Earlier quoted context omitted.
That problem will solve itself then.
You could make that argument without needing a vaccine.
Yes, everything is the same without context.
Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
611–620 of 712 posts
Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#612Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#613Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you get to know, at the end of trial, in which group you were?
Not OP but from the reports I have read, people who have been given placebos will be informed if the actual vaccine is found be really effective. This is for ethical concerns (in the sense that it would be unethical to not vaccinate people who have got a placebo if the real vaccine is really effective)
For some history on the matter of ethics in medical research, the 'Tuskegee Experiments' was among the most infamous biomedical research study in U.S. history [0].
Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#614Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm assuming you also don't know if you got the active substance or a placebo? Yep. In the UK, they used an existing, unrelated vaccine with similar side effects as the control so it wasn't obvious which one you got. In some countries and for some of the other vaccine trials, they are just using saline as the control so it seems like a lot of those people would know.
> so it seems like a lot of those people would know. You can tell the difference in getting a vaccine shot and a shot of saline?
I don't get any difference, though I do always get warned about this (I qualify for a free flu jab every year because part of my immune system had cancer when was I was younger)
This year I actually had a moment as I was preparing for bed that night when I went "Oh shit what's this?" because I felt a bump that hadn't been there before on one arm. It was the tiny sticking plaster the nurse applied after the injection to cover the site. That was the first time since leaving the clinic I'd even remembered I got a jab that day. I peeled it off, put it in the waste and went to bed.
A lot of the things that happen are psychosomatic, so those would happen even if it was saline (or, I suppose they might not happen if you believe it was just saline even if it was really the active vaccine) but there are effects above this baseline in some people some of the time.
Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#615Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering all the excluded groups on the trial (page 3, kids, 55+, obese, weak immune system, a lot more), it's a lot of exclusions, how does one get from results on a study like this to declaring the vaccine safe for general use?
Maybe a stupid question, but do we need to vaccinate everyone? I remember reading that heard immunity is 70% or something - so could we get away with leaving the people out that it wasn’t tested on?
i haven't read through all the questions asked here, but yours is perhaps the least stupid
i suspect you may already know the answer to your question; of course not everyone needs to be vaccinated - that's the job of any reasonably healthy immune system and this virus, which has not been properly isolated by the way, and that comes directly from the CDC, is not particularly dangerous, and that comes directly from the WHO
any thinking human being knows that masks are, at best, largely ineffective at preventing transmission, as is "social distancing" - the way governments are handling this "pandemic", which by definition is not a pandemic, is killing far more people and ruining far more lives that the virus ever will
the question then becomes, why? why are we being asked, and compelled in many case, to wear ineffective masks? why are being threatened and arrested in some cases for not distancing when there is no creditable scientific evidence to support that distancing works?
furthermore, the rt-PCR "test" that is used by many labs to diagnose COVID-19 is not a test - it is a procedure designed to amplify a tiny amount of RNA or DNA - it was never designed to test for this or any other virus and it does not produce a binary result, so in the end , we have NO idea how many cases there are, and it gets worse than that because apparently PCR is looking for any corona virus, alive or dead! that means that anyone that's ever had a cold can test positive (along with people that died in motorcycle accidents, fallen down stairs, or got shot in the face apparently)
the number of 'cases' is meaningless and the survival rate is exceedingly high, and if we make an adjustment for the radically inflated number of deaths, it becomes very questionable whether there even is a "novel" corona virus or whether it's the flu
lastly, even if one is not reasonably healthy, or just doesn't wish to spend a lot of time being sick, all that required is high-dose vitamin C along with D3 (and zinc wouldn't hurt) - what's a high dosage? 4 grams+ / hr. for an adult, not that it's critical because no one has ever died from vitamins (minerals is a different story)
READ: Coronavirus (COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2) news and resources – index – 12Bytes.org https://12bytes.org/articles/health/covid-19-coronavirus-inf...
Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#616Earlier quoted context omitted.
if we're back to normalish by spring next year I think that would be a great outcome, if the messaging to the public would be, buckle down until then I think lockdown complaince could go up
I think you're vastly overestimating our capacity to build enough vaccines and distribute them over the world, as well as dealing with those who will refuse to vaccinate. Even if we had a vaccine ready for the roll-out today, I don't see us going back to normalish until late 2021 at earliest. As with any vaccine, you'd need about 80% of the population to vaccinate in order for herd immunity to kick in. I feel like we…
None of the vaccines currently on the table are even remotely good enough for 'back to normalish.' The attack rate for this virus is so high that a vaccine good enough (i.e. multiple 9s effectiveness) to allow 'back to normal' almost certainly isn't possible.
The most we're going to get out of a vaccine is a tool that can be used in conjunction with physical distancing, and masks, to keep the infection rate and hospitalization rate sustainable.
Even with a vaccine, COVID-19 will remain one of the leading causes of death among the sick and elderly. The percentage of chronically ill people who live, and the percentage of people who make it past age 65, will plummet.
Everyone who's alive now will almost certainly need to socially distance (and should wear an N95/KN95 mask in public indoor spaces) for the rest of their lives.
What's happening now is humanity's normal.
Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#617Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe a stupid question, but do we need to vaccinate everyone? I remember reading that heard immunity is 70% or something - so could we get away with leaving the people out that it wasn’t tested on?
i haven't read through all the questions asked here, but yours is perhaps the least stupid i suspect you may already know the answer to your question; of course not everyone needs to be vaccinated - that's the job of any reasonably healthy immune system and this virus, which has not been properly isolated by the way, and that comes directly from the CDC, is not particularly dangerous, and that comes directly from the…
> this "pandemic", which by definition is not a pandemic
> any thinking human being knows that masks are, at best, largely ineffective at preventing transmission, as is "social distancing"
> it becomes very questionable whether there even is a "novel" corona virus or whether it's the flu
You know, I live in Adelaide, where we haven't had a single locally-acquired case in several months. I've been wondering how almost every other city on the planet has been screwing things up so badly when we've not really done all that much apart from having a quick reaction and social distancing appropriately.
My question is now answered: those cities have people like you, willing to spout even the most blatantly abject conspiratorial nonsense for the sake of advertising your own website.
Please show some responsibility for the lives of those around you.
Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#618Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A 50% effective vaccine might be an overall lose - only half are protected but more than that abandon masks and social distancing. I remember a similar argument being used against face masks. (That they are not perfect, and may cause harm by giving false sense of security.) Perhaps we should be more careful about perfect being the enemy of good.
The availability of masks is far higher than vaccines, though. You can order a box of masks on the internet and have them same-day delivered to your home. The scarcity and logistics of delivering a vaccine once it becomes available are both factors that make the effectiveness that much more important.
And the use of both vaccine and masks may also be sufficient to lower the average covid vector just enough to tamp it down.
Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#619Earlier quoted context omitted.
>That problem will solve itself then. At a considerable cost. There's a large number of people for whom the vaccine won't work when it has been taken correctly or who cannot take the vaccine because it will react very badly with their chemotherapy or whatever. This "let Darwin deal with the anti-vaxers" solution, though initially attractive, ends up being sociopathic when you dig into it.
And the alternative is...?
Mandate it, just like the US does currently for child immunizations.
Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young
#620Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the alternative is...?
Mandate it, just like the US does currently for child immunizations.
The US, as a union or the states individually, generally does not mandate child immunizations.
Many states make them (usually with fairly broad exemptions, often including belief-based) requirements for public schools, though.