Does the Covid vaccine even work?

And the conclusion of that study was clear that further testing and booster shots were important as well as social measures. Emphasis is mine.

"Our findings help to explain how and why the delta variant is being transmitted so effectively in populations with high vaccine coverage. Although current vaccines remain effective at preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19, our findings suggest that vaccination alone is not sufficient to prevent all transmission of the delta variant in the household setting, where exposure is close and prolonged. Increasing population immunity via booster programmes and vaccination of teenagers will help to increase the currently limited effect of vaccination on transmission, but our analysis suggests that direct protection of individuals at risk of severe outcomes, via vaccination and non-pharmacological interventions, will remain central to containing the burden of disease caused by the delta variant."

 

Exactly what we would expect. Thank you for sharing.

The anti-vaxx party aren’t taking the stand they are because of the science. Endorsing pseudo-scientific and medical quackery has become a proxy for “owning the libs” and tribe signalling. It’s pathetic, and also indicative of zero civic spirit and Christian charity.

 

There actually is a vaccine developed to protect against delta transmission, it’s in testing right now. It’s also got some other cool innovations, like boosters being administered by a nasal spray yourself, taking pressure off of the healthcare system (queue of course Big Pharma found a way to profit even more off COVID. Welcome to capitalism, still a cool development).

I only mention it because it was developed by my alma mater (the University of Queensland - we also developed the Cervical Cancer vaccine), and I’m considering signing up for clinical trials to test it.

 

That’s really cool! (I should have said “developed and cleared for use”.) The multinational cooperation in the rapid development of these treatments means that some good may come of all this, especially insofar as they can provide a template or blueprint to follow in the event of future pandemics.

 

Excuse me, why do you still call them vaccines, when I've shown that they aren't, by the very definitions in the medical community?

And science is firmly and completely on our side here: none of these vaccines have had any adequate testing on their impact on the human body. We literally have no idea what they're going to do to people. A normal vaccine (ie. an actual vaccine, these are not) takes 5-7 years of testing. These "vaccines" have literally had zero testing. I think the head of Pfizer said recently that once we release these into the general population, then we'll know what their health impacts are going to be.

That's anti-science. People who are advocating forcefully injecting these chemical cocktails into everyone are not "pro-science". Those who have religious fanaticism for these chemical cocktails (ie. not proper vaccines), should understand that they have no scientific basis to stand on.

 

So, let me get this straight: even though they fit the criteria for being vaccines, if we don’t call them “vaccines”, that means they really aren’t vaccines, at least according to you. Sounds like nominalism to me.

Instead of playing these silly word games, it would be much more economical (as well as much healthier) to simply do one’s civic duty for the common good and get the vaccine while encouraging others to do the same. Just a thought. Of course, we all know this isn’t really about the vaccines; they are just a proxy for the venting of anti-government feeling and anger at the economic damage caused by the pandemic itself. The simple truth is that people will eat things, drink things, smoke things, etc., without giving 2 seconds of thought into how much research went into studying the effects of those products on human health, all for the simple reason that nobody is telling them they ought to use those products. Those things didn’t suddenly start to really matter to those people just because we were talking about a vaccine. It’s a proxy for something else entirely, and it’s quite sad, really.

 

Let me try this again:

You said a vaccine is something which has dead bacteria or virus to elicit an immune defense.
I replied with official government statements that the Covid injections are explicitly lacking any dead bacteria or viruses.

The Covid injections do not fit the definition of a vaccine, by your own definition of the term. They're not injecting what you assumed were vaccines into people, simply because they called them vaccines;; they're injecting something else.

 

Perhaps I've forgotten the original cause of this argument, but even if Invictus mis-defined a vaccine, that doesn't mean COVID vaccines aren't vaccines.

A vaccine is a substance that provides immunity against a disease. The COVID vaccine does that, so it's a vaccine. A vaccine that contains a causative agent of the disease is called a "live vaccine", and they are now quite rare. Unless you're an infant or travelling overseas to a country with yellow fever you will probably never get a live vaccine, because synthetic substitutes can be found for almost all diseases (usually from the thing that causes the disease, or a byproduct of the disease) and carry no risk at all of you contracting the actual disease in the process of being vaccinated.

 

vaccine
/ˈvaksiːn,ˈvaksɪn/

noun
noun: vaccine; plural noun: vaccines

1. a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
   "every year the flu vaccine is modified to deal with new strains of the virus"

How COVID-19 vaccines work

How the vaccines work
These vaccines will protect you from getting severely ill or dying if you get COVID-19.

The vaccines train your immune system to recognise and clear out the virus, before it makes you seriously ill. Your body's immune system builds this protection over time.

You are fully protected 7 to 14 days after your second dose.

The virus that causes COVID-19 (called SARS-CoV-2) has spikes of protein on each viral particle. These spike proteins allow the virus to attach to cells and cause disease.

The vaccines help the body to:

• recognise these spike proteins as a threat
• fight the coronavirus that has these proteins.

 

Perhaps you missed the part that I quoted,

Anyway, more science against the Covid vaccine tests:

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1455889872951070721?s=21
“Not a randomized trial. Thus we cannot know how the 3rd dose group differed in variable demographic a priori health features that can only be controlled by randomization. A fatal flaw.”

“And so we don't know. And certainly cannot "follow the science" to policy conclusions.”

“And we can't merely say "this is the best we can do under the circumstances " as scientists when our conclusions are used to drive policy. What's worse than ignorance? Premature and unreliable conclusions wearing the mantle of scientific fact.”

 

The definition has not changed. Perhaps checking the facts before assuming it is all to make money for pharmaceutical companies may be a good thing to do.

Viruses mutate. It is quite common. There were two unusual things about smapox which allowed us to eradicate it. One was that it didn't mutate. If it did a one-off vaccine would not have worked. I'll explain why shortly. The other reason was smallpox infects humans only. Therefore, there was no animal reservoir where it could exist with the possibility of re-infecting humans.

Unlike smallpox, influenza is not caused by a single virus. There are quite a number of different viruses that cause influenza. Also, unlike smallpox the influenza viruses mutate. If you had influenza your immune system would respond to the specific influenza virus that gave you influenza. If exactly the same influenza virus infected you at another time your immune system's response would be so fast that you may not have any illness. However, if that virus had mutated and you were infected with a different variant of it your immune system may not recognise it and would respond as it would to any new pathogen. That response is slower and, therefore, you may have some illness as a result. Indeed, the symptoms we have with influenza are caused by our body's response to its presence rather than directly by the virus itself.

Vaccines aim to stimulate your immune system to respond to a pathogen but without giving you the actual disease. However, because viruses mutate just like natural immunity your immune system may not be primed against variants of a virus for which you have had a vaccine. Unlike smallpox, the influenza viruses mutate. In a way they are always one step ahead of us in the battle. Each year vaccines are developed against a few strains that are predicted to be the main ones which will be prevalent during the coming flu season. We need annual flu vaccines because the viruses mutate. Over time we should become immune to more and more forms of the influenza viruses. However, because they will continue to mutate we will always need vaccines against them.

 

You do still need to be vaccinated. If you had the Delta variant you may have some immunity to it. We are all different. Your immune system may have mounted a good response, or it may not. You may have permanent, long-term or short-term immunity. It does vary from individual to individual. Plus if you were infected by one variant it does not necessarily make you immune to others. You would still be wise to be vaccinated.

 

I admire your fortitude. It seems to me it is like banging one's head against a brick wall. You will note contrary arguments are not based on any science but on twisting words to mean what people would like them to mean and using personal incredulity as if it were a form of evidence.