health

Vaccine protection may diminish need for yearly boosters

19 Comments
By LAURAN NEERGAARD

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

19 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

I provided the data from the sources you respect. A demographic with a 0.03% mortality rate, and based on Pfizer’s own declaration, they are pushing for EUA approval to provide their Experimental product to this demographic.

How does that prove that vaccines represent a higher risk for this population? a 0.03% mortality rate in the US means that out of the 74 million people under 18 more than 22,000 people would be at risk of death from COVID, if the vaccines can reduce this at least a 95% (as in other populations) this would mean over 20,000 lives saved thanks to vaccination. So, can you prove the vaccines put a significant portion of those lives at risk? because if you don't that means you just proved vaccination is justified. Are 20,000 lives justification enough for you for vaccination? or are those also lives you consider disposable?

 If the vaccine was proven safe , it wouldn’t be classified as Experimental.

The vaccine has been proved safe, much safer than the COVID infection, which is why it was allowed to be used in the population to reduce their risk. No data collected from anywhere in the world has indicated this to be different, in all populations being vaccinated it reduces the risk.

What I have denied and it is still true is that the population being vaccinated are not being included in any clinical trial or experiment, the vaccine is being used for its therapeutic value, which made your appeal for the Nuremberg code obviously irrelevant, that has not changed.

You make invalid conclusions from the data, and question the decision to reduce the risk from all populations where the vaccine has been demonstrated safer than the natural infection but based on nothing but your own personal opinion. That is not valid, unless you can prove the vaccines put any segment of population at even similar risk of death or complication as the infection you have no argument.

Also can you quote exactly where did I said the vaccine would not enter the bloodstream? if you are having imaginary discussions on your head they should remain there.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Bookmarked.

Hopefully there will be more discussions on issue of grant/approval of EUA.

Hopefully we get definitive answers on whether an emergency is needed to get EUA and whether there is one. (For kids and infants/ unborn)

2 ( +4 / -2 )

This is your main problem, you give more importance to your personal opinion, not based on any scientific data than the judgement of experts that work professionally to examine the safety of vaccines and that have data to back up their decisions.

I provided the data from the sources you respect. A demographic with a 0.03% mortality rate, and based on Pfizer’s own declaration, they are pushing for EUA approval to provide their Experimental product to this demographic.

What has my personal bias anything to do with it. If the vaccine was proven safe , it wouldn’t be classified as Experimental. A classification which you yourself denied and spread misinformation about for months. Only to state it was minor oversight. No, it was major oversight in fact. And so were your erroneous statements that spiked proteins would not enter the bloodstream via vaccination. Basically, you have been “winging it”.

It is not me that requires scientific data to question an Experimental vaccine being administered to infants and pregnant women. It is the people in charge of public health that need to prove why it’s necessary and why it’s an emergency status in the first place. It hasn’t been even close since this debacle started.

Your position is neither scientific or professional. It is one of misplaced compliance without question or critical thought.

You don’t dispute the data I send you because you cannot. You only reject the logical implications and motives behind the reaction to this data. And find comfort under the tired mantra of safety, professionalism, and concern for the human race.

Don't be so shocked when you discover it’s not reciprocal in nature. Not everyone was born yesterday and subjected to an Experimental vaccine.

Not yet.

BTW. You’re avatar is cute, but it does seem a little obsessive.

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

Critical studies are underway, and evidence is mounting that immunity from the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna does not depend exclusively on antibodies that dwindle over time. The body has overlapping layers of protection that offer backup.

Great pitch

3 ( +5 / -2 )

I believe you are having difficulty with some basic understanding. My explanation does not suggest all those people are lying at all. In fact many are not. What I am saying is there is an extremely powerful element of influence that is not necessarily prioritizing Global Health.

The problems is that your explanation requires this to be true, even if you were not able to see it, because all those people are in a position to easily disprove the supposed conspiracy just by doing their jobs. All of them must be in the conspiracy for it to be real. There is no realistic possibility your suspicions can be right without their complete cooperation, I know you really want to ignore this because demonstrate your point as invalid but that is not something you can do. I already explained many different ways for health care and scientific professionals to easily detect information that is not congruent with the real world, so if in general this is not being reported the only two possibilities are that the science is actually correct, or the thousands of people that are in a position to correct the science are not doing it because they are on the conspiracy. Obviously only one of those possibilities is realistic.

Also, all those institutions are on dozens of countries around the world, with experts working to examine their own results and those of other places to reach scientific conclusions, it is not realistic to think they are all in the conspiracy when their own loved ones are the ones that will be subjected to the measures they recommend.

The conclusions of the CDC are valid and can be checked by any professional scientist around the world, manh of which are specialized in detecting problems with statistical data. Again that none of them have reported any concern with it can only mean that the data is valid and correct (because obviously they are not all in the conspiracy).

The trials are designed to give enough data to make the determination of reduction of risk for vaccinated people compared with the infection. You have produced nothing to indicate this not to be the case (except for a theoretical report that is contradicted completely by the evidence collected in the world) Investigating more will give more information about it, but there is no realistic possibility at this point, with all the previous knowledge available that this preliminary conclusion will be reversed, if you have information that do it you can present it, else you have to accept this.

I'll wager there will be more complications from the vaccine side effects with this group than Covid-19 illness itself.

This is your main problem, you give more importance to your personal opinion, not based on any scientific data than the judgement of experts that work professionally to examine the safety of vaccines and that have data to back up their decisions. This is an irrational conclusion that heavily determine your bias, making you discard all the information that goes against your conclusions and immediately accept as dogma of truth anything that appears to confirm it, even reports of terribly low quality or baseless opinions.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

Your explanation require all those people to be lying just so you can be right, absolutely. You just never noticed (or refused to to notice) that this makes the conspiracy obvious nonsense.

I believe you are having difficulty with some basic understanding. My explanation does not suggest all those people are lying at all. In fact many are not. What I am saying is there is an extremely powerful element of influence that is not necessarily prioritizing Global Health.

And when you say "I can be right", to what does that pertain? I have not made any conclusions. I have only expressed caution with regards to what all those people have been saying. ALL of them, not only the industry sponsored ones.

You are drawing the conclusions based on selective data and bias. Never have I stated that vaccines are not essential elements of our medicines. My kids and family have been administered many fully approved vaccines, and I am very comfortable with that.

As much as I would love to leave folks in the comfort of your echo-chamber (where critical thinking encounters obvious obstacles), maybe others would like to hear alternate opinions.

All those institutions and people are part of the consensus

Incorrect, yet again.

All the institutions must comply with the regulatory bodies that govern and licence their practice. The more these regulatory agencies are influenced by the product manufactures, the more inherent the risks to public safety becomes.

As Pfizer boldly declares:

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine has not been approved or licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but has been authorized for emergency use by FDA under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to prevent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) for use in individuals 12 years of age and older. The emergency use of this product is only authorized for the duration of the declaration that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of the medical product under Section 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act unless the declaration is terminated or authorization revoked sooner.

Once again, as of today, the CDC arrived at the following survival rates even using their own number:

Ages 0-18 163 Female deaths in the US since the crisis began, or 0.028% 203 Male deaths in the US since the crisis began, or 0.035% Ages 0-18 163 Female deaths in the US since the crisis began, or 0.028% 203 Male deaths in the US since the crisis began, or 0.035%

Is this a bloody emergency that warrants all the global kids in these age groups to be subjected to an Experimental vaccine under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) classification. The regulatory bodies all seems to think so. We hope it's so (despite the Experimental Classification) because of safety. But that will not take away my concerns over who is influencing these decisions.

The CDC, frankly, is a vaccine company; it owns 56 vaccine patents and buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which is over 40% of its total budget.

Similarly, The FDA receives 45% of its annual budget from the pharmaceutical industry.

The World Health Organization (WHO) gets roughly half its budget from private sources, including Pharma and its allied foundations.

Your comments about lying and conspiracy are naive and infantile as far as I am concerned. In a normal functioning Health system, this type of business influence would be curtailed.

FtGuy2017 states Today  01:10 pm JST

"more research is needed" said the article, pretty much the only valid claim here, not surprising since it is an "experimental vaccine".

This poster states an important point. And how much research time our the Big Pharma folks willing to tolerate? Well, not much longer according to Pfizer.

https://www.pfizer.com/science/coronavirus/vaccine/additional-population-studies

The Phase 2/3 clinical trial will evaluate the safety and immune response in healthy pregnant women 18 years of older between 24-34 weeks of their pregnancy. Each woman will participate in the study for approximately 7 to 10 months.

The Phase 1/2/3 dose-escalation study in healthy children six months old to 11 years will evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine on a two-dose schedule (approximately 21 days apart) in three age groups:

**Children ages 5 to 11 years** **2 to 5 years** **And 6 months to 2 years: **

Note: Children younger than 6 months of age may subsequently be evaluated, once an acceptable safety profile has been established.

As I have mentioned previously, my kinds have been vaccinated with fully Approved vaccines at a young age as recommended. Most have been studied for decades and their side effects are well known. However, there is no longer any need to wait, and we can all enjoy the supposed benefits of these brand new vaccines even at the experimental stage.

Because 0.03% mortality is simply an Emergency that warrants such risks. And finally, the timeline.

If safety and immunogenicity is confirmed, and pending authorization or approval from regulators, we hope to submit the vaccine for potential Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sometime in the September-October timeframe for children 5 to 11, and soon after for 6 months to 5.

So, it looks like the schedule plan for a completely safe Experimental, first time deployed, mRNA medicine for your baby and possibly unborn (thru Mom) is for the Fall of this year.

I'll wager there will be more complications from the vaccine side effects with this group than Covid-19 illness itself. But then again, I really don't have the data to support that bet. I just get the eerie feeling that neither will the drug producers. In the very least, I am sure they will take their time studying it further as their products are EUA approved and being distributed like beer nuts.

And the profits roll in.

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

All this drama because you fear a little jab in the arm.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

No they don’t require the complicity of every single institution. They simply need to work together to influence (via funding) the major regulatory public bodies like the CDC, FDA, WHO, etc.

Of course they do, how many papers do you think are coming every week about COVID, vaccines, non-therapeutical measures, etc? each of those papers have many authors, and involve the participation of dozens and dozens of people in many institutions. Then the reports are seen, analyzed and review by professionals all over the world whose work consist on professionally evaluate scientific information to make conclusions, then other thousands of doctors and nurses that would use that information to perform their daily duties and that would easily notice if the reality was different from what they read. This happening in every country of the world, including countless institutions that don't depend on major regulatory bodies (most hospitals don't receive a dime from them).

All those institutions and people are part of the consensus, and in general they do say that measures to contain the pandemic are justifed, vaccines safe and effective and that the world is much better in those part where vaccination has dropped the rates of infection in the population at large.

Your explanation require all those people to be lying just so you can be right, absolutely. You just never noticed (or refused to to notice) that this makes the conspiracy obvious nonsense.

So no, if all those people, with data in their hands say one thing, and you on the other side, without any data to support your beliefs, say the opposite there is simply no comparison.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

"more research is needed" said the article, pretty much the only valid claim here, not surprising since it is an "experimental vaccine".

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

You don't need to be more blunt, just to face the obvious problem with your explanation. The conspiracy that you think is pushing vaccines in the world absolutely require the complicity of every single institution of science and medicine in the world, as well as all the professionals that work on them.

No they don’t require the complicity of every single institution. They simply need to work together to influence (via funding) the major regulatory public bodies like the CDC, FDA, WHO, etc.

They have done just that, and have removed the arms-length protection of check-and-balances these agencies once provided.

You have once again stated a ridiculous premise which further reveals a lack of understanding.

-5 ( +7 / -12 )

Well, let me more blunt. The World's largest investor and promoter of Big Pharma will clearly explain the business model. Is he one of those people that value money over global health? One wonders.

You don't need to be more blunt, just to face the obvious problem with your explanation. The conspiracy that you think is pushing vaccines in the world absolutely require the complicity of every single institution of science and medicine in the world, as well as all the professionals that work on them.

Do you think this is believable? this is the main point you are trying very hard to ignore, but it makes obvious that the whole conspiracy thing is not even remotely logical. You think you have shown one person that would do this for money, now show the other millions of people that would do the same and that are necessary for the conspiracy to work. Can you do that?

If you can't that only means you have to accept the scientific and medical consensus as valid, and this consensus is that vaccines are effective, and safe enough to be used by anybody that wishes to do it because they will lower the risk from the infection, even if they are not part of a specially vulnerable segment.

0 ( +10 / -10 )

Your explanation is still unbelievable. Not because they want to make money but because of the absolutely necessary requirements for it to be as you think. Specifically because it requires the complete cooperation and complicity of countless professionals that worked all their lives to protect public health, and that would know they were supporting unsafe measures that would be used by their friends and family, that is not something anyone could believe (except for people that value more money than their loved ones). You have never addressed this absolute requirement, which means you know it is impossible to believe, but nevertheless still want people to ignore this big impediment and just accept your explanation, that is not logical.

Well, let me more blunt. The World's largest investor and promoter of Big Pharma will clearly explain the business model. Is he one of those people that value money over global health? One wonders.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZ5DavuOkcM

I stated my concerns. And I have politely requested you to take on an assignment. Are you up to it, or do we need to endure more endless science lessons?

-5 ( +7 / -12 )

Please refrain from the drama and compassion play. We all have families and people we care for. So that line of discussion should not be used to mask your previous erroneous statements.

You were the one doubting there were millions of sick people, that has no justification, anybody can easily confirm it and even more the number of deaths.

Your explanation is still unbelievable. Not because they want to make money but because of the absolutely necessary requirements for it to be as you think. Specifically because it requires the complete cooperation and complicity of countless professionals that worked all their lives to protect public health, and that would know they were supporting unsafe measures that would be used by their friends and family, that is not something anyone could believe (except for people that value more money than their loved ones). You have never addressed this absolute requirement, which means you know it is impossible to believe, but nevertheless still want people to ignore this big impediment and just accept your explanation, that is not logical.

What is most concerning is the rabid rejection of data or theories that challenge the current fix for all things (be they broken or not). Observations and analysis that come from non-sponsored sources. Are these counter discussions so dangerous to the group-think?

The examples you bring were full of perfectly valid reasons for being discarded as defective, to say they were rejected only because they are contrary to the current consensus you must first provide much better references, at this point the much more likely explanation for them being rejected is that they are of much lower quality compared with the studies that support the current consensus. And this is completely desirable, science only advances by keeping the best explanations that help understand reality, those that on the contrary do not fit the observations made in the world should not be given the same importance, even if you happen to like them more.

As for me, I say No. I don’t see data that justifies inoculations across all groups. So, I await your information with anticipation..

That is because of a personal decision, when you willingly ignore the risks from COVID and refuse to consider it an emergency even with 3 and a half million deaths (while in the middle of extremely severe measures) then it becomes clear that for you these deaths are just not worth of attention. How many million deaths would you feel are necessary to justify using safe and efficient vaccines? 10? 100? a billion? would that be an emergency for you?

A vaccine becomes justified as long as it lowers the risk of the people being vaccinated, that happens for all demographics included in the vaccination programs. You may believe the contrary, but the scientific data contradicts you, so people should be still free to vaccinate as they like.

1 ( +11 / -10 )

Obviously millions of people got sick from COVID, I mean, more than 3 and half million people have died from the pandemic, it takes a lot of effort to willingly ignore this just to say the vaccines are not necessary. All those dead people (and those that suffer long lasting health problems after the infection) may be nothing to you, which is why you discard their suffering so easily, but for their families and for all the people that care about other human beings they are a very powerful reason to try and prevent more deaths using the best tools discovered by science, at this moment treatments, social distancing measures and very effective and safe vaccines.

Please refrain from the drama and compassion play. We all have families and people we care for. So that line of discussion should not be used to mask your previous erroneous statements.

What you better consider is that the industry behind these products priorities their business over your family concerns. In addition, they have been spared the impact of liabilities against faulty products in pursuit of this business in this case. Thanks primarily to government incompetence and self preservation.

The argument has never been about protecting the segment of our population most prone to this Covid-19 debacle. The argument is really about the existence of the “Emergency” that has resulted in urgent deployment to every human being .

Does this Emergency exist in every demographic? Not in my opinion. And you’ll be hard pressed to present numbers supporting otherwise.

You have repeatedly posted industry papers that expound the benefits of these experimental vaccines. We know, we can all read. What is most concerning is the rabid rejection of data or theories that challenge the current fix for all things (be they broken or not). Observations and analysis that come from non-sponsored sources. Are these counter discussions so dangerous to the group-think?

And don’t keep asking for science you don’t want to hear about. You have already revealed your inability to consider most of it.

I have an assignment for you now that you have finally understood that these medicines are Experimental, which by definition come with elevated risks: Why don’t you present the case on why infants, toddlers, and pregnant women should be vaccinated by the Big Business caretakers of our health?

We look forward to your supporting data. The data that clearly shows the upcoming emergency that justifies the expanding deployment of these medicines into these demographic group.

As for me, I say No. I don’t see data that justifies inoculations across all groups. So, I await your information with anticipation..

-4 ( +8 / -12 )

It’s a Global Business.

Period.

And a Global Business needs Advertising, marketing, and growth.

And that still does not make sense, because this is a terribly poor justification for the absolutely necessity of willing cooperation of all the doctors, nurses, scientists, etc. of the world, that would need to sacrifice their loved ones for that supposed "global business". Maybe people that would sacrifice their family in the bat of an eye for money would think this is believable, but for the vast majority of people this simply unbelievable. Is it so easy to believe this for you?

Obviously millions of people got sick from COVID, I mean, more than 3 and half million people have died from the pandemic, it takes a lot of effort to willingly ignore this just to say the vaccines are not necessary. All those dead people (and those that suffer long lasting health problems after the infection) may be nothing to you, which is why you discard their suffering so easily, but for their families and for all the people that care about other human beings they are a very powerful reason to try and prevent more deaths using the best tools discovered by science, at this moment treatments, social distancing measures and very effective and safe vaccines.

1 ( +11 / -10 )

So all the efficacy and safety data from dozens of countries universities, hosptitalss, millions of people is just part of a world wide conspiracy that includes every single institution of health and science, with people perfectly willing to inoculate their friends and family with a vaccine they know is not safe. Because of money.

It’s a Global Business.

Period.

And a Global Business needs Advertising, marketing, and growth.

Are all those millions of people sick? Is the whole worlds population so threatened to warrant the vaccination and boosting of people down to 6 months of age? And even pregnant women.

With an Experimental vaccine under a questionable emergency.

Think about about it.

-5 ( +8 / -13 )

So all the efficacy and safety data from dozens of countries universities, hosptitalss, millions of people is just part of a world wide conspiracy that includes every single institution of health and science, with people perfectly willing to inoculate their friends and family with a vaccine they know is not safe. Because of money.

And you think this is a believable explanation? Specially when the article clearly talks about lack of need of boosters, which would mean no further profit made (specially with the time span it is talking about, more than enough for any government to develop their own second generation vaccines to avoid paying any pharmaceutical company?).

Anybody interested in infectious diseases, its prevention and management already knows children are already being vaccinated against problems that never kill any children, COVID would not be anything new in this aspect. Irrational fears about imaginary problems not based on any scientific data is a very poor reason to willingly ignore the very real risks from the COVID infection, even for children.

1 ( +10 / -9 )

Interesting theory. Let’s hope you’re correct.

But surely you must realize that you’re reading a business plan, and not a valid health plan.

It’s the same Business plan that strives to inoculate pregnant women of teenage years, the associated unborn, and newly born infants . All with a “vaccine “ still classified as Experimental.

And the supporting paid for “science journals” and political stooges will all rally behind this Global cause. I suppose you will sing from the same hymn book as well.

We know the overall child popular are in no real danger from Covid as a demographic, so I wonder how inoculation of infants and toddlers will be sold along with the speculative yearly booster proposal.

The article states: “I would imagine we will need, at some time, a booster,” Fauci said. “What we’re figuring out right now is what that interval is going to be.” He best be trying to figure out how to stay out of jail in my opinion.

This will be interstate to see play out. I can’t wait for the onslaught of science, new emergencies, government bungling, and massive quarterly profits.

-4 ( +8 / -12 )

Science data until now has not supported the need for boosters, even if people that would benefit from selling them think so, the new development is that new data now supports the conclusion that those boosters appear unnecessary.

As long as most people get vaccinated the spreading can be stopped and the appearance of escape mutants avoided, if this situation is maintained long enough people could have enough immunity to make any infection (even years away) as dangerous as other respiratory infections.

Best case scenario (unlikely but completely possible) is that the pandemic is controlled globally, and without a natural reservoir apart from human SARS-CoV-2 ends up as the first SARS virus.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites