Booster shots

Treatments and their effectiveness, herd immunity, masks, testing, etc.
Splatt
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Booster shots

Post by Splatt »

Fingal wrote: Sat Apr 17, 2021 7:20 am
We don't know enough about the new variant threat to judge. But it has to be a possibility that travel restrictions will stay for years, if only to enable all other sectors to operate freely.
Why do you want that insanity?!

You want to permanently deprive people of their leisure, relaxation and a huge number of people of their livelihood just so some people can go to the theatre?!

This isn't an either or decision. This isnt a super infectious virus. Its not a super deadly virus. And with vaccination even those susceptible aren't going to get seriously sick from it (yes even variants. T-cell responses).

Variants are going to happen whether there's travel or not. The UK gets 7000+ trucks to/from mainland Europe per day on its own without everything else.
Variants will also emerge locally as a result of selection pressure.
You really need to get out of the mindset that the only "solution" is to hide behind the sofa for a few years and hope the problem goes away.

Unless you want to go back to living in the 1800s where nobody went more than a few miles from home its time to abandon that insanity and get on with life. Let people live with the risk they're personally prepared to accept for whatever it is they want to do.

Nobody
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:05 pm

Re: Booster shots

Post by Nobody »

It can be treated in other ways, safely. The vaccines are not especially effective anyway. I cannot see what else it can be about other than establishing a series of public practices: they have managed to signify a relatively tame virus as a continuous threat, they are continuing this strategy with the new variants which is apparently all bullshit from what I have read, so, it seems to me to be about continuously threatening the population and constantly introducing them to some new version which, in turn, needs a new booster. It is a way of creating a global market among adults for a life of continuous surveillance and continuous vaccination. I saw somewhere they were already planning to charge more for the booster shots and look at this:

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/pfizer-d ... 7KatS.html

This is why the government should have pursued alternative from the start. There had to be alternative strategies. Those were not considered because the course we have been steered on was the original aim of the whole charade of hyping up this virus to create the necessity of the policies.
But all I can do is defer to the scientific authority of clever people with real education, I do not understand the science and cannot contest any of it. All one can do is delegate one's opinion to a given authority. This is what the whole thing relies on: the population have bought into the lies and their behaviours are now aligned in relation to these fears and the world is now changed. I do not see why a national government would not try to defend the bases of its culture and would so easily use the abstracted notion of "public health" to debar people from the public sphere and enforce conditions that are economically and psychologically damaging unless they were pursuing other agendas and these were desired effects.

Fingal
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:11 pm

Re: Booster shots

Post by Fingal »

Splatt wrote: Sat Apr 17, 2021 10:51 pm
Why do you want that insanity?!.

....Variants are going to happen whether there's travel or not.
I'm saying I want anything. I'm simply stating that they will resort to lockdown again if things get bad enough.. So if it comes to a choice between sacrificing the travel industry, or all industry (including travel anyway) then the answer is obvious.

It's nonsense to suggest the degree of travel makes no difference. Track & trace high cope with occasionally outbreaks, but when you get 1,000 simultaneous infection events, it's game over.

Splatt
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Booster shots

Post by Splatt »

Fingal wrote: Sun Apr 18, 2021 9:54 pm I'm saying I want anything. I'm simply stating that they will resort to lockdown again if things get bad enough.. So if it comes to a choice between sacrificing the travel industry, or all industry (including travel anyway) then the answer is obvious.


Again you seem to think its an either/or?
Why?
Based on what evidence can only one of those industries survive?

Why exactly should people be deprived of their holiday, their leisure, their relaxation and their physical and mental health along with hundreds of thousands of jobs just so some soap-dodgers can have a festival in a field or some posh bloke go to the ballet?
How are the two linked in any way at all?

It's nonsense to suggest the degree of travel makes no difference. Track & trace high cope with occasionally outbreaks, but when you get 1,000 simultaneous infection events, it's game over.
Really? Lets see your data showing how its a big risk.
Why, when people aren't getting serious sick or dying from a virus do we even need track and trace?
Again you're arguing to never ever return to normal. Have peoples lives controlled by arbitrary medical testing to be allowed to do something.
Why are you so against normal life?

Fingal
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:11 pm

Re: Booster shots

Post by Fingal »

Splatt wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:47 am Again you're arguing to never ever return to normal. Have peoples lives controlled by arbitrary medical testing to be allowed to do something.
Why are you so against normal life?
Ok, you need to make a leap of imagination into the actual behaviour of governments, rather than what you believe they should be doing.

If covid infections balloon again - because we get a vaccine resistant variant - the government will probably lock down. Which nobody wants.

So we have 2 options. We can take a gamble. We can hope that none of the new variants ever pose a serious threat to vaccine control - and therefore leave the borders totally open. Travel anywhere!

But if we do that, we have to assume that every single variant in the world will end up on our ultra-connected doorstep sooner or later.

You want to play the gamble that none of those variants will breach our vaccine control. From where we're sitting today, that is one stupendously risky strategy.

The risks are off the scale. But for the sake of the travel industry alone, that's the risk you want to play.

It doesn't mean no more travel, ever. It means restrict travel until we can understand the threat variants present.

User avatar
MikeAustin
Posts: 1091
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2020 2:27 pm

Re: Booster shots

Post by MikeAustin »

jmc wrote: Sat Apr 17, 2021 9:23 am There are no health benefits with current and any future SARs CoV 2 vaccines for the under 55's.
Worse than that, there has been a stark warning from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi:

https://philosophers-stone.info/2021/04 ... pisode-15/

He pulls no punches. He says do not take a second jab because it is too dangerous. If you survive and are requested to take a booster, you should make sure you prepare your will!

jmc
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:01 am

Re: Booster shots

Post by jmc »

MikeAustin wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:59 am
jmc wrote: Sat Apr 17, 2021 9:23 am There are no health benefits with current and any future SARs CoV 2 vaccines for the under 55's.
Worse than that, there has been a stark warning from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi:

https://philosophers-stone.info/2021/04 ... pisode-15/

He pulls no punches. He says do not take a second jab because it is too dangerous. If you survive and are requested to take a booster, you should make sure you prepare your will!
Thats what has been so bizarre about SAR CoV 2, the mortality age profile is pretty unique.

For normal seasonal flu its about 80/20 for over 65 / under 65. A number pretty much repeated for the pandemic flus of the 1950's and 1960's. With the Spanish flu of 1918 the ratio was almost reversed. Mostly younger people dying of cytokine storms. The first return of the Spanish flu variant (H1N1) in Swine flu in 2009 gave us another skewed mortality age profile. Older people had a lower death rate than with other flu pandemics. But this was due less to high rate of cytokine storms in younger people, which were not as common as 1918, but stronger cross immunity in older people. People whose first exposure to pandemic flu was H2N2 in the 1950's got seriously ill at lower rates than those whose first exposure was to H3N2 in the 1960's and later. I was a H3N2 kid so I got poleaxed by H1N1 in 2009 whereas all my older friends had barely a sniffle.

And now we have SAR CoV 2. Where the viral pneumonia mortality age profile is < 10% under 65, >90% over 65 and the < 55 morality rate is 1% or 2%. Complete unique for a pandemic viral respiratory illness. Maybe another pointer to it being genetically engineered. Real world viral illnesses dont have those kind of mortality demographics.

Splatt
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Booster shots

Post by Splatt »

Fingal wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:26 pm
Splatt wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:47 am If covid infections balloon again - because we get a vaccine resistant variant - the government will probably lock down. Which nobody wants.
Want is nothing to do with it. Its also got nothing to do with travel.
So we have 2 options. We can take a gamble. We can hope that none of the new variants ever pose a serious threat to vaccine control - and therefore leave the borders totally open. Travel anywhere!
You mean normal life? Exactly what we've always done. A reasonable, sensible assessment of risk as opposed to permanent imprisonment?
But if we do that, we have to assume that every single variant in the world will end up on our ultra-connected doorstep sooner or later.
So what?
You want to play the gamble that none of those variants will breach our vaccine control. From where we're sitting today, that is one stupendously risky strategy.
You seem to think that (i) mutants are only a problem outside and (ii) you can keep 100% biosecurity and imprisonment forever more.

Mutants happen. They'll happen more rapidly once vaccination picks up.

B.1.1.7 evolved here naturally without travel.
B.1.1.7 picked up 484K completely naturally without travel or exposure.
501Y and others have evolved independently countless times globally.
Thats how it works. It happens. Its nothing to do with travel.

You're actually trying to argue that stopping someone going on holiday is going to defeat convergent evolution. Laughable.
The risks are off the scale. But for the sake of the travel industry alone, that's the risk you want to play.
No they aren't. Stop being so utterly hysterical.

We've already reduced SARs2 to Flu like IFRs. This wont change. Totally vaccine evasion to the point it evades T-cells and can start causing serious illness and death is going to take years, if it happens at all.
That can be easily controlled.

Why aren't you arguing for travel bans to stop pandemic Flu - long accepted as the biggest pandemic threat to the country due to its rapid mutants and lethality in certain demographics?
It doesn't mean no more travel, ever. It means restrict travel until we can understand the threat variants present.
You're literally arguing for no more travel ever. We understand the mutation rate. We understand the variant threat. This isn't the first virus we've seen.

You are never ever going to stop natural selection, never going to stop variants and due to the nature of the economy and geography can never ever stop travel 100% to prevent inflow anyway.

You've gone full batshit Sridhar. Arguing for never ending restrictions based purely on the precautionary principle on steroids.
Sharing Boris' fear of ever returning to normality in case a hypothetical at some point arises and causes a perceived threat.
You're ignoring the fact we don't react with this insanity to other viruses that are (i) more transmissible (ii) more rapidly mutating and (iii) more deadly.

Flu has partial vaccine evasion every year or two. Why wasn't there widespread hysteria there?

And thats without the social issue - why are you so keen to imprison a population on this grey, shitty island and deprive them of the only leisure and relaxation they get based purely on your paranoia and fear of normal?

jmc
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:01 am

Re: Booster shots

Post by jmc »

Fingal wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:26 pm
You want to play the gamble that none of those variants will breach our vaccine control. From where we're sitting today, that is one stupendously risky strategy.

The risks are off the scale. But for the sake of the travel industry alone, that's the risk you want to play.

It doesn't mean no more travel, ever. It means restrict travel until we can understand the threat variants present.
SARs Cov2 is just another human-corona virus (HCOV). There are four in general circulation. The most recent entered general circulation, endemic in humans, maybe 130 years ago. The oldest many thousands of years ago. HCOV's spins off variants at an even faster rate than the Influenza virus. Because of the way they work. RNA viruses lead a rather louche existence.

SARs Cov2 is has pretty much the same health risk numbers as the other HCOV's. It makes people sick and kills them at pretty much the same rate. You will have had many HCOV's infections as a kid. Its usually at least two or three a year until your early teens. This is how you body builds its immunity to HCOV and all the variants. As an adult you will usually have at least one or two HCOV infection per decade. Could be a new minor variant, your immunity could have worn off. HCOV immunity seems to have a 8 to 10 year roll-off curve. That really bad cold you had a few years ago, that was probably a HCOV infection.

SARS CoV2 will be no different now that it is the fifth general circulation HCOV. Endemic in humans. Any SARs vaccine will at most give short term protection. Like the flu shot. It will not be like the MMR shot giving lifetime protection or even Tdap shot which is good for at least ten years.

SARs CoV2 will spin off variants at the rate of several major and many minor per year. And every 5 or 10 years one of them will make you sick for a few days. And if you are old and sick or have a very weak immune system or physiology it might even kill you. Just like one of the other four general circulation HCOV's. In the next ten years your risk of getting felled by SARs Cov2 wont be that much greater than from other HCOV's like 229E, OC43, or HKU1.

So if you start thinking of SARs CoV 2 as just another HCOV that might give you a very bad cold (if you are in good health) every now and then you would not be too far wrong. Clinically speaking. Or thinking of the SARs CoV2 vaccine as just like the flu shot. Good for a year at most and it might take the edge of any infection you might get. That would be correct too. Vaccinologically speaking.

Thats how completely bloody insane the current mass hysteria is.

JohnK
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:47 pm

Re: Booster shots

Post by JohnK »

Spot on. The whole idea of it’s nomenclature looks dodgy when you look at the facts, i.e. the term ‘SARS’ seems to be inappropriate for many age groups; it’s not really SARS at all, more like another HCov, which we’re kind of used to, as you describe. Might even be a degree of cross-immunity as well.

Historically, I used to have a lot more ‘common cold’ like problems when I was younger, either because of the work environment, or my diet etc, but it could just be, as you say, that the really is a decade or so variation in our immune capability as well. No firm has succeeded in promoting vaccination against the other HCov’s either. Cheap over-the-counter medication is good enough, most of the time.

Post Reply