I forget who and what network, but I heard someone say one of the shots gives you a year of IMMUNITY. Can’t believe they didn’t immediately have to retract that. Resistance at best.
|
|
|
|
|
I forget who and what network, but I heard someone say one of the shots gives you a year of IMMUNITY. Can’t believe they didn’t immediately have to retract that. Resistance at best.
Moderna claimed today that their vaccine (2 shots) is good for a year of immunity. What are you getting at?Originally Posted by techman05
Some think the JNJ shot (single shot), which is still in trials, might confer more durable immunity because of the T cell response.
I didn’t think any company claimed immunity. Do any shots provide complete immunity to anything?
Nothing is guaranteed. It is all probability. The data is still being collected since the vaccines are less than a year old.
Moderna obviously felt confidently enough in their data to say today that their vaccine has a year of durable immunity.
No guarantee that this will be good for all mutations, but there is a decent degree of confidence because the vaccines use the entirety of the RNA sequence from the part of the virus that lets it into your cell. Would have to be a substantial mutation of this part of the virus and the mutation would have to still allow the virus to enter the cell to defeat the vaccine. Possible, just not believed to be probable.
To be clear, I don’t think Moderna is claiming that it now works 100% of the time. The previous claim was that it prevents symptoms in 94% of patients. Now they are saying that immunity should last a year.
Which means you will probably need the shots again next year if you get the Moderna one.
The standard flu shot is only good for a year, why would anyone expect the China virus vaccine to be any better? Yes, it is true, the China virus is a corona strain virus, not an influenza strain, and the corona types are not as common nor do they manifest into epidemics nearly as often. There are flu virus strains around us every day and always will be. Thus far, given historic records, the corona viruses tend to lay dormant for decades then Bam! re-emerge with a passion! (passion??) Thus, I suppose the China virus vaccine will afford protection for a year+...and that would be true, regardless, if the corona viruses go dormant for a spell.
But, isn't it curious "the world" has not developed any vaccines for the corona viruses before now. SARS I and MERS were two corona viruses, and actually, now that I think of it, the viruses that cause "the common cold" are also in the corona virus family. Yet...no vaccines. Trump deserves the credit for lighting a fire under pharma to get off their asses and do something... of course removing all that red tape helped!
Naturally, the conspiracy theories are making the rounds. Some of them are doozies and would make a good Netflix series.
Vaccine = permanent Shot = annual
Lots of virus vaccines confer lifetime immunity.
You need flu vaccines yearly because it’s genes mutate regularly defeating flu immunity.
Colds don’t cause your body to generate sufficient antibodies.
Exactly! But the new out front commie Dems will carry out this China virus forever and not ask for, nor even try, to receive retribution from communist China due to Biden and the Dems culpability and planning this virus with the Chinese to win an election.
Well of course the liberal states and cities were 100% wrong per their school systems , students and shutting them down.
Study Shows Transmission of COVID-19 in Schools is “Extremely Rare,” Undercutting Teachers’ Unions Arguments
by Mike Robert Lee
Posted: January 14, 2021
Study Shows Transmission of COVID-19 in Schools is “Extremely Rare,” Undercutting Teachers’ Unions Arguments
A new study found that in-school transmission of COVID-19 between students is “extremely rare,” casting doubt on the claims of teachers unions that have fought to keep schools closed amid the pandemic.
From the Washington Free Beacon:
In a collaborative study between Duke University and the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, researchers discovered that among 11 school districts with nearly 100,000 staff and students, there were no instances of children passing the coronavirus to adults during in-person instruction. Researchers found just 32 cases of either kid-to-kid or adult-to-adult coronavirus transmission over nine weeks.
The study also slammed school policies that ask individuals to self-quarantine if they come within six feet of a person infected with coronavirus for more than 15 minutes, even if both individuals wore masks. The study calls the policy “counter-productive,” as transmission of the coronavirus when properly wearing a mask is “uncommon” in school settings. Researchers also said the policy sends a mixed message to the public on the benefit of face coverings.
The study concluded that “schools can stay open safely in communities with widespread community transmission.”
The peer-reviewed study as a growing body of evidence suggests that school-aged children are less likely to contract COVID-19, and even less likely to fall severely ill from the virus.
One hypothesis for why this may be the case is children are frequently afflicted with the common cold, four of which contain coronaviruses similar to COVID-19. While immunity from colds wanes over time, children are more likely to be recently exposed than adults which may help provide them added protection.
Nevertheless, teachers’ unions across the country have actively resisted returning to the classroom.
More
https://bongino.com/study-shows-tran...ions-arguments
And no comment from those that should admit they were very wrong on this issue?
Typical beginning of the socialist/Commie state. It’s going to be the Hunger Games and Pres. Snow Biden soon. Yes these hybrid socialist/commie Dems are going to play the China flu for everything they can. After all China gave Joe and Hunter Biden permission and money to do whatever it takes to destroy America and Trump. Yes Trump hammered the Chi-cons were it hurt and where they had hurt the USA and that’s trade.
Published 1 hour ago
Charles Barkley says NBA, NFL players should get COVID-19 vaccine first because they pay more taxes
The NBA has said it would not 'jump the line' to get the vaccine
Barkley said during the "NBA on TNT" broadcast that pro athletes should get the first round of the vaccine.
"I think they should let NBA players and coaches all get the vaccine. That’s just my personal opinion. We need 300 million shots. Give some thousand to NBA players … NFL players, hockey players … As much taxes as these players pay, let me repeat that, as much taxes as these players pay, they deserve some preferential treatment," Barkley said.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/charl...layers-vaccine
I used to think Barkley had some reasonable beliefs. The times he made sense may have been an anomaly
Kind of like McCain. The older he got the more batsmit crazy he became.
COVID Lockdowns Have No Clear Benefit vs Other Voluntary Measures, International Study
quote:
A new study evaluating COVID-19 responses around the world found that mandatory lockdown orders early in the pandemic did not provide significantly more benefits to slowing the spread of the disease than other voluntary measures, such as social distancing or travel reduction.quote:Interesting, now that Biden is going to be POTUS, everyone is saying that we need to "open things back up".
The peer reviewed study, which was conducted by a group of Stanford researchers and published in the Wiley Online Library on January 5, analyzed coronavirus case growth in 10 countries in early 2020.
The study compared cases in England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and the U.S. – all countries that implemented mandatory lockdown orders and business closures – to South Korea and Sweden, which implemented less severe, voluntary responses. It aimed to analyze the effect that less restrictive or more restrictive measures had on changing individual behavior and curbing the transmission of the virus.
The researchers used a mathematical model that subtracted "the sum of non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) effects and epidemic dynamics in countries that did not enact more restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions (mrNPIs) from the sum of NPI effects and epidemic dynamics in countries that did."
Newsweek subscription offers >
Using that model, the researchers determined that there is "no clear, significant beneficial effect of [more restrictive measures] on case growth in any country."
"Implementing any NPIs was associated with significant reductions in case growth in 9 out of 10 study countries, including South Korea and Sweden that implemented only lrNPIs [less restrictive NPIs] (Spain had a non-significant effect). After subtracting the epidemic and lrNPI effects, we find no clear, significant beneficial effect of mrNPIs on case growth in any country," the study said.
"We do not question the role of all public health interventions, or of coordinated communications about the epidemic, but we fail to find an additional benefit of stay-at-home orders and business closures," the research added.
The efficacy of lockdown orders has been a hotly debated topic since the start of the pandemic.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
