COVID-19 Vaccine Talk, 2nd Dose

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

I am disgusted by some of the comments since my posts, and frankly I expected nothing less. I figured these comments would happen quickly and why until very recently have kept that discussion off this forum.


I was foolish to believe several posters within this community would be willing understand there are real world complications to these vaccine and approach them with a open mind. Instead, what appears to be blind zealotry to a group of companies.

Please, make light of what has happened within my family, going so far as to claim falsehood. Disgusting.

Dont bother replying.

It might have all happened. Hell, it might’ve all been because of the vaccine. But if it did and it was, you would be in the running for the unluckiest person on planet earth, and your next move should either be to start playing the lottery or stop going outside.

The fact is that there is nothing suggests all the issues you and your family are going through are vaccine-related. The real world data suggests it’s almost certainly not. Playing a victim when people point out the reality of the situation and calling everyone disgusting isn’t an effective replacement for facts.

It has nothing to do with blind zealotry to some company. The fact that you believe that has anything to do with the reaction shows how shut off from reality you are, and it’s nobody here’s job to entertain those delusions.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

I strongly disagree, The best decision for me was to never be vaccinated. I had just finished a delta infection, I should never had been advised to be vaccinated so quickly. There was no health data even tested on impacts of vaccination after infection and never should have been advised. Period.

The second shot. Given my reaction to the first dose, I should never have been advised to receive the second dose, and definitely at the timeline as was advised at the time.

I was a healthy male in my early thirties with no pre existing conditions.

my wife, the same, and still was advised to receive her booster.

My sister in law, the same.

We were coerced and pressured, By government, by MD's, by peers.

I think it’s understandable and reasonable you are angry. Hopefully you and your wife recover over time and you can avoid permanent complications.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The fact is that there is nothing suggests all the issues you and your family are going through are vaccine-related. The real world data suggests it’s almost certainly not. Playing a victim when people point out the reality of the situation and calling everyone disgusting isn’t an effective replacement for facts.

It has nothing to do with blind zealotry to some company. The fact that you believe that has anything to do with the reaction shows how shut off from reality you are, and it’s nobody here’s job to entertain those delusions.

I did not realize you were a medical doctor and had reviewed shotinthebacklund’s medical information to come up with this prognosis.

I guess by your logic I should be as well similarly skeptical when we hear about healthy people in the hospital because of COVID, because statistics.

[Azure]

Glad I have PepsiFree on ignore just reading his reply that you quoted. Pretty pathetic.

That response is exactly why there are people who are now questioning it all. Blind, dogmatic belief in what the pharmaceutical companies and their public health cronies were peddling with zero awareness that these are literally the same people who have been carving out and dismantling our health care system for years.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by ikaris

I did not realize you were a medical doctor and had reviewed shotinthebacklund’s medical information to come up with this prognosis.

I guess by your logic I should be as well similarly skeptical when we hear about healthy people in the hospital because of COVID, because statistics.

It doesn’t take being a doctor to read some posts, see that all connections to vaccines are based on correlation in terms of what information the poster is giving us, and note that we have millions of data points that show that one person knowing that many people with vaccine injuries would be extremely rare, to the point of requiring proof to be believed.

You’re obviously not following the logic at all, which isn’t surprising based on your posting history on the subject, as the statistics show it’s far more rare for someone to know multiple people with a vaccine injury than for one otherwise healthy COVID patient to end up in the hospital. Now, if one person said they knew a dozen otherwise healthy people that ended up in the hospital because of COVID, sure, you should be skeptical. Why wouldn’t you? Do you believe literally every anecdote you hear regardless of how believable it seems? You seem to, so maybe you shouldn’t be skeptical. Up to you.

Originally Posted by Azure

Glad I have PepsiFree on ignore just reading his reply that you quoted. Pretty pathetic.

That response is exactly why there are people who are now questioning it all. Blind, dogmatic belief in what the pharmaceutical companies and their public health cronies were peddling with zero awareness that these are literally the same people who have been carving out and dismantling our health care system for years.

I’m also glad you have me on ignore, as you end up responding to me every couple weeks regardless with more takes that show you’re the least educated contributor on any subject. The idea that the people following the actual data and the science itself are the ones with a “blind, dogmatic belief” and not the ones peddling bargain basement conspiracy theories that get debunked every second day because they are desperate to hold on to the idea that they have everything figured out, because without that fantasy they have nothing and their contributions are completely meaningless, is almost too absurd to put into words.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It doesn’t take being a doctor to read some posts, see that all connections to vaccines are based on correlation in terms of what information the poster is giving us, and note that we have millions of data points that show that one person knowing that many people with vaccine injuries would be extremely rare, to the point of requiring proof to be believed.

You’re obviously not following the logic at all, which isn’t surprising based on your posting history on the subject, as the statistics show it’s far more rare for someone to know multiple people with a vaccine injury than for one otherwise healthy COVID patient to end up in the hospital. Now, if one person said they knew a dozen otherwise healthy people that ended up in the hospital because of COVID, sure, you should be skeptical. Why wouldn’t you? Do you believe literally every anecdote you hear regardless of how believable it seems? You seem to, so maybe you shouldn’t be skeptical. Up to you.

I'm assuming you're on your 4th or 5th, or 6th shot? Good for you.

It's interesting how the overwhelming majority of people seem to think this is ridiculous too (only ~25% of the population seems to have bought into this nonsense). I guess we must all not follow "the science."

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/co...tion-coverage/

[Wormius]

I am still a little fuzzy on how you get diagnosed with myocarditis before getting the vaccine, and then attribute it to the vaccine.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by ikaris

I'm assuming you're on your 4th or 5th, or 6th shot? Good for you.

It's interesting how the overwhelming majority of people seem to think this is ridiculous too (only ~25% of the population seems to have bought into this nonsense). I guess we must all not follow "the science."

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/co...tion-coverage/

Why are you suddenly talking about 4th or 5th shots?

I don’t know how many boosters I got, probably just the one, maybe two? but I do know that I got the last one more than 6 months ago, so I wouldn’t be one of the people included in the 25% that got it in the last 6 months. You read that part, right? The last 6 months? Or is that another thing that needs to be explained to you? I’m pretty sure most people could have had two boosters by summer of last year (which was about 8-9 months ago, just in case you couldn’t get there on your own).

And yeah, I don’t think anyone has ever confused you with someone who follows any kind of science at all, or one who even could if they wanted to. Don’t worry, you’re safe.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Why are you suddenly talking about 4th or 5th shots?

I don’t know how many boosters I got, probably just the one, maybe two? but I do know that I got the last one more than 6 months ago, so I wouldn’t be one of the people included in the 25% that got it in the last 6 months. You read that part, right? The last 6 months? Or is that another thing that needs to be explained to you? I’m pretty sure most people could have had two boosters by summer of last year (which was about 8-9 months ago, just in case you couldn’t get there on your own).

And yeah, I don’t think anyone has ever confused you with someone who follows any kind of science at all, or one who even could if they wanted to. Don’t worry, you’re safe.

What's your definition of most? When looking at Ontario:

https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-...mary.pdf?la=en

31.8% of the total population over 5 have taken a booster 6+ months ago. I'm sure the 21.7% that have taken it more recently are from the 31.8%.

But ya, you're the smart guy representing a "majority" view. I mentioned the 4th or 5th shots to see if it would trigger you.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by ikaris

What's your definition of most? When looking at Ontario:

https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-...mary.pdf?la=en

31.8% of the total population over 5 have taken a booster 6+ months ago. I'm sure the 21.7% that have taken it more recently are from the 31.8%.

But ya, you're the smart guy representing a "majority" view. I mentioned the 4th or 5th shots to see if it would trigger you.

Are you serious? Why on earth would you think that? The breakdown clearly draws a division between >6 months ago and <6 months ago; I have no idea how you missed that given how clearly it's laid out on page 2 and in the chart on page 8.

So the population breakdown is:

15.3% unvaccinated
31.2% 2 doses only
31.8% more than 2 doses w/ latest booster 6+ months ago
21.7% more than 2 doses w/ latest booster less than 6 months ago

And obviously the booster level is age stratified as you'd expect, since that matches the risk. % of total population with 3+ doses:

5-11: 7.2%
12-17: 21.2%
18-29: 39.2%
30-39: 47.1%
40-49: 55.2%
50-59: 64.2%
60-69: 76.9%
70-79: 85.9%
80+: 87.9%


I'm baffled how you could think the most basic public health precautions of regularly vaccinating at-risk people (just like we do for the flu) is "nonsense" that people have to "buy into".

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by ikaris

What's your definition of most? When looking at Ontario:

https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-...mary.pdf?la=en

31.8% of the total population over 5 have taken a booster 6+ months ago. I'm sure the 21.7% that have taken it more recently are from the 31.8%.

But ya, you're the smart guy representing a "majority" view. I mentioned the 4th or 5th shots to see if it would trigger you.

Who is representing a majority view? When did I ever claim that, and for what reason did you think mentioning 4th or 5th shots would “trigger” me?

You’re kind of making my case for me, if nothing else. The “majority” if there is one, is just following the science, listening to health care professionals, and have pretty much moved on with their lives. For some that means more boosters than others, but at a certain point after Delta that became pretty obvious to everyone, no?

But look at you. Someone presents statistics and it’s “OH SO YOU’RE A DOCTOR???” Someone suggests exceptional information requires more evidence than anecdotal correlation and you try to “trigger” them… for what, exactly? Everyone is a “smart guy” or beholden to pharma companies or whatever. Sarcasm is basically just a crutch and you flip flop around to different points, trying to “get” people when everyone else is just having a normal conversation, following basic logic, and happy to follow the most likely explanations for the abundance of information in front of them.

I know it’s hard to wrap your head around, but most people aren’t still obsessing over this stuff like you are. Nobody is “triggered” by you mentioning booster shots and nobody is “playing doctor” by pointing out basics concepts like the idea that exceptional claims should hold carry some sort of proof to believed. That’s just how the world works. Most people are also well past trying to convince anyone to get a fourth or fifth dose and don’t care if the majority has it or not.

Don’t you think it’s sad that your entire life is still wrapped up in this? That you’re spending a Friday afternoon trying to “trigger” someone over a COVID conversation? Something most people haven’t thought seriously about in months? To get serious for a moment, have you considered talking to a professional about this? Because it can’t be healthy.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I'm baffled how you could think the most basic public health precautions of regularly vaccinating at-risk people (just like we do for the flu) is "nonsense" that people have to "buy into".

I’m not saying at all that people at risk shouldn’t get boosters, they absolutely should if they fall in those categories. I had meant the majority of people do not and the boosters are a waste of time, in contrast to the messaging from public health officials that have said in the past that everyone over 5 years old should get it.

Regarding the data, I definitely misinterpreted it and it seems that just over 50% have gotten a booster generally, and around 21% in the last six months. Still, it’s not a significant majority or anything like that, that have gone down this road.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by ikaris

I’m not saying at all that people at risk shouldn’t get boosters, they absolutely should if they fall in those categories. I had meant the majority of people do not and the boosters are a waste of time, in contrast to the messaging from public health officials that have said in the past that everyone over 5 years old should get it.

Regarding the data, I definitely misinterpreted it and it seems that just over 50% have gotten a booster generally, and around 21% in the last six months. Still, it’s not a significant majority or anything like that, that have gone down this road.

Current Canadian public health advice

OVERVIEW
• OnMarch3,2023,thePublicHealthAgencyofCanada(PHAC)r eleasedguidancefrom the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) on an additional COVID-19 booster dose in the spring of 2023 for individuals at high risk of severe illness due to COVID-19. This guidance is based on current evidence, vaccine principles and NACI expert opinion.
• NACI now recommends that:
o Startinginthespringof2023,anadditionalboosterdosem aybeoffered6 or more months from the last COVID-19 vaccine dose or infection to the following individuals who are at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19: (Discretionary NACI recommendation)
• Adults 80 years of age and older
• Adults 65 to 79 years of age, particularly if they do not have a
known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection
• Adult residents of long-term care homes and other congregate
living settings for seniors or those with complex medical care
needs
• Adults 18 years of age and older who are moderately to severely
immunocompromised due to an underlying condition or treatment
• Bivalent Omicron-targeting mRNA COVID-19 vaccines continue to be the preferred booster products.
• Individuals who have not received previously recommended doses, including a primary series or fall 2022 booster dose, are recommended to receive them now. For more information, please refer to Guidance on COVID-19 vaccine booster doses: Initial considerations for 2023.
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL ADVISORY CO

It matches the Ikaris health advice.

Quit arguing strawman.

[Azure]

For the Adults 65 to 79 years of age, interesting how it says 'particularly if they do not have a known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection.'

I guess that tricky natural immunity is now again something they know exists after it not having existed for the past 2 years. Funny how things change once the profits are made.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by GGG

Current Canadian public health advice



It matches the Ikaris health advice.

Quit arguing strawman.

Yes, it happened earlier this month (quietly.)

We still have certain universities and employers that still have vaccine mandates that aren’t protecting anyone. We also have legal decisions that say these mandates are justified even comparing against the latest advice from NACI which was very slow to update the requirements. We’ve had politicians propose student COVID vaccine mandates without any regards to the science (and in place in jurisdictions in the US).

It’s a straw man if there wasn’t any discrimination still, but there is.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Azure

For the Adults 65 to 79 years of age, interesting how it says 'particularly if they do not have a known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection.'

I guess that tricky natural immunity is now again something they know exists after it not having existed for the past 2 years. Funny how things change once the profits are made.

I don’t think any educated persons find it particularly funny or strange when understanding of something like natural immunity changes as both real-world cases pile up over time and the virus itself changes.

It seems entirely commonplace, actually. But I understand people desperately need to peddle their big-pharma conspiracy theories now that the world has left them behind once again.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by ikaris

Yes, it happened earlier this month (quietly.)

But it was a very minor change. At the end of 2021, NACI's recommendations for booster doses were:

Strong Recommendation (i.e. the following people should get a booster):

50+ year olds
Adults living in LTC
Frontline healthcare workers

Discretionary Recommendation (i.e. the following people should be offered a booster if they want it):

Adults 18-49 years old


Isn't that basically exactly what you're suggesting? Recommended for at-risk people and offered to anyone else who wants it? That has been their policy the whole time.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by ikaris

Yes, it happened earlier this month (quietly.)

We still have certain universities and employers that still have vaccine mandates that aren’t protecting anyone. We also have legal decisions that say these mandates are justified even comparing against the latest advice from NACI which was very slow to update the requirements. We’ve had politicians propose student COVID vaccine mandates without any regards to the science (and in place in jurisdictions in the US).

It’s a straw man if there wasn’t any discrimination still, but there is.

Your argument that I responded to was you saying that people aren’t getting boosted anymore to which I replied of course not they are following the NACI advice. You also said that public health advice was contrary to the Ikaris advice. I posted public heath information which matched your advice and has matched prior to the Mar update which opendoor posted above.

Now you are goalpost moving. So you will need to restate which particular thesis of what your position is.

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by Azure

For the Adults 65 to 79 years of age, interesting how it says 'particularly if they do not have a known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection.'

I guess that tricky natural immunity is now again something they know exists after it not having existed for the past 2 years. Funny how things change once the profits are made.

They didn't know who how strong the effect would be, and all the way up to delta, catching covid was typically much worse than omicron, and vaccination plus natural immunity is still the best protection.

It's so embarrassing when people post nonsense like this, if it was about money and none of this mattered, big pharma would make far more money from treatments, not vaccines.

The "big pharma" statements are always so silly.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Pfizer's revenue from the Covid vaccine alone in 2021 and 2022 was around $72 billion. Profits more than doubled from around $9B in 2020 to around $22B in 2021. I suspect 2022 was similar. And they are making money from treatments. Pfizer garnered about $19B in revenue from Paxlovid, the antiviral pill, in 2022.

That's just Pfizer.

Big Pharma was absolutely driven by money to get their vaccines out the door first. I would argue thinking these companies were working double time to create the vaccines first for reasons other than money is silly.