Vaccine Certification Restriction of Travel

[Tonali99]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Inject your poultry with antibiotics to keep you safe..
OH Shoot.. we've vaccinated the bugs and antibiotics don't work anymore..
Inject your livestock with steroids and boost your produce by up to 40%.. Shoot up yourself while your at it and become twice the man you were..
Oh Shoot.. Steroids have serious physical and psychological side effects..
All hail Science..

Swing and oops, foul ball.
Viruses and bacteria mutate very quickly, so yes some do become immune.
Anabolic steroids are the ones that can/will do harm. Others are regularly prescribed to treat various illneses or infections such as those related to the skin. Exema or burns. And what treats psoriesis?
As to those pesky insects? Yes there are instances of resistance to insecticides.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Tonali99

Swing and oops, foul ball.
Viruses and bacteria mutate very quickly, so yes some do become immune.
Anabolic steroids are the ones that can/will do harm. Others are regularly prescribed to treat various illneses or infections such as those related to the skin. Exema or burns. And what treats psoriesis?
As to those pesky insects? Yes there are instances of resistance to insecticides.

Never mentioned insects.. Bugs are a colloquism for bacteria and viruses eg.. Damn I got the flu bug

[Mike OReilly]

I think I mentioned this before, but just to restate:

It is true that the current RNA-based vaccines may not produce an immune response that kills the SARS-CoV-2 virus directly. It may, or it may not. We Don't Know yet.

What these vaccines do is create an immune response to the spikes on the SARS-CoV-2 virus. These are used by the virus to enter human cells, so without them the virus cannot get in, and therefore cannot replicate.

It may be that the virus is still present in the host, but unless it can replicate itself using our cells, it will die a natural death, regardless of any direct immune activity. So it dies, but perhaps indirectly.

The more important aspect of all vaccines is that it prevents Covid-19, which is the disease that SARS-CoV-2 causes. Without the disease, the host does not produce all the coughing and sneezing and mucus production which is the primary method for virus spread. If it can't infect other hosts, the virus dies a natural death.


As to the statement about science being the new religion; this demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of what science actually is. Science is not a thing. It's not a cabal, or a group of people. Science is a PROCESS.

Science is a process which continually drives for an improved understanding of the phenomena in question. Unlike self-evident or bestowed knowledge (the faithful call them "truths"), science takes nothing for granted. All truths are contingent on the current best data and understandings. Nothing is necessarily immutable.

Science is conducted by scientists who, like any human, are as flawed as the rest of us. But that is the truly amazing thing about the process of science. It inherently accounts for our human flaws by accepting that nothing is 100% certain. This is in direct contrast to faith-based systems of knowledge peddled by actual priests.

So no... Science is NOT the new religion and scientists are NOT the new high priests.

[Emoyeni]

Well said. I would go a step further and say that if a scientist can demonstrate in a reproducible way that another scientist’s claims are faulty, they get respect and fame amongst scientists (unlike religion where that person would be labeled an apostate) . So there is actually a tremendous incentive for scientists to somehow demonstrate that vaccines are dangerous. The thing is, nobody can do this because vaccines that pass the review of the scientists creating them and the government scientists reviewing them are. SAFE AND EFFECTIVE.

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I think I mentioned this before, but just to restate:

It is true that the current RNA-based vaccines may not produce an immune response that kills the SARS-CoV-2 virus directly. It may, or it may not. We Don't Know yet.

What these vaccines do is create an immune response to the spikes on the SARS-CoV-2 virus. These are used by the virus to enter human cells, so without them the virus cannot get in, and therefore cannot replicate.

It may be that the virus is still present in the host, but unless it can replicate itself using our cells, it will die a natural death, regardless of any direct immune activity. So it dies, but perhaps indirectly.

The more important aspect of all vaccines is that it prevents Covid-19, which is the disease that SARS-CoV-2 causes. Without the disease, the host does not produce all the coughing and sneezing and mucus production which is the primary method for virus spread. If it can't infect other hosts, the virus dies a natural death.


As to the statement about science being the new religion; this demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of what science actually is. Science is not a thing. It's not a cabal, or a group of people. Science is a PROCESS.

Science is a process which continually drives for an improved understanding of the phenomena in question. Unlike self-evident or bestowed knowledge (the faithful call them "truths"), science takes nothing for granted. All truths are contingent on the current best data and understandings. Nothing is necessarily immutable.

Science is conducted by scientists who, like any human, are as flawed as the rest of us. But that is the truly amazing thing about the process of science. It inherently accounts for our human flaws by accepting that nothing is 100% certain. This is in direct contrast to faith-based systems of knowledge peddled by actual priests.

So no... Science is NOT the new religion and scientists are NOT the new high priests.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Emoyeni

.......... if a scientist can demonstrate in a reproducible way that another scientist’s claims are faulty, they get respect and fame amongst scientists .............(

Sadly, this is hardly true at all.
More than likely they would be pushed under a bus. \
Big Science doesn't like whistleblowers.
But I am not going to try to push anyone off of their soapbox on this thread.
Preach on.

[Dsanduril]

Safe and effective is relative. An EUA is more like a civil trial (in the US anyway) - a verdict can be found based on the preponderance of the evidence. Full approval is closer to criminal law - beyond a reasonable doubt. They are different standards that share a lot of common characteristics but are not quite the same.

The preponderance of the current evidence indicates that the two vaccines given EUAs in the US are safe and effective, but they have not (yet) met the full testing requirements for approval. The scientific PROCESS has been deliberately short-circuited - by the very people who designed this particular process - on a risk-adjusted basis.

Even within the community of scientists that developed these vaccines there are still questions about how they actually work. We’ve been so focused on effectiveness (because it’s an emergency) that we’ve bypassed the “how” part of the scientific process. Given the current situation that may be justified, but it should be acknowledged.

Before I get flamed I’m not saying that’s a reason in and of itself to not get vaccinated, just that it is something that should be part of everyone’s own personal risk analysis.

On the basis of the determination by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services on Feb. 4, 2020, that there is a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of United States citizens living abroad, and issued declarations that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of unapproved products, the FDA may issue an EUA to allow unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent COVID-19 when there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.

The issuance of an EUA is different than an FDA approval (licensure) of a vaccine, in that a vaccine available under an EUA is not approved. In determining whether to issue an EUA for a product, the FDA evaluates the available evidence to determine whether the product may be effective and also assesses any known or potential risks and any known or potential benefits. If the product meets the effectiveness standard and the benefit-risk assessment is favorable, the product is made available during the emergency. Once a manufacturer submits an EUA request for a COVID-19 vaccine to the FDA, the agency then evaluates the request and determines whether the relevant statutory criteria are met, taking into account the totality of the scientific evidence about the vaccine that is available to the FDA.
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/pres...n-second-covid

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

The preponderance of the current evidence indicates that the two vaccines given EUAs in the US are safe and effective, but they have not (yet) met the full testing requirements for approval. The scientific PROCESS has been deliberately short-circuited - by the very people who designed this particular process - on a risk-adjusted basis.

Even within the community of scientists that developed these vaccines there are still questions about how they actually work. We’ve been so focused on effectiveness (because it’s an emergency) that we’ve bypassed the “how” part of the scientific process. Given the current situation that may be justified, but it should be acknowledged.

Before I get flamed I’m not saying that’s a reason in and of itself to not get vaccinated, just that it is something that should be part of everyone’s own personal risk analysis.

I agree. And I think your point about the "how" question is well acknowledged in the scientific community (as I outlined).

These vaccines have undergone rigorous testing, including all the normal trial stages. The process has been pushed at break-neck speed, but if one looks at the research and reports, along with the data collected, there are reasonable explanations for how this was achieved.

But the one thing resources and established scientific knowledge can't replicate is time. The major unknown-unknowns have to do with how these vaccines will interact over time. There is NO reason to suspect there could be any issues -- but we don't know what we don't know.

So yes, it is a risk assessment. All the credible evidence indicates these vaccines are safe and effective. But we can't know everything. What we do know for certain is that we are dealing with a very serious pandemic that has disrupted life and commerce. These vaccines, and the ones coming down the pipeline, may be a significant part of the solution.

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by Singularity

You don't seem to appreciate that all vaccines merely reduce symptoms...prevent death...they don't prevent infection. This is what it means to be immune; immunity isn't a force field. What % of action is antibody mediated, what % is cell mediated, and what % is just net effect isn't per se determinable within an individual, though antibody blocking, all else equal, would reduce spreading.

I never suggested that immunizations created a force field. But, a typical vaccine helps our bodies produce antibodies in our systems that target specific pathogens.
Here is an elementary refresher on how antibodies work in the human system. (Hint...antibodies directly target pathogens and destroy them thus preventing the disease from manifesting, and more importantly our immune system "remembers" how and when to create specific antibodies.) Also, "many vaccines prevent transmission."

These vaccines for covid are different from 'traditional' vaccines. They are mRNA vaccines and while not entirely new tech...it is the first time this type of vaccine will be used according to the Harvard Medical School Health Letter.

There are still a lot of unanswered questions (or misinformation) regarding this virus and the overall efficacy of this vaccine as outlined in this editorial in Lancet regarding the mRNA covid vaccines.

IMHO, when wankers scream "science, science, science" it occasionally seems they have less actual facts than those people who are somewhat skeptical. So, I can understand the skepticism (to some degree). (After all, science is based on skepticism otherwise we'd all believe the crap that flies out of anyone's mouth without prejudice.) Of course the opposite is also true in that some people will be harshly critical or deny certain 'truths' based on personal beliefs regardless of the facts.

But, these are unprecedented times for certain, and in order to restore somewhat of a "normal" world order we will have to take unprecedented measures, and it is likely that we (the population as a whole) will continue to need to take additional measures even after the vaccine for some time to come.

I personally do think these vaccines will do much to protect high risk people (I am not overly convinced on it's efficacy on low risk individuals), and will have a positive outcome on combating this pandemic. I also hope that this new mRNA vaccine will help our bodies develop long term antibodies in our systems, and can be used to combat additional illnesses...but that will take years to bear out.

[NorthCoastJoe]

This has been fun reading and educational.

When the Hep-B vaccine first came out I was working as a paramedic, we were first in line for the new vaccine. I am still here and doing well, no problem then.

If you don't want to get the vaccine for COVID, stay home, and don't cause problems for everyone else. Try to be realistic one person out of 1,000,000 has a reaction that is controlled and you are freaked out. The vaccine is safer than the ocean, bay, or your car.

So to be safe, stay home, lock your door, and make sure you can fit under the bed. But there are monsters there too ... I remember from when I was young.

[SalingSue]

As it stands this virus is under a 0.1% morbidity/mortality rate for people in my demographic, however there has been a 3% rate of a major reaction for the vaccinated according to CDC, a reaction that is described as not be able to function in daily life and require medical attention


https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/me...OVID-CLARK.pdf


For me it is more dangerous for me to take the shot than get the sniffles for a week from covid, so that choice is clearly made, now if people want to try to damage my life because of that, I obviously need countermeasures for any attempted attack on my person or way of life.

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by NorthCoastJoe

This has been fun reading and educational.

When the Hep-B vaccine first came out I was working as a paramedic, we were first in line for the new vaccine. I am still here and doing well, no problem then.

If you don't want to get the vaccine for COVID, stay home, and don't cause problems for everyone else. Try to be realistic one person out of 1,000,000 has a reaction that is controlled and you are freaked out. The vaccine is safer than the ocean, bay, or your car.

So to be safe, stay home, lock your door, and make sure you can fit under the bed. But there are monsters there too ... I remember from when I was young.

Soo all vaccines are the same?
you’re a provider, you know better, this cookie cutter approach is one reason why medical blunders are the third leading cause of death in the US.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news...eath_in_the_us


Also if all vaccines were safe, these funds wouldn’t exist.

https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/index.html

It’s really simple, do your own due diligence, weight the likelihood of infection and resulting morbidity & mortality against the possible reactions to the medical procedure.

And you have it backwards, if you are sick stay home just like always, if you are super ill with the 2.5 major co morbidities seen in the vast majority who have a major issue with covid, well stay home if you’re concerned. As for me and the majority of people, I’ll be doing what I was doing before this nonsense and what I’ll be doing long after.

Some shots, meds, etc might make sense for me, but maybe not for you, and vise versa

As a EMT-P you should know this

Right medication
Right dosage
Right patient

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by SalingSue

As it stands this virus is under a 0.1% morbidity/mortality rate for people in my demographic, however there has been a 3% rate of a major reaction for the vaccinated according to CDC, a reaction that is described as not be able to function in daily life and require medical attention

The problem with this analysis is that you’re comparing morbidity with, so far, temporary responses to vaccination. By all reports the bulk of these responses are similar to the disease itself (this in not unexpected with a vaccine) for about a day. The proper comparison would then be that 10-50% of people who get the disease are symptomatic for a period of a week or so. And those same people are definitely carriers and spreaders of the disease. The trade-off then is a 3% likelihood of a day of symptoms vs. a week times the likelihood of getting symptomatic Covid.

[NorthCoastJoe]

I guess COVID is nonsense ...WOW... no further comment needed.

[JamesPNW]

We should not condone or spread misinformation about COVID19 pandemic or its vaccine. There are 305K+ deaths in the US, millions are unemployed because the attitude of we know better and it is a hoax. Yes you have your right not to get vaccinated, but don’t go spreading the freaking virus everywhere and don’t complain countries deny entry. Life is full of risks, sail a tinny boat out in the ocean is very risky activity. People equipped with emergency equipment are like get vaccine. It is just in case of facing emergency or in this case the deadly virus.

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

The problem with this analysis is that you’re comparing morbidity with, so far, temporary responses to vaccination. By all reports the bulk of these responses are similar to the disease itself (this in not unexpected with a vaccine) for about a day. The proper comparison would then be that 10-50% of people who get the disease are symptomatic for a period of a week or so. And those same people are definitely carriers and spreaders of the disease. The trade-off then is a 3% likelihood of a day of symptoms vs. a week times the likelihood of getting symptomatic Covid.

If it was a rash or having the hiccups ok
But not being able to function in daily life and requiring medical treatment, when before I didn’t, that’s a no from me bro lol

Originally Posted by NorthCoastJoe

I guess COVID is nonsense ...WOW... no further comment needed.

Who said that?

No one

Lots think the reaction is nonsense