul should have informed the School in October 2021 that the study you referred to done in 2021-2022 and published in 2023 would look at transmission since the Pfizer trials were not designed to look at Transmission.
And why didn’t you or Paul inform them in October 2021 why a brand new MRNA vaccine could not possibly shed
I have never met anyone more intellectually challenged on comprehension of a simple observation than you. I would explain it to you, but you clearly cannot understand what I was clearly trying to convey.
I have never met anyone more intellectually challenged on comprehension of a simple observation than you. I would explain it to you, but you clearly cannot understand what I was clearly trying to convey.
The “vaccine” was never tested to see if it stoped transmission of the virus. The 95% effective was at reducing hospitalization which means you created asymptomatic carriers of the virus. They were absolutely correct in using caution since transmission is possible in the vaccinated. To ridicule them for using caution is cowardly. I am ashamed for you Paul.
You clearly don’t know the difference between viral transmission and acquisition of the “lethal” spike proteins through the ridiculously implausible concept of “shedding”.
I am ashamed for you Ammon.
Total bullshit. There were asymptomatic carriers long before the vaccine
Yes, and there were more after the vaccine.
The vaccine doesn't cause asymptomatic carriage. The only reason there are "more" asymptomatic covid cases since the vaccine is that:
1. Almost everyone has had the vaccine, so you see this happen, in the same way you still see people die despite wearing seatbelts.
2. Some of those who didn't have the vaccine are probably dead, rather than being just asymptomatic cases.
Total bullshit. People who have received all of their mRNA boosters are MORE likely to contract the disease and spread it to others. It’s not “caused” by the jab, but the jab has negative efficacy in this regard.
Citation needed.
Show me a post-Delta citation that the vaccine reduces transmission.
Aren't you going to give me your citation before you ask me for one on something quite different?
OK then, I'll assume you cannot support your claim, and want me to do your homework?
Here's just one paper on vaccine and booster effectiveness on transmission including Delta and Omicron
"Vaccine effectiveness against transmission (VET) of SARS-CoV-2-infection can be estimated from secondary attack rates observed during contact tracing. We estimated VET, the vaccine-effect on infectiousness of the index case and susceptibility of the high-risk exposure contact (HREC)...
...Initial VET of booster-vaccination (mRNA primary and booster-vaccination) was 87% (95%CI 86–89) against Delta and 68% (95%CI 65–70) against Omicron. The VET-estimate against Delta and Omicron decreased to 71% (95%CI 64–78) and 55% (95%CI 46–62) respectively, 150–200 days after booster-vaccination."
So effectiveness of Boosters against transmission of Omicron was 55% after 200 days post vax (as compared to no vax)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10073587/
That doesn't look like "negative efficacy" to me, Phil.
I was simply returning the favor, dipwad.
The bivalent-vaccinated group had a slightly but statistically significantly higher infection rate than the unvaccinated group in the statewide category and the age ≥50 years category.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10482361/
And here are more studies showing boosters can reduce Omicron infections...
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7148e1.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/72/wr/mm7225a4.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7148e1.htm
Scold me for study samples, then the only semi-current study you could find was only among nursing home residents. LOL
As for the Cleveland clinic study (which is often cited by antivaxers as showing there were more infections in the vaccinated), again you are looking at subgroups with different behaviour characteristics. Those staff who were vaxed were the frontline clinical care providers who had high covid exposures. The staff who weren’t vaxed had jobs not involving contact. So finding a higher rate of infections is explicable. The vaxed staff are also likelier to have been tested more, so you’d pick up more asymptomatic infections.
Again, I’d point out that the study authors don’t state vaccination increases infection; this was an anomalous correlation and not causation. In fact the overall study did conclude that vaccination was associated with a 30% REDUCTION in covid infections.
Please stop cherrypicking and misrepresenting studies to try and prove your fallacious point.
There are multiple other population and epidemiological studies that demonstrate vaccination reduces the risk of infection. Of course, it can’t prevent all transmissions, but even a small reduction can be important particularly in the vulnerable.
With the Omicron variant we see overall milder infections, so the role of vaccines in preventing infection is less relevant, what is important is that vaccination can avert SERIOUS infections and death from Covid which it still does.
I dont need freaking studies to show that there are infections among the vaccinated. I’ll give you the benefit of a doubt and say at best, a 30% reduction in transmission. For a respiratory virus that 100% of the population has had at this point. We haven’t even touched the adverse effects from the mRNA “cure”.
And this was was the cure that the corrupted white coats supported taking away people’s jobs and right to life over? Every single ”scientist” or politician or media talking head that scolded us that the virus “stops with each vaccinated person” deserves to be in jail for misinformation. No, you sir are on the wrong side of this.
You do not refute the findings of my study, I note. It is not an analysis of a cherrypicked subgroup, but looks at the whole population.
I note your Cureus study is on prison inmates, who likely have very differing behaviour to the general population and I’d hesitate to extrapolate. They found a non-significant difference between vaxed and unvaxed inmates, and only teased out a small significant difference when analysing different age ranges. In research terms this is known as p-hacking, looking at subgroups until hey presto you find one which is different. Here we have a subgroup of a subgroup … certainly not generalisable and the study authors don’t do so and don’t draw firm conclusions, so neither should you.
"The “vaccine” was never tested to see if it stoped transmission of the virus. "
Yes it was.
E.g. " Vaccine effectiveness against transmission of alpha, delta and omicron SARS-COV-2-infection, Belgian contact tracing, 2021–2022
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10073587/#:~:text=The%20combined%20effect%20(reduced%20risk,vaccines%20outperformed%20viral%2Dvector%20vaccines.
There are other examples.
Fact is the anti-vaccs almost never get the most basic facts correct.
Albus, 01001001 00100000 01100110 01101001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 01110010 01110010 01101111 01100111 01100001 01101110 01100011 01100101 00100000 00100000 01100010 01101111 01110100 01101000 00100000 01101000 01100101 01101100 01110000 01100110 01110101 01101100 00100000 01100001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01100001 01101101 01110101 01110011 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110011 01101001 01101110 01100011 01100101 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01110000 01110010 01100101 01101000 01100101 01101110 01110011 01101001 01101111 01101110 00100000 01101111 01100110 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01110011 01110101 01100010 01101010 01100101 01100011 01110100 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01101100 01100001 01100011 01101011 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100010 01100101 01110011 01110100 00101110 00100000 01000101 01110110 01100101 01101110 00100000 01110100 01101000 01101111 01110101 01100111 01101000 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01110111 01101111 01101110 11100010 10000000 10011001 01110100 00100000 01100110 01110101 01101100 01101100 01111001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01110000 01110010 01100101 01101000 01100101 01101110 01100100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01101001 01110011 00101100 00100000 01001001 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01101110 01101011 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110100 01101001 01101110 01110101 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100100 01101111 00100000 01110111 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100100 01101111 00101110
Posting in binary code is “predicating people are too stupid to read” really that’s your argument? The binary code was specifically for you.
People are smart enough to read it and figure it out.
You obviously didn’t understand its content. Or you couldn’t read it.
1. You have once again you have replied to yourself....apparently correctly making comments is just too difficult for you.
2. You continue to deflect from the fact your claim:
"The “vaccine” was never tested to see if it stoped transmission of the virus. "
Is still a still a lie predicated on folks being too stupid to read.
3. You are welcome: I will keep doing what I do--I post the links so everyone can see that then anti-vaccs stupidity lie about ~everything.
Speaking of stupidity....it was staggeringly foolish of you to think posting in binary would make it difficult to read....apparently...intellectually you just can't do any better.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-CCaJLR1zhQ
It may have been tested after but that is irrelevant and to try and explain that to you is an exercise in futility.
Wow....in a matter of life and death and you think lying about the basic facts is irrelevant!
Thanks for the link....putting aside the fact that the timing of the testing is irrelevant with respect to how it performs in the real world....
You are still stuck with the fact that the entire argument is predicated on folks not understanding what a vaccine is.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=26-USC-222761909-1963936815&term_occur=999&term_src=
You keep getting all pissy because you just keep arguing BS.
The hypocrisy is world class.
You are an excellent troll.
I hope you get all you deserve in life.
Oh look....not one world from you about the facts!
You can rant and name-call all you want....but the truth is you keep posting lies that insult the intelligence of the average 10-year-old.
I think you are just ashamed because once again the anti-vaccs are proven to lie....counting on folks to be too stupid to read.
Great comeback you obviously won the argument.
Posting a lie predicated on folks being too stupid to read isn't arguing.....it is just lying.
Perhaps you and Paul should have informed the School in October 2021 that the study you referred to done in 2021-2022 and published in 2023 would look at transmission since the Pfizer trials were not designed to look at Transmission.
And why didn’t you or Paul inform them in October 2021 why a brand new MRNA vaccine could not possibly shed
I have never met anyone more intellectually challenged on comprehension of a simple observation than you. I would explain it to you, but you clearly cannot understand what I was clearly trying to convey.
You replied to yourself!
Demonstrating exactly how intellectually challenged you are...clearly, you just can't do any better.
In theory, you could have some integrity and admit the simple fact that the anti-vaccs lie when they claim:
""The “vaccine” was never tested to see if it stoped transmission of the virus. "
But.....apparently you just don't have any!
I have never met anyone more intellectually challenged on comprehension of a simple observation than you. I would explain it to you, but you clearly cannot understand what I was clearly trying to convey.
There you go it’s proper now.
I do understand.
You posted a really, really stupid anti-vacc lie and you don't care that you were caught.
No big deal to you.....your anti-vaccs are only killing people...but other folks do care.