Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

Robert Wilson said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Johns Hopkins Study: Lockdowns Had ‘Little To No Effect On COVID-19 Mortality’ But Had ‘Devastating’ Effects On Society https://t.co/OYP15xHlaP pic.twitter.com/v5PHUEA5xw

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) February 2, 2022

---

This article deserves its own thread. Remarkable article and surprising

---

What makes it "surprising?"

---

I thought shutting down the economy and isolating would have had a bigger impact on stopping the spread of the virus.
What did you expect?

---

At the beginning they were basically talking about having the same number of people die, but at a slower rate so as not to "overwhelm the medical system."

---

I don't believe that is correct. The models didn't show fewer infections in the long run, but they did show fewer deaths after mitigation because of better health care (i.e. not overwhelming the system).

---

Yes, that makes sense.

---

the initial "14 days to slow the spread" models indeed did show a flatter, longer curve that would have the same number of cases spread out over a short period of time, in order to avoid a steep/high spike that would overwhelm the system.

The mitigation models are what has been used to continue the "14 days to slow the spread" into 700+ days of onerous, ineffective sovereign power intervention into free markets.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf

---

I can't imagine the lockdown measures affected you all that much, considering that most of them ended over a year ago without you noticing. They were always envisaged to last at least several months. "14 days to slow the spread" was a Trump administration catchphrase, not a scientific model.

---

LOL Democrats have wrapped themselves in the flag of science to set themselves above critique, no matter how obviously wrong-headed their policies might be.*

Lockdowns and enduring mitigation policies have destroyed millions of lives. That mine was only affected in ways I could afford is immaterial. I'm not part of "the poor," who always bear the greatest burden of the damage from bad policies. But, unlike you, I do see their pain and am trying to get them some relief while others continue to virtue posture no matter how much collateral damage it causes. (vaxxes and masks in children & public schools being a great current example.)

Many elite institutions , already groaning under the strain of decades of poorly serving society, have fatally damaged themselves, too. Garcetti saying "i didn't exhale" and the gut-gnawing going on at CNN is just the tip of the iceberg. Local govt and national media....making asses of themselves.

*The left doesn't know it yet, but climate change movement is dead in the water. Nobody believes experts anymore. Experts lie at will to push their own agendas. The public is not going to continue to follow along.

---

I can't speak for leftists or Democrats. I do see the pain, and I also see the facts. The two are not mutually exclusive, as many of you seem to believe.

The idea that the right has lost faith in experts as a result of the pandemic is less than honest. I was here when the conversation started a couple of years ago, and you all were howling with resentment and disdain for experts from day one.

---

Some of us understood it was foolish to let purported experts from a narrow field set broad policy that would affect so many things outside of their field. And, of course, the unintended consequences appear to have run roughshod over the intended consequences.

---

Neither of those things happened. Policy was set by a representative government according to established laws. The results were imperfect but beneficial overall.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam: "The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible"

Your goal perhaps, but not Medicine's goal. Herd Immunity has always been the goal of virus experts.

And no, I am not 'substituting' my views, simply reminding you what doctors prior to 2019 said, and will say in future.

It's not that vaccines are a bad idea, it's that so much done, and so much of the way things were forced on people, with so much unnecessary harm, could and should have been different.

---

And you don't get herd immunity just by focusing on the most vulnerable. The whole point of herd immunity is to protect them from disease transmitted by the less vulnerable.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam: "The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible"

Your goal perhaps, but not Medicine's goal. Herd Immunity has always been the goal of virus experts.

And no, I am not 'substituting' my views, simply reminding you what doctors prior to 2019 said, and will say in future.

It's not that vaccines are a bad idea, it's that so much done, and so much of the way things were forced on people, with so much unnecessary harm, could and should have been different.

---

And you don't get herd immunity just by focusing on the most vulnerable. The whole point of herd immunity is to protect them from disease transmitted by the less vulnerable.

---

Still selling the lie that we needed the shut downs, mandates and coercion, I see.

God help you Sam, if you don't wake up even now.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

Quote:

---

Lockdowns and enduring mitigation policies have destroyed millions of lives

---

would you have supported a lock down of patient zero in Wuhan?

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam: "The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible"

Your goal perhaps, but not Medicine's goal. Herd Immunity has always been the goal of virus experts.

And no, I am not 'substituting' my views, simply reminding you what doctors prior to 2019 said, and will say in future.

It's not that vaccines are a bad idea, it's that so much done, and so much of the way things were forced on people, with so much unnecessary harm, could and should have been different.

---

And you don't get herd immunity just by focusing on the most vulnerable. The whole point of herd immunity is to protect them from disease transmitted by the less vulnerable.

---

Still selling the lie that we needed the shut downs, mandates and coercion, I see.

God help you Sam, if you don't wake up even now.

---

Many years ago, I started a long thread about Iraq called "Bush Lied, People Died." The OP included about ten supporting links, none of which you addressed substantively. Toward the end of the thread, you suggested we agree to disagree about Bush lying and said, frankly, that I could probably tell you weren't open to the idea. I respected your honesty at the time. Little did I know it was about the last glimmer of self-awareness I would see from you.

By the time you posted about Covid and said you were "researching" it out of concern for your wife's family in China or some such thing, anyone could tell where that was going. You've been impervious to facts in a way that stands out even on this board. You believe exactly and entirely what you want to believe, and those beliefs don't change no matter what information is put in front of you. You wanted to believe your loved ones were safe. So as predictable as it was that you'd minimize the pandemic after ten deaths, it was every bit as predictable that a million deaths wouldn't change your mind. It's just how you roll.

The real damage is that you and a large part of the American public will face the next challenge even less prepared and less educated than you were two years ago. Yes, our experts made mistakes, mostly in the realm of messaging. That was inevitable in a crisis that was changing and developing every day. But the wallowing in misinformation, conspiracy theories, and perverse denial of the most obvious facts? That's all on you. No one made you do that.

I don't say any of this because I think you're wrong about lockdowns. Reasonable people can disagree on that. Reasonable people can also make their case without appealing to paranoid fantasies about the government or "Big Pharma." If any poor fool was hapless enough to believe your rants and suffer the consequences, that's on you too. Because whether we agree or disagree, everyone has a right to accurate information. Freedom of choice depends on it. That's really all I'm interested in, rather than trying to change anyone's opinions.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

Oldbear83 said:

---

We can always count on quash to fear-monger.

---

Count on you to be triggered by facts.

Quite the rant.

The gist of it is you refuse to admit when you were wrong, Sam, regardless of the cost.

Interesting, though, that you mocked me for doing research about the virus instead of just going along. How big has your idol statue of Fauci become, Sam?

Big enough to ignore the signals when doctors and nurses are fired for not agreeing with Administrators? Big enough to ignore the lies you have been told for so long?

So do masks help?

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

We can always count on quash to fear-monger.

---

Count on you to be somewhat amused by trolls

---

More accurate version

BUbearinARK said:

---

So do masks help?

---

In robberies, almost always.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BUbearinARK said:

---

So do masks help?

---

In robberies, almost always.

---

Only if they are fit-tested n95's tho




Edit: I hear these help with messing with facial recognition

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

The original goalpost was a 50 percent reduction in infections or severe cases. People seem to forget this. Had the vaccines been (only) as effective against alpha as they are against omicron, they would have been considered successful.

D. C. Bear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

The original goalpost was a 50 percent reduction in infections or severe cases. People seem to forget this. Had the vaccines been (only) as effective against alpha as they are against omicron, they would have been considered successful.

---

Not sure how you can say the last sentence. Or did you mean if the vaccines were as successful against Omicron as they were against Alpha they would be deemed successful.? There were breakthrough infections and death from Alpha also, but alpha was a weak mutation strain in the first place.

ATL Bear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

The original goalpost was a 50 percent reduction in infections or severe cases. People seem to forget this. Had the vaccines been (only) as effective against alpha as they are against omicron, they would have been considered successful.

---

Not sure how you can say the last sentence. Or did you mean if the vaccines were as successful against Omicron as they were against Alpha they would be deemed successful.? There were breakthrough infections and death from Alpha also, but alpha was a weak mutation strain in the first place.

---

I can say that because that was literally the FDA's standard for granting emergency use authorization for a COVID vaccine.

D. C. Bear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

The original goalpost was a 50 percent reduction in infections or severe cases. People seem to forget this. Had the vaccines been (only) as effective against alpha as they are against omicron, they would have been considered successful.

---

Not sure how you can say the last sentence. Or did you mean if the vaccines were as successful against Omicron as they were against Alpha they would be deemed successful.? There were breakthrough infections and death from Alpha also, but alpha was a weak mutation strain in the first place.

---

I can say that because that was literally the FDA's standard for granting emergency use authorization for a COVID vaccine.

---

What's your data that it reduces Omicron infection by 50%?

ATL Bear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

The original goalpost was a 50 percent reduction in infections or severe cases. People seem to forget this. Had the vaccines been (only) as effective against alpha as they are against omicron, they would have been considered successful.

---

Not sure how you can say the last sentence. Or did you mean if the vaccines were as successful against Omicron as they were against Alpha they would be deemed successful.? There were breakthrough infections and death from Alpha also, but alpha was a weak mutation strain in the first place.

---

I can say that because that was literally the FDA's standard for granting emergency use authorization for a COVID vaccine.

---

What's your data that it reduces Omicron infection by 50%?

---

Don't have any, but don't need any because the standard to be met was 50 percent reduction in cases OR in severe illness. If it had no effect whatsoever on transmission but reduced severity by 50 percent, it would have met the efficacy requirements for an emergency use authorization.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

I'm not sure what you mean about updated mRNA strands. There is work being done on an updated vaccine, but the existing boosters are nothing but a smaller dose of the original. As for heightened immune defenses wearing off, that's by no means peculiar to the Covid vaccine. Flu vaccines do the same thing.

The goal is always to have the most effective vaccine that we can, but 50% effectiveness was the minimum standard. We've far exceeded that.

I'm all for treatments (if they're not bogus), but monoclonal antibodies are less flexible and more difficult to mass-produce than the vaccines. They also take time and expertise to administer, which ties up resources even in the outpatient setting. And even the most perfect treatment does next to nothing to slow transmission since it's only applied after the fact. For something as transmissible as Covid, the idea of treatments as a main line of defense is a pipe dream.

How many "Sam works for Pfizer" threads do we need?

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

How many "Sam works for Pfizer" threads do we need?

---

Well, after Sam started campaigning to make Fauci "Dear Leader" for the US, then started his well-known "Down With Doctors Who Have Their Own Opinion" web group, The Pfizer guys began to worry he was forgetting his Patron.

So the reminder is kind of a PSA

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

I'm not sure what you mean about updated mRNA strands. There is work being done on an updated vaccine, but the existing boosters are nothing but a smaller dose of the original. As for heightened immune defenses wearing off, that's by no means peculiar to the Covid vaccine. Flu vaccines do the same thing.

The goal is always to have the most effective vaccine that we can, but 50% effectiveness was the minimum standard. We've far exceeded that.

I'm all for treatments (if they're not bogus), but monoclonal antibodies are less flexible and more difficult to mass-produce than the vaccines. They also take time and expertise to administer, which ties up resources even in the outpatient setting. And even the most perfect treatment does next to nothing to slow transmission since it's only applied after the fact. For something as transmissible as Covid, the idea of treatments as a main line of defense is a pipe dream.

---

No, it's not a pipe dream. HIV bent to advancement in anti virals, no reason COVID can't.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

I'm not sure what you mean about updated mRNA strands. There is work being done on an updated vaccine, but the existing boosters are nothing but a smaller dose of the original. As for heightened immune defenses wearing off, that's by no means peculiar to the Covid vaccine. Flu vaccines do the same thing.

The goal is always to have the most effective vaccine that we can, but 50% effectiveness was the minimum standard. We've far exceeded that.

I'm all for treatments (if they're not bogus), but monoclonal antibodies are less flexible and more difficult to mass-produce than the vaccines. They also take time and expertise to administer, which ties up resources even in the outpatient setting. And even the most perfect treatment does next to nothing to slow transmission since it's only applied after the fact. For something as transmissible as Covid, the idea of treatments as a main line of defense is a pipe dream.

---

No, it's not a pipe dream. HIV bent to advancement in anti virals, no reason COVID can't.

---

Thus the qualifier. HIV and Covid are near opposites in terms of transmissibility.

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

I'm not sure what you mean about updated mRNA strands. There is work being done on an updated vaccine, but the existing boosters are nothing but a smaller dose of the original. As for heightened immune defenses wearing off, that's by no means peculiar to the Covid vaccine. Flu vaccines do the same thing.

The goal is always to have the most effective vaccine that we can, but 50% effectiveness was the minimum standard. We've far exceeded that.

I'm all for treatments (if they're not bogus), but monoclonal antibodies are less flexible and more difficult to mass-produce than the vaccines. They also take time and expertise to administer, which ties up resources even in the outpatient setting. And even the most perfect treatment does next to nothing to slow transmission since it's only applied after the fact. For something as transmissible as Covid, the idea of treatments as a main line of defense is a pipe dream.

---

No, it's not a pipe dream. HIV bent to advancement in anti virals, no reason COVID can't.

---

Thus the qualifier. HIV and Covid are near opposites in terms of transmissibility.

---

You'd do better comparing COVID with Influenza.

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

I'm not sure what you mean about updated mRNA strands. There is work being done on an updated vaccine, but the existing boosters are nothing but a smaller dose of the original. As for heightened immune defenses wearing off, that's by no means peculiar to the Covid vaccine. Flu vaccines do the same thing.

The goal is always to have the most effective vaccine that we can, but 50% effectiveness was the minimum standard. We've far exceeded that.

I'm all for treatments (if they're not bogus), but monoclonal antibodies are less flexible and more difficult to mass-produce than the vaccines. They also take time and expertise to administer, which ties up resources even in the outpatient setting. And even the most perfect treatment does next to nothing to slow transmission since it's only applied after the fact. For something as transmissible as Covid, the idea of treatments as a main line of defense is a pipe dream.

---

The pipe dream became mRNA vaccines as a solution for a highly transmissible mutative virus like COVID. It is not simply coincidental that infection and even death has maintained its path while vaccination is at its highest points.

I mention new mRNA strand requirement because current ones are failing with Delta and Omicron because they don't provide cellular instructions to address a mutated spike protein from new variants. Think of it as an ineffective monoclonal antibody. They will have to be adjusted.

As this is a virus that is 99% defeatable through our natural immune system and symptom treatment, treatment is the way forward. We don't worry about infection if we're confident we can treat or heal ourselves back to health. This literally is the argument you make about vaccines now. It's "not as severe", with severe being hospitalization or worse. Whether you think it's a vaccine or a medicine in your early treatment, it doesn't matter. It also ignores the reality that treatments are part of vaccinated individuals, especially in high risk groups, routine of keeping their COVID "non severe".

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

I'm not sure what you mean about updated mRNA strands. There is work being done on an updated vaccine, but the existing boosters are nothing but a smaller dose of the original. As for heightened immune defenses wearing off, that's by no means peculiar to the Covid vaccine. Flu vaccines do the same thing.

The goal is always to have the most effective vaccine that we can, but 50% effectiveness was the minimum standard. We've far exceeded that.

I'm all for treatments (if they're not bogus), but monoclonal antibodies are less flexible and more difficult to mass-produce than the vaccines. They also take time and expertise to administer, which ties up resources even in the outpatient setting. And even the most perfect treatment does next to nothing to slow transmission since it's only applied after the fact. For something as transmissible as Covid, the idea of treatments as a main line of defense is a pipe dream.

---

The pipe dream became mRNA vaccines as a solution for a highly transmissible mutative virus like COVID. It is not simply coincidental that infection and even death has maintained its path while vaccination is at its highest points.

I mention new mRNA strand requirement because current ones are failing with Delta and Omicron because they don't provide cellular instructions to address a mutated spike protein from new variants. Think of it as an ineffective monoclonal antibody. They will have to be adjusted.

As this is a virus that is 99% defeatable through our natural immune system and symptom treatment, treatment is the way forward. We don't worry about infection if we're confident we can treat or heal ourselves back to health. This literally is the argument you make about vaccines now. It's "not as severe", with severe being hospitalization or worse. Whether you think it's a vaccine or a medicine in your early treatment, it doesn't matter. It also ignores the reality that treatments are part of vaccinated individuals, especially in high risk groups, routine of keeping their COVID "non severe".

---

It was still better than 50% against Delta. Think of it as last year's flu vaccine, but twice as good.

99% defeatable sounds great. It's also completely meaningless if hospitals can't handle the other 1%.

"99% defeatable sounds great. It's also completely meaningless if hospitals can't handle the other 1%."

It's completely meaningFUL to those helped.

Just as coercion is meaningful harm to those who lose their jobs, businesses, who are prevented from visiting sick loved ones, who are denied their right to worship at church, who are shut out of public forums simply for having an opinion not in line with the rich and powerful elites.

Oldbear83 said:

---

"99% defeatable sounds great. It's also completely meaningless if hospitals can't handle the other 1%."

It's completely meaningFUL to those helped.

Just as coercion is meaningful harm to those who lose their jobs, businesses, who are prevented from visiting sick loved ones, who are denied their right to worship at church, who are shut out of public forums simply for having an opinion not in line with the rich and powerful elites.

---

And this is why you shouldn't ever let unaccountable government employees dictate policy. Political leaders are responsible for their decisions and they are responsible to act within the law even during a pandemic. This is not China. Many of our politicians seem to have forgotten this.

On the other hand we have those who deny basic facts because they don't like the conclusions that others draw from them.

(1) Vaccines work against COVID! (Yes, they work incredibly well).

(2) If we force everyone to be vaccinated and many fewer people will die. (True, without a doubt).

(3) Therefore, we should force people to be vaccinated.(Absolutely NOT).

You don't have to deny (1) and (2) to reject (3).

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I know this

For all the noise, COVID is a virus, and we know quite a lot about viruses, including coronaviruses.

We have handled prior viruses in sound, rational ways. Identify and immunize the at-risk population, find the most effective treatments for those who get the virus, and make sure containment is focused on the demographics most at risk.

Lockdowns, mandatory mask mandates and telling people they cannot go to church, school or work have always been extreme measures that made no sense for what we know. Silencing doctors and nurses who had direct experience working with COVID patients also made no sense.

Some of us said that from the beginning, and the fear mongers are pretending the government and profiteers did not lie.

The worst damage is that when we next face a medical crisis, the public will remember the lies and not trust the government, even if this time there is reason to do so.

---

You substitute your own wishes for real history. The goal has always been to immunize as many as possible, and the means have been far more draconian at times in our past. Focusing on particular demographic groups is ineffective as well as discriminatory, and it's one of the few things that provoked legitimate wrath from skeptics when it was tried.

---

Vaccinate, not immunize. One of the great failings of the vaccine is a lack of immunity it bestows. And it isn't discriminatory or draconian to target the most vulnerable. We do it with all types of medical and social strategies.

---

That's just not true, or it least it wasn't until Omicron. Vaccines often need updating. These have been hugely successful. But we've been over all that before.

---

Success depends upon the horizon of evaluation. This is why vaccine trials and studies take years. Why Delta and now Omicron are overcoming the vaccine is that we are relying upon lab created mRNA strands that aren't naturally adaptive like human mRNA. Therefore every new mutation requires an updated strand (the boosters). But we aren't evaluating each new form of mRNA we might insert, and we're one year into actual human trials. As any vaccine activates your immune system, your natural defenses are heightened early but wear off. That's as much of a contributor as the efficacy of the mRNA effect. It's why the goal post moved to reduction of severe outcome and not immunity. I know we've been through this before, but I recommend studying how the vaccine works and how SARS-CoV-2 destroys cells. That's why I believe treatments, which can operate better in a real time basis are the real answer not vaccines with this virus, at least for the vast majority of the population.

---

I'm not sure what you mean about updated mRNA strands. There is work being done on an updated vaccine, but the existing boosters are nothing but a smaller dose of the original. As for heightened immune defenses wearing off, that's by no means peculiar to the Covid vaccine. Flu vaccines do the same thing.

The goal is always to have the most effective vaccine that we can, but 50% effectiveness was the minimum standard. We've far exceeded that.

I'm all for treatments (if they're not bogus), but monoclonal antibodies are less flexible and more difficult to mass-produce than the vaccines. They also take time and expertise to administer, which ties up resources even in the outpatient setting. And even the most perfect treatment does next to nothing to slow transmission since it's only applied after the fact. For something as transmissible as Covid, the idea of treatments as a main line of defense is a pipe dream.

---

The pipe dream became mRNA vaccines as a solution for a highly transmissible mutative virus like COVID. It is not simply coincidental that infection and even death has maintained its path while vaccination is at its highest points.

I mention new mRNA strand requirement because current ones are failing with Delta and Omicron because they don't provide cellular instructions to address a mutated spike protein from new variants. Think of it as an ineffective monoclonal antibody. They will have to be adjusted.

As this is a virus that is 99% defeatable through our natural immune system and symptom treatment, treatment is the way forward. We don't worry about infection if we're confident we can treat or heal ourselves back to health. This literally is the argument you make about vaccines now. It's "not as severe", with severe being hospitalization or worse. Whether you think it's a vaccine or a medicine in your early treatment, it doesn't matter. It also ignores the reality that treatments are part of vaccinated individuals, especially in high risk groups, routine of keeping their COVID "non severe".

---

It was still better than 50% against Delta. Think of it as last year's flu vaccine, but twice as good.

99% defeatable sounds great. It's also completely meaningless if hospitals can't handle the other 1%.

---

A lot of assumptions in that 50% with Delta and Omicron. But fortunately the 1% don't show up all at once.