840

So effective, just not as strong.

Still best to get the booster.

841

Effective is subjective. At the current efficacy, herd immunity cannot be achieved through vaccination. It will only be achieved through natural immunity from being infected.

That said, I agree, being boosted to reduce my individual contribution to natural immunity is the smart thing for me to do and I will willingly take another booster (particularly if it’s tailored for Omicron) this spring. But I am under no illusion that this thing will be over until there are too few people for the virus to infect to maintain vectors of transmission.

1 Like
842

So he basically thought the research was worth the risk of a pandemic. How many more of these people do we have out there? As we can see, that’s a dangerous game. What if they let something out with a much higher mortality rate? This had a low one and it killed millions.

2 Likes
843

We should be referring to Fauci as Dr. Strangelove.

2 Likes
844

Interesting study.

Dates are important and buried in the study. July 15, 2021 to August 31, 2021.

Across eight AHN hospitals in Western Pennsylvania during the time period studied, 473 patients were hospitalized with COVID-19. Of those, 128 were fully vaccinated at the time. The other 345 were either unvaccinated or didn’t get a full vaccine course.

Among the fully vaccinated patients, 73% had symptoms of COVID-19 while the other 27% were considered incidental cases — that is, they were admitted to the hospital for other reasons but tested positive for COVID-19 in the hospital.

The patients hospitalized for COVID-19 symptoms had an average age of 73 and most had other health problems, such as diabetes, high blood pressure, chronic kidney disease or chronic lung disease. About half were overweight and a quarter were severely immunocompromised, meaning they were on chemotherapy for cancer, had a prior organ transplant or stem cell transplant, or they were on medications to suppress their immune system.

For many immunocompromised patients, the vaccines don’t generate enough antibodies to protect against COVID-19. A new preventive treatment, Evusheld, has been authorized for these individuals. The treatment wasn’t available at the time of the study.

Of the 93 fully vaccinated patients, 14 needed to be placed on mechanical ventilation and 19 died in the hospital of COVID-19.

As of Jan. 18, the Pennsylvania Department of Health reported that 85% of hospitalizations with COVID-19 as the primary diagnosis or cause of admission were in unvaccinated or not fully vaccinated people.

I like how the headline treats this as some sort of revelation of discovery.

WAY before delta 85% unvaccinated is less than the more impressive 95% often tossed around.

The incidentals were pretty high at 27%. Indicates a lot of antibodies are out there unaccounted for in the flailing public health guidelines.

845

This freakin’ guy…

1 Like
846

Here is a page with a German language youtube video that also has a Pdf translation to download.

PDF:

The subtitles for the video itself can be changed in youtube.

It goes into detail on the Covid Criminal Network and the affiliated masterminds controlling the wacko politics.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/02/17/covid-criminal-network.aspx?cid_source=gab&cid_medium=social&cid_content=mercola&cid=lead_20220217

847

This senile old ■■■■ still does not want to place a goal on ending.

one of the questions you asked before about the CDC considering giving more precise metrics for decisionmaking, that concentrating more on what the rate of severe disease and hospitalization is will determine that. We don’t know what that number is yet. But that will be much more of a determinant than the rate of infection.”

848
1 Like
849

CDC knows the midterms are coming apparently.

5 Likes
850

…follow the science…I mean…politics.

4 Likes
851

That’s why they call it political science. :wink:

3 Likes
852

Who swallows this? Good grief.

1 Like
853

Tuesday is also very sciencey

2 Likes
854

Lemme guess…the kits were made in China?

Be aware: That COVID-19 test kit in your home could contain a toxic substance that may be harmful to your children and you.

The substance is sodium azide, and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center’s Drug and Poison Information Center has seen a surge in calls about exposures to the chemical since more people started self-testing for COVID-19 at home.

Fifty million U.S. households have received some version of the test kits, although it’s not clear how many contain sodium azide. The government has sent 200 million of the kits, with about 85% of initial orders filled, officials said at a White House briefing last week.

855

It’s a colorless, tasteless, and odorless powder? Are you thinking what I’m thinking?

856

Hollywood announced Friday that in a city with mandatory vaccine passports, the elites would not be required to be vaccinated to attend the Oscars. Even Starbucks ditched its vaccine mandate. Meanwhile, masks appear to now be optional, at least at large gatherings such as the Super Bowl.

Yet, for the unvaccinated employees of United Airlines, CEO Scott Kirby’s draconian policy continues. Today, 355 pilots and hundreds of flight attendants remain grounded with the unreasonable accommodation of indefinite, unpaid leave — all this despite Kirby’s public claim that the air on an aircraft is scientifically proven to be cleaner than that in a hospital operating suite.

Follow the science!!

3 Likes
857

Let’s try it this way…meme style.

image

5 Likes
858

Oh, I know what you are thinking. :wink: :joy:

In the home test kit I guess there is an extraction vial which is a liquid you mix with the test swab.

I think that is what they specifically speaking of in this case.

However, the extraction vials do look like small squeeze bottles or eye droppers. Some people may accidentally confuse them with medications and apply the drops into their eyes or nose, which may cause irritation. People also may spill it on their skin which can cause skin irritation or chemical burns. Small children may accidentally swallow the contents of the vial or choke on the vial’s small cap.

Seriously. Who the hell takes a bottle out of their test kit and says to themselves “hey self, these must be some kick ass eye drops, let’s put them in our eyes. Maybe snorting them would be even better”?

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

859

That’s kind of besides the point. Who is so stupid that they would drink the liquid contents of the kit? Do they need to warn people to not drink it … like they do the contents of your car battery?

1 Like