The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
How Low Should Vaccines Go?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Something Here
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

So far, the covid vaccines are working out about as well as I had hoped for in my December 16, 2020 column “Let’s Be Over and Done in ’21.” We are now up to almost 55% of the population of age 16 and over having received at least one vaccine dose.

These vaccinations of 146 million people, along with the arrival of spring and the sizable share of Americans already infected by the end of the Third Wave of early winter, is paying off. Back in late March it looked like the U.S. might be heading into a Fourth Wave, but since mid-April that fear has fizzled, with cases dropping just about everywhere over the last two weeks except Oregon and Colorado.

Who knows what might happen in terms of weird mutations, but the trend looks good.

In the rest of the world, however, things aren’t going so well in countries with low levels of vaccination, such as India and Brazil.

Lately, I’ve been asked by several young people whether they should get vaccinated. Clearly, vaccines are a smart choice for oldsters like me, but how young do you have to be to make it, all in all, a better idea to skip getting vaccinated?

Here’s a new real world study of American hospitalizations due to covid among age 65+. There was concern when the impressive results of the clinical trials of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines were announced last November that the vaccines wouldn’t work as well on older people because their immune systems are less hair-trigger. While the clinical trials did enroll people over 65, they were somewhat scare on the elderly. But now it looks as if both vaccines are great in the real world at keeping oldsters out of the hospital:

Among the 187 case-patients, 19 (10%) had received at least 1 dose of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine ≥14 days before illness onset (including 18 [10%] who were partially vaccinated and one [0.5%] who was fully vaccinated) compared with 62 (27%) of 230 test-negative controls (including 44 [19%] and 18 [8%] who were partially and fully vaccinated, respectively). Prevalence of receipt of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines was similar (53% and 47%, respectively, among those vaccinated with ≥1 doses). Adjusted VE [vaccine efficacy] for full vaccination using Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine was 94% (95% CI = 49%–99%), and adjusted VE for partial vaccination was 64% (95% CI = 28%–82%) (Figure). There was no significant effect for receiving the first dose of a 2-dose COVID-19 vaccine series within 14 days before illness onset (adjusted VE = 3%, 95% CI = −94%–51%).

In other words, the vaccine efficacy of either the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA vaccines, when fully vaccinated, at keeping Americans at least 65 years of age out of the hospital for covid is a spectacular 94%, just like last year’s clinical trials found for vaccine efficacy at keeping people from developing symptomatic covid. In other words, you are only 6% as likely to wind up in the hospital if you get both doses of Pfizer or Moderna as if you get none.

On the other hand, you aren’t out of the woods yet after just one dose. After two weeks after the first dose but before the second dose, the vaccine efficacy is 64%: i.e., your chance of getting hospitalized for covid if you are at least two weeks out from your first dose but haven’t had your second dose yet is 36%, which is good but not as great as only 6% after the second dose.

Perhaps the mRNA vaccines’ efficacy of just one dose would grow given enough time, but my vague impression from the Israeli data is that the second dose really does help. This is not to say that Britain’s “first doses first” policy was not a clever idea. It may well have led to a more efficient allotment of doses under Winter 2021’s conditions of vaccine scarcity. But now that we have plenty of vaccines, it’s wise to get your second dose.

What about the very young? There are multiple considerations:

– One issue is risk to yourself from covid.

– Another issue is the risk you pose to others. Vaccines appear to somewhat reduce transmissibility of coronavirus, although the effect may not be as great as the self-protection effect. But it’s worth noting that if your local culture is encouraging you to be wary of getting vaccinated, you are probably more likely to infect somebody you know and like because they are also wary of getting vaccinated. So it makes sense to get vaccinated to protect the kind of people you like.

 
Hide 307 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. So it makes sense to get vaccinated to protect the kind of people you like.

    Yes but the downside is that you will be much less likely to transmit Covid-19 to people who you don’t like!

  2. Another issue is the risk you pose to others. Vaccines appear to somewhat reduce transmissibility of coronavirus, although the effect may not be as great as the self-protection effect. But it’s worth noting that if your local culture is encouraging you to be wary of getting vaccinated, you are probably more likely to infect somebody you know and like because they are also wary of getting vaccinated. So it makes sense to get vaccinated to protect the kind of people you like.

    But won’t everyone at serious risk from Covid already have been vaccinated?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  3. @Kent Nationalist

    Not if they are a true believer in the idea that the vaccine is either useless or unnecessary. You need to protect Americans who would generally agree with form their own foolsihness over vaccines.

  4. Giving children or even young people an experimental, unapproved vaccine on the off chance that they may infect someone more vulnerable (who, if they’re oh so concerned about this virus, can take the experimental, unapproved vaccine themselves) is evidence of the mass psychosis that has gripped much of the world for the past fourteen months. I’m sixty-seven and would much rather take my chances with a coronavirus which human immune systems evolved to handle relatively well, than with some concocted gene therapy pushed by people who do not have my best interests at heart.

  5. @Jonathan Mason

    “[T]he downside is that you will be much less likely to transmit Covid-19 to people who you don’t like!”

    True, but you probably spend more time around people you like unless your work at a place like Oberlin College or a UC-campus.

  6. I don’t know. A cousin of my friend, a doctor, got Covid a few days ago. And she was vaccinated in February, Pfizer. Now- something with liver, pneumonia, very weak …

    Good news is she is recovering rather fast.

  7. Spud Boy says:

    “…how young do you have to be to make it, all in all, a better idea to skip getting vaccinated?”

    I’ve been wondering this for months now, and the fact that we don’t have an answer from the “experts” to what appears to be a relatively simple question, by now, is infuriating.

    Joe Rogan raised a shit storm recently when he suggested that children may face a greater risk from the vaccine than from COVID itself.

  8. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:

    And then there’s this


    Which is fine if you’ve been having trouble learning the Jitterbug.

  9. I wish you gave vaxx stats the same diligence you give to sports.

    A query of CDC’s publicly available Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS, available at https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html) shows the following for COVID vaxxes since they started giving the vaxxes in December:

    3,607 deaths
    2,527 life threatening events
    1,675 permanent disabilities
    8,499 hospitalisations
    5,274 ER visits
    107 congenital/birth defects (mostly miscarriages)

    and a number of serious events that with the above approach 24.4k total serious events coinciding with a COVID vaccine. If you count all reported events, they exceed 133k in just five months.

    For comparison purposes, the next most “lethal” vaxx is HIBV, which averages reports of coincidental death of circa 62 per year. Clearly, the COVID vaxxes are not as safe as the official narrative would lead us to believe.

    The other point is that in good years, VAERS submissions are believed to be made in only 1% of cases. Since COVID is a much more political issue, I doubt the reporting is that low, but I’d be surprised if it was much more than 10%, since for every person brave enough or with sufficient knowledge to submit a report (individuals can submit), there are probably several more qualifed to report (medical professionals) who are under pressure to not report.

    So, maybe 3,407 people have “coincidentally” died shortly after getting a COVID vaxx, or maybe 34k. It doesn’t help that a number of “coincidental” deaths are not in VAERS because the death was deemed to be from old age, other morbidities, or even COVID itself rather than attributed to the vaxx.

    We haven’t even gotten into the long term safety, but it can readily be said given recent research that the spike protein that is supposedly the magic of the vaxxes is itself pathological, as it is in cases of the wild virus, that there may be lasting long-term effects from the vaxxes. The difference is that the vaxxes don’t have material simulating the nucleocapsid, which would trigger T-cell and B-cell memory, which provides lasting immunity, but instead rely on the spike protein triggering short-lived antibodies, which is why they say people will need boosters (it’s a feature, not a bug).

    I’m not anti-vaxx, but I am pro safe vaxx, and the jury is still out on all of the COVID vaxxes.

    The best advice I’ve heard is to avoid using the vaxxes on people under 50 in any case, and under 70 in most cases for those in good health.

    If they are pushing it to younger people and children, it’s because they are either trying to cover up their stupidity thus far, or because they are perhaps evil.

  10. Playing their #covidhoax game is foolishness, just like Whites playing the anti-racist game is foolishness.

    Do you really believe globalist tyrants are going to let you have your freedoms back with a 100% vax rate? This is as dumb as letting a vampire lick a paper cut on your finger, trusting it will stop there.

    A covid vaccine–with its own set of downplayed risks–is as needed as water wings and a life preserver worn by an adult soaking his feet in a kiddie pool.

    The global covid mortality rate can never justify the economic and social damage the prison lockdowns have caused, plus whatever unwholesome schemes the tyrants have planned next, shots or not. They can’t let the crisis end, because then lawsuits from health problems wrought by forced mask-wearing begin.

    • Replies: @Alden
  11. This seems to have faded from the memory of everyone, but . . .

    From the day of the announcement of Operation Warp Speed from the White House Press Briefing room until Election Day, we saw a parade of Democrat politicians and various leftist influencers stare into a television camera and proclaim to the world that they would never trust a vaccine developed while Trump was is office.

    That really happened, right? That’s not just my long term memory playing tricks on me, as it sometimes does, right?

    But the “vaccine” in the current “vaccine hesitancy” phenomenon we’re seeing consists of vaccines developed while Trump was in office. That’s also true, right?

    Now, I’m not one to fall for the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, but sometimes the post hoc is in fact propter hoc. Shouldn’t these pols/influencers be asked the same sort of questions posed to Kamala Harris after she agreed to appear on the ticket with the guy she characterized as a dyed-in-the-wool-segregationist? Shouldn’t those pols and celebrities reassure us, like she did, that, ah, that was just politics? It’s the right thing to do.

  12. Ralph L says:

    Once the parents are vaccinated, maybe they should have covid parties for kids like they used to have chicken pox parties (which I’ve only heard of recently). Except, in a few decades, there might be a nasty second affliction like shingles from covid. And the level of fear among younger women at low risk is still sky high.

    • Replies: @Alden
  13. FWIW, my brother-in-law in Romania and his wife have been diagnosed now with COVID-19.

    Their school-aged son, my godson, does not have it.

    They are, to put it simply, sick but fine. You know, kind of like people who have the flu, bro. The only difference seems to be some reduction of the senses of taste and smell, plus a weakness that makes them feel tired just walking from their bedroom to the balcony outside. They have a pulse oximeter, and their oxygen levels have remained normal.

    They are more than a week into it now. Their doctor prescribed vitamins, plus an antibiotic that fights lung infections, plus some handwritten scribble that we haven’t yet been able to translate into English.

    There are rumors that their small city is experiencing a rise in cases and that leaders are covering up the high numbers.

    My brother-in-law’s job takes him all over Europe, and we think that might be why he caught it.

  14. Anon[239] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    No, the main objection I hear is that the vaccine itself may cause problems worse than the disease. See Bret Weinstein and his wife for this paranoid view. Of course there is the opposite view that there is a “Long Covid” that gives you a permanent condition similar to chronic fatigue/chronic Lyme/Morgelons/Gulf War and all those other imaginary diseases that people got before the transgender fad replaced them as the self diagnosis of choice for those with depression/anxiety.

  15. So vaccine damages are irrelevant? What if those numbers eventually top the one percent covid fatality numbers? This is what I truly don’t understand about the “trust the science crowd.” Why don’t the previously healthy people, now damaged, matter to you. Why are you so trusting of the science? Some criminally insane scientist, likely backed by an evil rich man or government created this thing. Yeah, trust those scientists. As someone in the risk group I take my chances with the mengele bug over the mengele vaccine. I also seriously doubt the vaccinated will be protecting me. Seems like transmission isn’t effected one bit by the vaccination. If some scientist are right, prophylactic Ivermectin would do better then the vaccine. Yet Ivermectin backing scientists are silenced. Weird how that works.

    By the way it is starting to look like Drs. Pfizer, Merck, and Fauci were and are far worse monsters then the late Dr Mengele.

    Also I am sorry Steve for this snotty outburst. This is a decades old argument I have had with my science loving family. I tell them follow the money before you get on you Phd/Dr worshipping knees. They too think I am a crank.

    • Replies: @gda53
  16. Anon[378] • Disclaimer says:

    So glad you came out as pro-vaccine. Just got second shot and kicked my butt for 24 hours. Then I read alt right media and felt a fool, or a dupe. Does everything have to be an hysterical 11?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  17. Hans says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Steve, you’ve heard Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi and Michael Yeadon on this thing they are calling a “vaccine”?

    Yeadon is a former chief science officer at Pfizer – https://www.sgtreport.com/2021/04/former-pfizer-chief-science-officer-mike-yeadon-gives-dire-warnings-about-the-cv19-shots/

    Bhakdi is renowned (“a-ward winning”) virologist – https://thehighwire.com/videos/the-biggest-experiment-ever-done/

    • Replies: @gda53
  18. Perhaps the mRNA vaccines’ efficacy of just one dose would grow given enough time, but my vague impression from the Israeli data is that the second dose really does help.

    We know that after a COVID-19 infection over some number of months the body fine tunes its fleet of memory B cells that are poised to make more antibodies if or more likely when you get challenged again. On the other hand based on one chart about the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine cellular immunity that doesn’t use antibodies doesn’t reach hardly as high a level after one big dose vs. two doses of varying ranges including the one they settled on.

    From what I’ve been learning lately, you really want a good cytotoxic T cell AKA CD8+ T cell response, it’s an independent of antibodies recognition system and can serve as a back stop if antibody recognition is subpar or fails. It doesn’t prevent disease like antibodies can by intercepting the viruses before they hijack a cell, instead they recognize hijacked cells and kill them. Lot of people believe this is important in preventing severe disease, and we can see something seems to be doing that for people vaccinated against “classic coronavirus” who get the South African variant, for whom vaccination is “leaky” but it keeps them out of the hospital.

    One other wrinkle to the “how young?” is the possibility that variants will arise that hit the, much, harder thus it’s wise to figure out now how younger populations react to these vaccines, and do we really know whatever morbidity the current circulating strains leave in them? Do we have any good ideas why it’s so age stratified? We see that a lot once a child reaches a certain age, but this goes down to those over twos year of age, there’s a small bump for 1-2 years of age, and a larger one for under 1, but we’re talking about 11 and 45 total children killed by COVID-19 through 2/20/21. The age stratification is remarkable, doesn’t really kick in until say age 17, but we’re still talking very low numbers, one would assume in almost all cases due to existing comorbidities. I’ve crunched the gender divided data from this data set into totals in case anyone’s interested.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Troll: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @Rob
  19. Travis says:

    Healthy people under the age of 45 have no reason to get vaccinated and 70% of Americans over the age of 50 have already been vaccinated.

    The CDC estimates that 120 Million Americans had recovered from Covid-19 by March.
    Imagine if we had focused vaccination on only those without prior infection. We’d likely have already completely vaccinated all willing participants. Natural immunity doesn’t count toward herd immunity anymore. Science, or something.

  20. Bill H. says: • Website

    If a vaccine is 94% successful, it means that 6% of the people who took it still got infected. Since 9.8% of people in the general population before the vaccine was available became infected, this means the vaccine is (theoretically) dropping the infection rate from 9.8% to 6%. This does not strike me as any stunning sort of success.

    The vaccine hustlers also say that, having had Covid-19 and recovered from it, I should get the vaccine and “reduce” my chance of getting Covid-19 again to 6%. That strikes me as counterfactual. According to everything I can determine from the media, if I developed a second case of Covid-19, I would be the first person in the world to have done so. That would seem to make my present chances a whole hell of a lot less than 6%.

  21. You need to protect Americans who would generally agree with form their own foolsihness over vaccines.

    Fascist much?

    You sure protected the shit out of these nuns.

    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/several-nuns-die-after-taking-first-shot-of-covid-vaccine

    • Agree: Adam Smith
    • Replies: @Adam Smith
  22. TTSSYF says:

    I still don’t understand why this vaccine is being pushed on the entire population given a survival rate of over 99%. Why are so many people proudly announcing that they’ve “gotten the vaccine” or have auto-email replies indicating that they are “out of the office this morning because I’m getting vaccinated”. Get vaccinated if you wish, but quit with the bragging about it. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” applies to a whole host of things.

  23. David B says:

    Steve, with all due respect, you are extremely ignorant on the subject of these experimental mRNA “vaccines”. If you are interested in educating yourself, I suggest you start by watching the last eight or ten episodes of the weekly two-hour program streamed every Thursday by Del Bigtree on thehighwire.com, and by reading all Covid-related posts at the Children’s Health Defense website.

    • LOL: Rob
  24. Ok boomer says:

    Thank you Steve are vengeance
    Take the jab
    Eat the bug
    Live in the pod
    Cut off the penis

  25. David B says:

    ….Or read Mike Whitney’s columns on the subject right here on The Unz Review.

  26. If the vaccine is valid, shouldn’t I do the courtesy of allowing others to go first? And if it isn’t… Hurry up and wait.

    I’d trust Pfizer more if their pet doe hadn’t kicked out my radiator in Kalamazoo.

    • Replies: @LabMan
  27. @Steve Sailer

    I’ve been exposed at least twice, self quarantined both times, nothing, no “symptoms whatsoever”. Both my sons have had it. Both asymptomatic.

    WHY am I being forced to take this “experimental” “vaccine”???????

  28. @Steve Sailer

    Useless or unnecessary is relative, of course. I never saw you mention this article, Steve:
    https://www.sovereignman.com/trends/why-the-number-3-may-make-you-rethink-covid-hysteria-29697/

    First, on the reason the vaccines were approved (albeit a week after the election):
    I told you yesterday that the vaccine results are very promising: only 8 people out of 20,033 who received two full doses of the vaccine ended up testing positive for COVID-19.
    And perhaps even better, ZERO out of the 805 subjects over the age 75 (who received the vaccine) tested positive for COVID.

    That’s good news.

    in addition to the people who received the vaccine, another roughly 20,000 people received a placebo.
    …162 of them expressed symptoms of acute respiratory illness and tested positive for COVID-19 during the evaluation period.

    Well, that’s interesting, especially since the sample size and controls made this the most rigorous source of data on COVID.

    The article goes on:
    out of those 162 in the placebo group who tested positive for Covid, THREE of them had ‘severe’ Covid. And only one of them was hospitalized.
    (The study also clearly defines ‘severe’ Covid by a quantitative measurement of oxygen saturation. So there was no subjectivity involved.)
    So from the roughly 20,000 participants who did NOT receive the vaccine, 162 (0.8%) tested positive for COVID-19 during the evaluation period. And THREE (1.9% of the positive tests) had ‘severe’ Covid. [see page 30 of the report]
    Remember– this was a BIG test. Tens of thousands of people, from all walks of life, under uniform research conditions. So this is pretty pristine data.
    Yet the numbers show that 98% of the people who tested positive for Covid during the evaluation period had a mild case.

    If we can trust the science that showed that the mRNA therapy was “safe and effective,” why should we not also trust the science that showed that COVID isn’t much to worry about? That’s the author’s point.

    I’m glad to see you raise the issue. Rather than inject the entire populace with mRNA gene therapy, let’s find the people who actually benefit from it. Elderly seem like great candidates. People south of 30 should probably get COVID and avoid the mRNA gene therapy. In between is where the media, and you, could be doing some good work.

  29. Rob says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    One nice thing about CD8 cells is that a lot more of the virus is visible to them. Potentially effective antibodies bind the solvent-exposed surface of viral proteins. Of those, not all antibodies are neutralizing, though non-neutralizing ones can certainly be effective. MHC present peptides for killer T cells from lots of proteins, including those buried in the spike, hidden in the capsid…

    A virus will have more trouble evolving around broad cell-mediated immunity than it will antibodies. But Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccines only covers part of the spike protein.

    This* paper about trying to reduce the antigenicity of a protein found that there were not all that many places where antibodies bound. Though they did not try every antibody, and there might be antibodies that work well enough in vivo, but are not good enough to make effective monoclonal antibodies. Other work has shown that, at least for linear epitopes, most people make antibodies to the same peptides. Hopefully the COVID vaccines include several hotspots.

    Personally, I am a big fan of live-attenuated vaccines, but the mRNA ones sure came fast, and we don’t have a plug and play format for LAVs. That is why we need prototype vaccines for one of every kind of virus. Like how other alphaviruses can be plugged into the yellow fever.

    On the UK, it would have been nice for Pfizer and Moderna to include single shot recipients for longer than a few weeks. Is the 50-60% protection still around in a month? How about two? Especially with the new Americans, i will bet that a lot of people only get one shot, space the second, or can’t get a ride, or…

    I wonder, if back when vaccines were the hottest thing in biotech, and people loved getting them, and they didn’t take 10-20 years to get approved, if they had had DNA tech, and could have sequenced the eleventy vermillion cold viruses, would kids be getting, like five shots for 25 viruses a shot? There must be some limit on combination vaccines, but maybe they are really high?

    * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2757538/

    • Thanks: That Would Be Telling
  30. Put aside for a moment the pro- vs anti-vaccine arguments. The big picture here is very interesting.
    1. Normally counter-official-narrative sources like iSteve, Ron Unz and MoonofAlabama went full-retard on the pro-vaccine propaganda.
    2. The official narrative sources like Facebook and Youtube adopted the risky strategy of censoring anti-vaccine opinion. This is risky because it lends credibility to the other side.
    3. Now there’s a big push on to lower the age of vaccination. This is difficult to put over even on the logic-impaired West, since children don’t suffer from covid and they admit vaccination doesn’t prevent the vaccinated person spreading covid.
    What are the implications of all this?
    Firstly I would argue you must put aside the normal human impulse to assume the authorities are benevolent. Just the way diseases of civilization are handled should overcome that tendency.
    One implication is that our rulers really, really want vaccination of the masses. But why? It’s not because they care about our health, so why is it? For money? It’s doubtful the profits of big pharma justify the losses of every other industry.
    Another implication is that the counter narrative like iSteve etc is just another department of the matrix-like control regime.
    Please think about what the goal here might be.

  31. Clyde says:

    mRNA jabs?
    go right ahead, ye fags
    take them vax
    with minimal facts
    In 6 months let me know
    Which way the Weatherman’s wind blows
    Sheeple
    In mighty Joe’s Blight House
    You have your weather blight man

    Joe will tax you trillions and
    generate the same
    Via Fed Reserve’s pump an dumping
    At a zero rate to keep
    The Ship of state afloat

    In the end
    Your real tax shall be anarchy
    Some call this taking your equity
    They will grab and take yours
    They the D.E.I
    They out to make their big scores
    By taking yo house
    You no good whitey louse

  32. anonymous[888] • Disclaimer says:

    Learning teamwork in the US Army

  33. There’s been a lot of discussion in and under other articles about the meaningfulness of the efficacy rate, including:

    In the biggest clinical trial to date (Pfizer NCT04368728) some 99.96% of the 18,198 vaccinated participants didn’t develop COVID-19 symptoms, whereas 99.12% of the 18,325 un-vaccinated participants didn’t develop COVID-19 symptoms. Pfizer’s acclaimed vaccine, despite assessment of 95.03% efficacy (a measure of relative rather than absolute risk), thus made a difference of just 0.84% within the study population.

    1. Can anyone refute the data?

    2. If not, then isn’t relying on the efficacy rate to inform a decision without understanding the distinction between relative and absolute risks — i.e., that there’s less than 1% chance of hospitalization with or without the shots — “foolish”?

  34. JimDandy says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Young, healthy, unvaccinated people with virtually no chance of dying from Covid need to protect other young, healthy, unvaccinated people with virtually no chance of dying from Covid?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  35. J.Ross says:

    There has been massive unprecedented lying through this whole thing, as well as censorship because I guess the lying didn’t work, and that is reason enough to distrust “science.” Science doesn’t work amid censorship because it requires the availability of information to have any meaning. By complete coincidence this is accompanied by an explosion in tyranny and oppression following unbelievable election results made possible through new procedures which had been rejected without the emergency. Getting the vaccine is not just unnecessary because of the survival rate, or the availability of medicines, or fears about the effects: it is unnecessary because it will not change anything.

  36. @Steve Sailer

    Uh, Steve, useless is the same as unnecessary. You’re (intentionally?) leaving out the main reason. Sometimes your Boomerism gets the best of you.

    When people complain about Boomers, this is what they’re talking about:

    In some ways y’all are a different species, or in your lack of care (in some cases open malevolence) for your young not even a species at all.

  37. Mike Tre says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Projection. You are the zealot concerning this topic, not the other way around.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  38. @TomSchmidt

    First, on the reason the vaccines were approved (albeit a week after the election):

    Pfizer announced the efficacy after the election, and that was deliberate as has been extensively discussed here. They had to wait until November 20th to have enough safety data to make an application to the FDA for an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), and didn’t get one until until December 11th.

    [Lots of correct by my memory quotes from the EUA application materials]

    Remember– this was a BIG test. Tens of thousands of people, from all walks of life, under uniform research conditions. So this is pretty pristine data.
    Yet the numbers show that 98% of the people who tested positive for Covid during the evaluation period had a mild case.

    “Mild,” no hospitalization survives 30 days cases turn out to have significant morbidity and delayed mortality in a Veterans Health Administration data set that’s much bigger. Although weighted towards the older, of the 70K who got “mild” cases the average age was 60 and only 1/4 were 41 or younger.

    If we can trust the science that showed that the mRNA therapy was “safe and effective,” why should we not also trust the science that showed that COVID isn’t much to worry about? That’s the author’s point.

    The “science” as of mid-November is all but irrelevant five months later after the US has administered 129 million Pfizer/BioNTech and 106 million Moderna doses, 52/43 million complete set of two doses, plus see Israel etc. We have a much better idea of these vaccines safety and efficacy. That you insist on calling them gene therapy shows you at best don’t actually understand the science involved that you claim to be basing your advise on. For example, all “active” vaccine like attenuated live virus and the new (only tested in humans for five years) viral vector ones for COVID-19 are means to the end of arranging for mRNA to create viral proteins inside of cells to closely mimic a real infection and invoke a full immune system response.

    All proteins are made through the DNA->mRNA->protein path, there’s nothing exotic about mRNA. Not sure which author you’re referring to, but he’s a complete idiot if as you portray him he has no concern for COVID-19 morbidity and as mentioned above delayed mortality. Seeing as how it’s vascular while being transmitted by respiration.

    This is not a disease you want to get and take a chance on!!! And we must use Phase IV up to date rather than five month old data to make estimates about individual risk/reward profiles, and those of us who aren’t sociopaths need to consider herd immunity in both small and large scales. I would hope most of us would be … unhappy if we killed grandmother by neglecting to get a vaccine that at last count seems to be quite safe.

    There’s also the known unknown of what variants might do to younger populations. I wouldn’t advise getting a COVID-19 vaccine based on that alone, but it should add a bit of weight in favor of getting them.

  39. @Steve Sailer

    I agree with this to an extent–and there are also those who cannot get the vaccine but want to because of allergies or whatever–but every drug has a side-effects and the long-term side-effects of MRA vaccines in humans are unknown, so, young healthy people might be making the right choice by not getting vaccinated.

  40. Fail completely to see the point of vaccinating young people, unless they are immune-compromised in some way.

    We started with “we must protect the old!” meaning granny and grandpa. No one mentioned jabbing the grandkids.

    Well, we’re well on the way to doing that, not only granny and grandpa but 50 and 60-somethings.

    What’s the argument for going further down the age scales? A very few young people will get seriously ill, but a very few young people get ill with other things.

    If we want herd immunity, we should let the young get it, because few will be ill and very few will be seriously ill. Why jab the entire population with an experimental “vaccine” (it isn’t actually a vaccine cos you can still get infected)?

    On this topic, Dominic Cummings’ blog, March 4 2019. His blog is like Sailer meets Peter Thiel without the HBD stuff, other than that Dom is definitely looking for the smart fraction audience.

    https://dominiccummings.com/2019/03/04/the-most-secure-bio-labs-routinely-make-errors-that-could-cause-a-global-pandemic-are-about-to-re-start-experiments-on-pathogens-engineered-to-make-them-mammalian-airborne-transmissible/

    “The most secure bio-labs routinely make errors that could cause a global pandemic & are about to re-start experiments on pathogens engineered to make them mammalian-airborne-transmissible”

    In UK politics, Dom was #1 target when he was Boris Johnson’s right hand man, simply because he was so effective. Alas, they got at him* and he’s outside the tent. I don’t think he’s actually pissing in, but he has even more enemies than Boris and he’s being briefed against by Boris’ new team. He’s made one statement denying the briefings and that’s been used in the media as “Dom’s War On Boris”.

    It’s all a bit like Trump and Steven Miller, though IMHO Dom’s much more of a technocrat than SM. Lee Kuan Yew would have loved Dom.

    * seemingly by friends of Boris’s new wife/doxy, who also seems responsible for the kerfuffle over the cost of the fixtures and fittings in Number Ten.

  41. Peterike says:

    The fact remains that 500,000 deaths is a meaningless blip. Without the panic, 99% of you wouldn’t even have noticed anything different. Yet the harm from our useless “interventions” impacts many millions, and will have negative effects for years. That’s your “long term Covid.” And let’s not forget the political fallout, which will likely ruin the nation entirely.

    Now even more absurdly we are panicking over 200,000 deaths in India, of all places. It’s just hysterically morbid.

    Oh and guess what. The PCR threshold for testing for “re-infection” post vaccine is 28. Yes, 28. So after a year of bullshit numbers based on wildly inaccurate PCR testing levels, we’re suddenly dropping the threshold to ensure the vaccine “works.” I’m sure it will. But then most of the previous “cases” were never cases at all.

    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
  42. The vaccines make sense for people over 60. However, we do not know the longer term impact of the vaccines, especially as to how it could impact pregnancies. We do not know if there will be a long term auto immune disease response to the vaccines.

    The prudent response would be not to inject all of your population with an experimental mRNA vaccine.

  43. I would certainly agree that oldsters, fatties, and the sickly should be getting the jab. But this is not going to be over and done in 21. Israel and the UK have already purchased third doses for autumn 21. Afterwards this vaccine will become at least an annual and likely a semi-annual event. The coalition of old, fat, and sick have not much choice in the matter.

    But there will soon emerge a sort of vaccine cold war between the vaccinated and those who are not vaccinated. As a cute racial aside, I would estimate that nearly all of the global population that is currently vaccinated is white or Asian and conversely, 90% of the global unvaccinated are non-white. Wokesters tend to be white and pro-vaccination and so they will probably not notice this racial split.

    In any case, there is little question that a large percentage of the global population will remain unvaccinated. With 7 Billion or so people, the vaccine industrial complex will have to produce 28 billion doses a year to keep the entire globe vaccinated but in terms of logistics, many 3rd world nations do not have the sovereign reach to carry out mass vaccinations. Not to mention popular vaccination resistance.

    The Covid vaccines are “leaky” in that they reduce symptoms but not infection or transmission and this could drive the evolution of increased rates of pathogen-inflicted damage, or virulence. Leaky vaccines against Marek’s disease in chickens have been shown to result if far more virelent strains that do not impact much vaccinated chickens but quickly genocide unvaccinated chickens. With Covid though we will have the unvaccinated population side by side with the vaccinated, and the unvaccinated will also be producing mutations of Covid. Only time will tell whose mutations wipe out whom.

    • Replies: @Grumpy
    , @Ben Kurtz
  44. Say no to drugs, except when we tell you otherwise.

    It’s really something how the gov completely destroys huge swaths of livelihoods; and third world villages.

    Outside of those in its inner circle, the government hates people.

    • Replies: @res
  45. LabMan says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    “shouldn’t I do the courtesy of allowing others to go first?”

    They have done that now. People I know say they can sign up to get a vaccine and get it the next day now.

    My wife and I waited for 50 million Americans or so to get it first, and it’s nice knowing others had very few issues. It sure feels good to now having gotten both vaccines. Yesterday was 2 weeks since my second shot – and I feel free again!

    • Replies: @TTSSYF
  46. Jack D says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I wish them a speedy recovery. For non-obese people in good health under age 50, the risk of serious illness or death is fairly small (and the younger you are the smaller the risk – for most little kids it’s like a common cold or even asymptomatic). If your immune system is in good shape then it is a flu like illness but not a killer.

    Still, it’s better to skip it altogether by getting the vaccine. Not everyone’s immune system is in top athletic form. Even if yours is, you don’t want to go spreading it to other people.

    • Thanks: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @epebble
    , @YetAnotherAnon
  47. Jack D says:
    @clifford brown

    If you let your imagination run wild, the vaccine can have all sorts of long term side effects – it can turn you gay! Your children will be born with two heads! (We don’t know for sure that it DOESN’T, do we now?) Back in the real world, it’s highly unlikely.

  48. vhrm says:

    – Another issue is the risk you pose to others. Vaccines appear to somewhat reduce transmissibility of coronavirus, although the effect may not be as great as the self-protection effect. But it’s worth noting that if your local culture is encouraging you to be wary of getting vaccinated, you are probably more likely to infect somebody you know and like because they are also wary of getting vaccinated. So it makes sense to get vaccinated to protect the kind of people you like.

    An argument I’ve also found moderately compelling is that every occurrence of the virus being replicated in humans has the chance of making it more virulent in some way or another.

    That is, there is value in reducing even mild and asymptomatic cases.

    Having the vaccine means that you likely make many fewer virus particles than you otherwise would do so in addition to lowering the risk of passing it on you lower the risk that a better virus is created by you or by someone you passed it on to.

    (Note: I’m still against the liberty trampling shutdown and hope that Gov. Newsom gets removed for it in the recall.

    Governor Caitlyn Jenner seems only fitting though some will find her whiteness to be a problem, no doubt)

    • Replies: @Sparkylyle92
    , @Marquis
  49. @clifford brown

    “We do not know if there will be a long term auto immune disease response to the vaccines”

    I’m an ape so I barely understand this stuff. From what I’ve gathered from non-apes — epidemiologists and evolutionary biologists who are very pro vaccine but hesitant on mRNA — the long-term consequences for immune systems is an unknown at this point. Those with autoimmune disease may want to think clearly before getting the jab. The pandemic has been politicized from day one; and the Woke response from the medical establishment, particularly public sector, does not lend confidence. I think Steve’s nutshell is correct: oldsters with diminished immune systems will probably benefit from the vaccines whilst youngsters and middle age simians like me with already hyper-active immune systems should think about it.

  50. @clifford brown

    The vaccines make sense for people over 60. However, we do not know the longer term impact of the vaccines, especially as to how it could impact pregnancies. We do not know if there will be a long term auto immune disease response to the vaccines.

    It’s incumbent on fearmongers like yourself to explain how the vaccines are uniquely dangerous compared to getting uncontrolled infections from the disease, like the original alarm raised about pregnancies/female fertility which would apply equally to getting the disease. There are no safe options!

    Long term effects of both we by definition can’t know, we learn it a day at at time. But we can make judgements based on what we do know, both about the disease, and the six plus months of experience we have with the vaccines (more for mRNA Phase III trial participants, now five months for Phase IV giving them to general populations under the FDA’s EUAs). See my comments above for why you should think twice before assuming the disease is anything like the option of getting a vaccine.

    • Agree: Jack D, reiner Tor
  51. utu says:

    The number of authors (44) is greater than the number (19) of fully vaccinated patients in their sample.

    The vaccine efficacy of VE=94% can’t be taken seriously from one fully vaccinated patients who was hospitalized with covid and 18 fully vaccinated hospitalized who did get sick with something else.

    When they trimmed their initial sample of N=489 patients (with and w/o covid) to N=417 the criteria they used for trimming determined the outcome. Just one additional vaccinated sick patient who would pass their filter would have changed the result from VE=94% to VE=87.5%.

    Their VE=64% for partially vaccinated, as I see their numbers, seems to be too high.

    Using hospitalized patients who were not covid infected as the control sample may raise several issues. They use that group because they had it in the hospitals (after all authors were hospital doctors who had access to such data) to determine vaccination rate in the general population. But if vaccinations in some case were the reason people were hospitalized the VE would be overestimated. This statement by Mr. Sailer

    In other words, you are only 6% as likely to wind up in the hospital if you get both doses of Pfizer or Moderna as if you get none.

    needs to be qualified because it is based on control sample of people who are already hospitalized.

    The patients used to construct the two samples were arriving to hospital over three months period: from Jan 1 to March 26, when the vaccination rate was rapidly changing from 1% to 27%. The result of VE=94% solely depends on that one patient that was fully vaccinated and got sick. When did he arrive at the hospital? If he arrived when vaccination rate was 10% or when it was 25% significantly different VE values would be implied.

    • Agree: Yancey Ward
    • Thanks: RSDB
  52. @Jack D

    Define “highly unlikely”. Pharmaceutical companies bringing forth new vaccines try to define this number with safety studies that run at least two years before going to market. This time we are inoculating billions of people and doing the follow up safety studies as post-market surveillance.

  53. I wonder whether vaccinated people might in some cases be even more dangerous to unvaccinated people. What if vaccination makes your immune able to suppress the virus enough to make you asymptomatic or reduces symptoms very much to e.g. only mild sore throat or something like that but not enough to be not infectious? In such a case the lack of symptoms might lead to more contacts than those which could be expected with contacts. This could be more an issue with the less effective vaccines, not with mRNA vaccines. Regardless of such individual cases over all vaccination obviously reduces the risk to infect others.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  54. @Jack D

    “it can turn you gay”

    I’ve been turned gay by reading your comments. I’d block your rather lengthy and voluminous correspondences but clicking the commenters to ignore button is the gayest feature on this website.

    • LOL: BenKenobi
  55. @TomSchmidt

    People south of 30 should probably get COVID and avoid the mRNA gene therapy.

    If you want to get covid rather than the vaccine because of some Scare Words you read on the internet(rather than any actual evidence the vaccine is dangerous) we could arrange that inside a variolation hotel that’s surrounded by barbed wire and guard towers.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    , @TomSchmidt
  56. @That Would Be Telling

    That you insist on calling them gene therapy shows you at best don’t actually understand the science involved that you claim to be basing your advise on.

    Well, no, it means I looked up what the definition of a vaccine is:
    https://www.medicinenet.com/vaccination/definition.htm

    Vaccination: Injection of a killed microbe in order to stimulate the immune system against the microbe, thereby preventing disease. Vaccinations, or immunizations, work by stimulating the immune system, the natural disease-fighting system of the body. The healthy immune system is able to recognize invading bacteria and viruses and produce substances (antibodies) to destroy or disable them. Immunizations prepare the immune system to ward off a disease. To immunize against viral diseases, the virus used in the vaccine has been weakened or killed.

    Care to accept the proper term? Or does Pfizer and/or Moderna use a killed or weakened virus?

    Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg. Unless you’re Antifa, or another semantic game player.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @JR Ewing
    , @vhrm
  57. TWS says:

    If you’re male between eighteen and seventy or so, your chance of death is infinitesimal. My organization has had about three thousand confirmed cases, well over eighty percent were asymptomatic, of all of them there were two deaths. Our numbers can’t be fudged hidden, or mislabeled. We are under strict scrutiny by the state and feds.

    Broad sweeps of mandatory testing, monitoring, and quarantine are the order of the day. No man is outside our monitoring and if they become covid positive we keep them until they are not positive and have no symptoms.

    This is less deadly than H1N1 than God, but the government is using it for social control. My numbers are solid. I’ve seen them with mark-one eyeballs. However my numbers include men mostly and very few women. No kids under eighteen and few over seventy-ish.

  58. RVS says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    You are wrong. These ‘vaccines’ are exotic. When a person becomes sick with Covid19 naturally, the pathogen enters his body via the lungs. The virus first multiplies in the lungs. The immune system attacks the virus in the lungs. Whereas, when a person is injected with a mRNA vaccine, the nanoparticles may enter the blood stream and trigger antigen production anywhere in the body, such as the brain or blood vessels. Antigen production in the lungs leads to a normal immune response. Antigen production in the brain or blood vessels can lead to an abnormal immune response ending in blood clots and neurological damage. The thousands of deaths reported to VAERS, and the dozens of young women who report seizures, is evidence that an abnormal immune response is happening in some people. These mRNA ‘vaccines’ are a gene therapy, not a vaccine. The public is owed full disclosure of potential risks and benefits to make an individual informed decision.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  59. @Desiderius

    Oh noes, us young people are being asked to take a shot in the arm! This is worse than the hall of cost!

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    , @Desiderius
  60. While Covid is a 2/10 disease in terms of danger to the young, the vaccine is a 0.1/10 in potential side effects.

    If you’re healthy enough to tolerate Covid then you are certainly healthy enough to tolerate the vaccine. The oldsters around you will appreciate it, and, if you’re honest about your anxieties, you will (at least) appreciate a greater degree of sureness that you won’t be infecting them

    • Agree: New Dealer
  61. Efficacy of 64% after the first dose does not mean you have a 36% risk of being hospitalized with COVID. unvaccinated people only have a 9% risk of contracting COVID and of those less than 2% will be hospitalized with COVID. This is in the Pfizer study of unvaccinated placebo volunteers.

    But for people under 40 the risk of being hospitalized after contracting COVID is less than 0.5%. The risk of them dying of COVID is 0.003% according to the CDC

    45% of Americans under the age of 40 already have natural immunity, because their immune system already defeated Coronavirus, another 20% have been vaccinated.

    There is no reason for healthy people under the age of 40 to get vaccinated. 80% of those over the age of 60 have been vaccinated and of the 20% not vaccinate 25% of them have acquired immunity from a previous CV infection.

  62. @Jack D

    Or,it could be the leading cause of deaths from vaccines in 2021 (taken from the VAERS dataset), and even worse going forward.

    • Replies: @dcthrowback
  63. Jack D says:
    @TomSchmidt

    A poorly worded definition of “vaccine” on a website for laymen is not definitive. In fact it’s silly to think that it is. But if you want to go by dictionary definitions, here is Merriam-Webster’s:

    vac·​cine | \ vak-ˈsēn , ˈvak-ˌsēn \
    Definition of vaccine
    : a preparation that is administered (as by injection) to stimulate the body’s immune response against a specific infectious disease:
    a: an antigenic preparation of a typically inactivated or attenuated (see ATTENUATED sense 2) pathogenic agent (such as a bacterium or virus) or one of its components or products (such as a protein or toxin)
    b: a preparation of genetic material (such as a strand of synthesized messenger RNA) that is used by the cells of the body to produce an antigenic substance (such as a fragment of virus spike protein)

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine

    Obviously, Webster has updated their definition to take into account developments in technology while Medicinenet.com has not.

    Here is a more nuanced article that discusses existing and emerging vaccine technologies:

    https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.583077/full#:~:text=Besides%20the%20traditional%20inactivated%20or,existing%20challenges%20of%20vaccine%20development.

    As Webster’s say, broadly speaking a vaccine is something that stimulates an immune response. The exact mechanism (whether a live or killed virus or mRNA or whatever) is not really important. What is important is the fact that the vaccine provokes an immune response (while not giving you the disease itself).

    • Thanks: New Dealer
    • Replies: @dcthrowback
    , @TomSchmidt
  64. @TomSchmidt

    Trusting the same people who said every death w/ COVID was the cause (line one on death certificates as protocol no matter what!!! – change in march 2020 CDC guidelines) of death while dwelling on 570K deaths like a CNN ticker while also simultaneously trusting those same folks who are wholly uninterested in the documentation, tracking and publication of vaccine related side effects is really something, but our #teamVIRUS bros in the chat are just those folks.

    Sad really.

    • Agree: TTSSYF, J.Ross
    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    , @HA
  65. anon[327] • Disclaimer says:

    How young do you want zombies to start appearing?

  66. @Jack D

    Vaccines are supposed to provide immunity. That is how they are known to millions of Americans for decades. I guess like 9/11, COVID changed everything – including the ability for us to tell the truth. Makes a lot of sense…in every crisis, opportunity, right? Gosh darn it, the parallels (including for a certain subset of corporate criminals to get rich and enrich their cronies) are really starting to become obvious.

    These “vaccines” provide no such immunity, as it is known to millions of people. Snowing the American people – well done. (WMD anyone?) Updating the definitions of vaccines online to confuse millions of people is evil, but hey, you do you. As Jack D notes, the medical dictionaries haven’t been hit by our elite censors yet. I assume that will happen soon.

    You can still get and spread COVID with these shots. Period. End of story. They promise a reduced risk of symptoms for something that doesn’t kill roughly 99.9% of Americans. At what cost? TBD.

    Tom indicated above that the relative risk reduction in Pfizer testing was 95% – 8 cases v. 158 cases – go ahead and trumpet those numbers.

    As far as abosolute risk reduction, we are talking about peanuts. 8 / 21k v. 158 /21k – or roughly 99.2% v. 99.8%. Statistically, it offers very little. (They don’t trumpet those numbers.). Thanks to Tom for providing the hospitalization numbers: 3! (Amazing! Better shut everything down.)

    And it’s hard to tamp down the rising numbers of stories of the vaccinated both 1/ acquiring COVID-19 and 2/ suffering from the effects of taking the vaccine.

    Keep spinning for the Big Pharma #teamVIRUS! You’ll find those WMDs inside those COVID long-haulers and variants soon enough.

    • Agree: TTSSYF
  67. @That Would Be Telling

    There are no safe options!

    You forgot to add: and swimming is the best form of exercise.

    That was Steve’s question for this column. How do we evaluate the relative risk for different individuals?

    See my comments above for why you should think twice before assuming the disease is anything like the option of getting a vaccine.
    I assume they are quite different, frankly. I assume that immunity achieved through infection is better than that induced through an mRNA gene therapy that causes the body to express spike proteins and react to them while not actually recognizing the virus itself. Will the spike protein antibodies last, or will Pfizer have a new diabetes, with lifelong injections? As you note, we still do not know.

    Here is an article from Nature, a peer-reviewed scientific journal of good reputation. I’ll quote you some of the abstract:

    Cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2 peptides revealed pre-existing T cell responses in 81% of unexposed individuals and validated similarity with common cold coronaviruses, providing a functional basis for heterologous immunity in SARS-CoV-2 infection.

    From another website we get: “Heterologous immunity is the induction of an immune response to an unrelated pathogen/antigen upon exposure to a different pathogen/antigen. ”

    Now, if 81% of the population had heterologous immunity given Tcell responses, that suggests that 1/5th of the population is at severe risk from COVID. Your solution: stab everyone with needles to save that 1/5th. A more reasoned response is to find those individuals at higher risk from the virus than from the mRNA gene therapy, and give it to them.

    Just a question: is there ANYone, in your opinion, at greater risk from the mRNA therapy than from the infection?

    • Agree: another fred
    • Replies: @vhrm
  68. @Jack D

    …it can turn you gay! Your children will be born with two heads!

    A two-headed gay could fall in love with himself. If you can have same-sex marriage, why not same-body marriage?

    They certainly won’t be passing on their birth defect!

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  69. @That Would Be Telling

    “This is not a disease you want to get and take a chance on!!! ”
    Completely depends on your age and health. If you’re healthy under 50, this is definitely a disease you might want to take a chance on compared to taking a chance on the novel vaccine.
    After ~4 years or so we will see the full safety profile of it, until then let the old and the obese/unhealthy take the chance, short term outcomes seem to be going fine for them. Long term? We will see.

  70. @Buzz Mohawk

    You got to a point where apprehensions (aka “conspiracy theories”) are conflicting. For the most part, Romanians think the pandemic is inflated by the government; but your relatives are going, Chernobyl-style, into seeing a governmental cover-up.

    The fact is that all my older relatives avoid hospitals with a renewed hate after 2020. They would avoid any sort of test, including oxymetry, thinking that the doctors will lock them up even with a false positive test, will make sure they get real covid, MRSA and all the other hospital bugs, which will eventually kill them. Therefore, it is impossible for the Romanian government to know who is ill. There is no need for a cover-up.

    Many of them avoid the vaccine too. They hurt Kizsmikia.

    Anyway, dear vaxxers, can you explain what happened to SARS 1? What made it go away?

    • Thanks: Buzz Mohawk
  71. JR Ewing says:
    @TomSchmidt

    • Troll: That Would Be Telling

    Are we now going to argue about the meaning of the term “troll”? Because responding with a definition from the dictionary that backs up one’s point in an argument is not what normal and honest internet-capable people would define as a “troll”.

    Instead it’s a shortcut for saying:

    “You disagreed with me and called me out with evidence that backs up your point. I can’t refute it so instead I’m going to call you a name that absolves me from having to respond in a substantive way.”

    Point awarded to @TomSchmidt.

    • Thanks: TomSchmidt
  72. I need some help here.

    230 people are checked in to a hospital with “covid-like symptoms” and get negative PCR tests for covid. Can somebody point out where an adjustment is made for the possibility that they in fact don’t have COVID? And if they don’t have COVID what are they doing in that statistical population?

    • Replies: @JR Ewing
  73. @Greta Handel

    Is my comment being whimmed?

    Jack D and That Would Be Telling can use some fresh meat.

  74. @clifford brown

    In truth we really DON’T know what the “long term” side effects may be, or if indeed there will BE any side effects. No one really knows what the side effects of any new drug may be until such time as they manifest themselves–or if they do at all. We just don’t know. In this case, we really won’t know how effective these vaccines are, or if there are side effects, for some time yet. It’s all new. I’m over seventy and I thought long and hard before deciding that it would be best if my wife and I were vaccinated. This was based upon a variant of Pascal’s Wager. We had nothing to lose and everything to gain. If there are side effects and/or if in the end it doesn’t work, then so be it. The alternative was not to get vaccinated and spend the rest of the time living like hermits and wearing masks for the rest of our lives albeit with no guarantee that this would keep us from getting infected anyway.

    Bottom line: In the end, like everything else, it’s all a crap shoot.

  75. @dcthrowback

    dwelling on 570K deaths like a CNN ticker while also simultaneously trusting those same folks who are wholly uninterested in the documentation, tracking and publication of vaccine related side effects

    As much as I dislike the CDC and our public health community in general, they do a useful thing by tallying all death certificates, and and the resulting “all cause” mortality means we’re likely undercounting COVID-19 deaths. Especially now with the VHA data I mentioned above which shows very significant increased mortality in the six months after non- as well as hospitalized cases survive the first 30 days.

    And you know what else the CDC tracks? Correlated adverse events, which is how we discovered the Janssen vaccine looks to have a very rare side effect (something less than 1 in 500K?), clotting in the veins draining the brains of women of a certain age range. Which far from these “folks” being “wholly uninterested in” resulted in their advising a ten day pause while they collected more data including more cases, weighed the new risk/benefit tradeoff, as I understood it put out advice to doctors etc. about this phenomena including how to treat it (normal anti-clotting methods are bad), and advised going forward with all this new information.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  76. vhrm says:
    @TomSchmidt

    It’s not “gene therapy” because it doesn’t edit your genome. The DNA of all of your cells is the same after the vaccine as it was before the vaccine.

    You’re right that the pfizer and moderna vaccines are new(ish) technology and work somewhat differently than previous ones, but they’re not gene therapy or similar to it in any way.

    In terms of what they DO to your body they slot between “weakened virus” and “killed virus” and should be safer than both in some ways and no more dangerous than either.

    Whatever you may think of the wisdom of these vaccines, if you believe they’re related to gene therapy it’s likely that you’ve misunderstood some part of how they work.

    see e.g https://www.umassmed.edu/news/news-archives/2020/12/inside-the-new-mrna-vaccines-for-covid-19/ but there are many others

  77. @Jack D

    I’ll see your Merriam-Webster and raise you a 30yo Compact OED. For vaccination, we have: “the action or practice of inoculating with vaccine (I.e. derived from cows) matter as a preventative of smallpox. B) inoculation with a virus.

    Jenner was engaged in an innovative experiment when he used cowpox to stop smallpox. It saved millions of lives, and established a a field whose reputation is mostly unsullied, at least until recently and the use of Thimerosal in some vaccines.

    There’s a reason that the new mRNA therapy wants to claim the mantle of “vaccine” and with it assume the glory of 220 years of infectious disease prevention. It is indeed remarkable and if it stands the test of time promises to end serious epidemics. But it is new, different, and ought to be called by its proper name.

    I should think you’d have more caution about people changing the definitions of words to meet modern requirements.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  78. LarryS says:

    At the moment I have neither the virus or the gene therapy in my body. I intend to keep it that way.
    If I catch the virus I’ll likely recover. I don’t have FAITH in the gene therapy.

  79. @vhrm

    You need to google Marek disease. Then you’ll understand why death rates go up in conjunction with vaccination rates.

  80. @dcthrowback

    These “vaccines” provide no such immunity, as it is known to millions of people.

    My but you’re full of lies today. Based on experience in the field, we’re now pretty sure a lot of these vaccines don’t just provide immunity to almost all who take then, they’re also “sterilizing” when it comes to “classic coronavirus” and thus stop transmission. Qualification because they’re not so good with variants, are much more “leaky” while still providing great protection against hospitalization. It should also be noted the one jab version of Janssen’s is intended to be the very best single jab, really, more aimed at the Third World, with a primary endpoint of preventing “moderate and severe” disease, full immunity is a secondary endpoint. And they’re seeing what two jabs eight weeks apart does.

    You can still get and spread COVID with these shots. Period. End of story.

    And your point is? Because due to the way our adaptive immune systems work and other factors all the way down to doses accidentally getting ruined without those administering them realizing it, no vaccine is 100%. But the mRNA ones are about as good as you can get for the standard reasons. And you’re so blinded by … what? Anger? Despite it being pointed out Tom’s data is five or more months old, you trumpet it to make ludicrous points especially with our now massive experience in how they reduce deaths and hospitalizations in the elderly which were underrepresented in the Pfizer/BioNTech Phase III trial. But not the Moderna one, which also had enough serious cases they were in the plausibly statistically significant range. Five months ago, now they have much more data, enough to ask for full licensure.

    And it’s hard to tamp down the rising numbers of stories of the vaccinated both 1/ acquiring COVID-19 and 2/ suffering from the effects of taking the vaccine.

    Vaccines along with all other drugs and biologics main and kill some of the people they’re given to. This is not news, and in a way, not even particularly interesting unless of course you’ve got a real connection to someone who rolled snake eyes. Meanwhile, deaths and hospitalizations are way down in areas where significant numbers of the more vulnerable have been vaccinated, after allowing for what seems to be an inevitable pause while idiots who don’t read or retain the simple information about how long any vaccine requires to take effect expose themselves by throwing parties etc., or that without a vaccinations you’re not protected if only a small fraction of the population have gotten them.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @TTSSYF
  81. Jack D says:
    @dcthrowback

    I have no idea what you are talking about. mRNA vaccines are like any other vaccine. The provoke an immune response. In most cases, this is enough to prevent you from getting the disease (or at least a symptomatic case) later on but sometimes it isn’t perfect.

    The fact that efficacy is less than 100% (in any vaccine) is not a big deal. If enough people are vaccinated, herd immunity is achieved and the disease stops circulating in the community. This is really the main benefit of vaccines. Once disease stops circulating it doesn’t matter if the efficacy is less than perfect.

    Of course with the Covid vaccine this is going to be hard because our society is now in an advanced state of decline and many people no longer trust authority. The thing that blacks and right wing whites share is that neither group trusts our government.

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    , @TTSSYF
  82. Achilleus says:
    @clifford brown

    The prudent response would be not to inject all of your population with an experimental mRNA vaccine.

    I have happily volunteered to be in the unofficial control group.

    If frightened boomers want to voluntarily take an experimental drug therapy – a couple of these therapies criminally referred to as “vaccines” – have at it. If there are long-term catastrophic side-effects, it won’t be so “long-term” in their case, anyway.

    But forcing – maybe evening just persuading – 0 to 30-year-olds to submit to an experimental drug therapy with unknown long-term risks in order to go to school, university, work, normal social interaction, or travel is evil. To ask them to take that risk to add another thin layer of supposed protection for old frightened boomers who won’t be around to see the results of the experiment is sick.

    • Replies: @S. Anonyia
  83. @vhrm

    My understanding of DNA is that genes themselves do not do anything. They are copied by RNA molecules during gene expression which are then used for protein synthesis. The proteins are then the useful enzymes and structures in the cell. So the mRNA therapy gets a cell to express certain proteins without the cell possessing underlying DNA. I appreciate your reminder on this.

    So mRNA ought not cause DNA changes. Interesting question: can proteins cause cancer?
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/01/160122103826.htm

    “Cancer is caused by the growth of an abnormal cell which harbours DNA mutations. A few years ago, scientists have identified an important mutagen which lies in our own cells: APOBEC, a protein that usually functions as protecting agent against viral infection. Today geneticist have deciphered how APOBEC takes advantage of a weakness in our DNA replication process to induce mutations in our genome.”

    Now, we have injected a spike protein causing agent into our bodies. Given that COVID is “novel,” we really haven’t had much time to study the long-term effects of this protein. We know that 1/5th of the population lacks any TCell heterologous immunity to COVID, and in those people any long-term risk from the vaccine is far outweighed by the short-term risk from COVID.

    I’m not disputing that. The rest is up for examination.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  84. Steve Sailer: Red-pilled on race, blue-pilled on Big Pharma and C-19

  85. Jack D says:
    @TomSchmidt

    You disprove your own point. According to the OED, the only true “vaccine” is the cowpox vaccine because the word vaccine is derived from the Latin vacca (cow). All the others should be called something else because they have nothing to do with cows. But there have been other therapies called “vaccines” for over a century now (pertussis (1914), diphtheria (1926), tetanus (1938),etc.) because they are similar in function to the original vaccine. The Covid vaccines are one more in a long line of vaccines that have nothing to do with cows.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  86. This is pretty funny:

    In a statement posted on Twitter Wednesday night, state Rep. Alma Hernandez, D-Tucson, said she tested positive for COVID-19 nearly three months after receiving her second Pfizer vaccine.

    Hernandez said she has continued to take the pandemic “very seriously” and has worn her mask, washed her hands, and socially distanced, on top of being vaccinated 11 weeks ago. Hernandez added her symptoms were “pretty mild” and she would quarantine in her Phoenix home for at least the next week.

    “The pandemic has not come to an end,” the statement said. “Be safe, take care and do not let your guard down even after you have been vaccinated.”

    This is not uncommon:

    As of April 16, there were 495 confirmed “vaccine breakthrough cases” reported in Arizona, meaning cases where someone tested positive for COVID-19 after receiving a vaccine. Of those 495, the Arizona Department of Health Services said 349 received Pfizer, 139 received Moderna and seven received the single Johnson & Johnson shot.

    No deaths have been reported due to COVID-19 breakthrough infection and only 13% resulted in hospitalization.

    64 hospitalizations, which is around the percentage of hospitalizations for 65-74 yr old COVID patients regardless.

    So you can still get the virus, you can still shed the virus and you have the same odds for hospitalization regardless of the vaccine. I’ve had COVID. I’m not getting GlobohomoCorp’s mystery liquid.

    Oh, and if we didn’t already know: masks don’t work, lockdowns don’t work, social distancing doesn’t work. The “vaccine” is already chasing strains from behind. And next flu season will let us know whether the coronaviruses have outcompeted H1N1 progeny for access to our upper respiratory tracts.

  87. Jack D says:
    @TomSchmidt

    You can get a little spike protein from a vaccine or a LOT of spike protein (along with all the other parts of the virus) from the virus itself. Not getting any spike protein doesn’t seem to be on the menu, at least until we can achieve enough herd immunity that some people will be able to free ride and get away with not being vaccinated.

    APOBEC is interesting but APOBEC and Covid-19 spike protein are two completely different things. There are many other coronaviruses in circulation (they are responsible for many (but not all) common colds so if coronavirus proteins gave you cancer we would probably have figured this out by now. Just because A certain protein can give you cancer doesn’t mean that ALL proteins cause cancer.

  88. J.Ross says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    An Intourist government minder calling “trolls” established long-term sincere commenters. Nice.
    Water in your cupped hand is not the ocean. I am certain that the data in your little set is perfect, and I will not forgive the exclusion and aggressive censorship of other data outside that set. We need to deal with the defamation of legitimate medicines in order to sell vaccines, and we need to deal with the election. Either one of those dwarfs a cold that kills dying nonagenarians.

    • Agree: BenKenobi
    • Thanks: TomSchmidt
  89. J.Ross says:

    Here’s an idea: let’s start to talk about prosecuting politicians for the voluntary extraconstitutional persecution of small businesses.

  90. @Jack D

    The flu vaccine is 40 – 60% effective in any given year. Basically a coin toss, and despite all the jabs, year after year, we’ve never achieved herd immunity from the rolling H1N1 pandemic we’ve been in since the early 20th century.

    Of course, with influenza cases down 97 percent, it looks like coronavirus is now “the flu.”

    I suggest exercise, ideal bodyweight, and lots of sun. And physical contact with your fellow humans who, like most hominids, are pack animals who suffer when socially isolated and a dearth of intimacy.

    • Agree: Cortes
    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  91. @Jack D

    If you let your imagination run wild, the vaccine can have all sorts of long term side effects – it can turn you gay!

    Wow, compelling argument. Actually, the way to determine long term side effects is you do just that, you study the long term side effects of a drug. That is how medical tests worked in this country until about a year ago.

    Back in the real world, it’s highly unlikely.

    Also back in the real world, COVID is highly unlikely to make people under 40 seriously ill.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon, Mark G.
  92. ziggurat says:
    @Jack D

    Or maybe the vaccine will cause spiked proteins to grow out of your head.
    You could look like Pinhead from Hellraiser.
    https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indiewire.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F05%2Fhellraiser.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

  93. Mr. Anon says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    It’s incumbent on fearmongers like yourself to explain how the vaccines are uniquely dangerous compared to getting uncontrolled infections from the disease, like the original alarm raised about pregnancies/female fertility which would apply equally to getting the disease. There are no safe options!

    No, it is incumbent on fearmongers like you to explain why people who are at virtually no risk for contracting a disease, or people who have already gotten it and recovered and would be expected to have natural immunity, should get an experimental vaccination against it.

    • Agree: BB753, Adam Smith
  94. vhrm says:
    @TomSchmidt

    Just a question: is there ANYone, in your opinion, at greater risk from the mRNA therapy than from the infection?

    This is an interesting question.
    The vaccines presents to cells 4k nucleotide long mRNA to produce spike proteins.

    SarsCov2 presents to cells ~30k nucleotide long RNA to produce spike proteins and a bunch of other stuff that the cell assembles into new SarsCov2 particles. Which then infect other cells.
    (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-020-00468-6 )

    So an infection by the actual virus is a superset of what the vaccine does.

    My understanding is that for every human it is a lower risk to get the “rna vaccine” than to get an infection causing dose of SarsCov2.

    (Unless that person is known to be allergic to some chemical in the vaccine shot.)

    • Replies: @Anne Lid
    , @TomSchmidt
  95. @That Would Be Telling

    It’s incumbent on fearmongers like yourself

    Who is the actual fear monger? I think the fear mongers have been running our public healthy policy over the past year. It is fair and rational to question taking an experimental vaccine for a disease that is not a serious health risk for healthy people under 40. I fully endorse the vaccine for people over 60.

    • Agree: Mr. Anon
    • Thanks: Hans, Mark G.
  96. @vhrm

    It’s not “gene therapy” because it doesn’t edit your genome. The DNA of all of your cells is the same after the vaccine as it was before the vaccine.

    While not by design, it might actually turn out to be the case that some cells incorporate small bits of the gene coding for the spike protein. The numbers are likely to be extremely small to nonexistent because that research is based on people who got uncontrolled normal infections hitting a lot of cells. As I mention in the thread, for this to happen the immune system also has to overlook the cells presenting epitopes of the spike protein which is how the immune system recognizes they’ve been hijacked, learns, and then kills them in a number of ways.

    My current guess is that this might happen from adjacent cells that pick up bits of RNA from zapped ones, and let me emphasize, it’s only bits, like the 2-3 bits needed for an RT-PCR positive which is how this phenomena was discovered, from people who’d clearly cleared the virus from their system but were still scoring positive on a test. If it was whole genes like any version of the spike protein, or even significant parts of one that’s so thoroughly targeted by the immune system, these cells would be taken out by the immune system. Instead this mostly happens with the nucleocapsid protein buried under the envelope, which is the #2 target of natural immunity.

    Whatever you may think of the wisdom of these vaccines, if you believe they’re related to gene therapy it’s likely that you’ve misunderstood some part of how they work.

    I believe this trope comes from the fact that one of the targets of this technology is credibly called gene therapy, “protein replacement therapies for rare diseases” as Wikipedia puts it for BioNTech (cancer therapies like tailored vaccines are another big target, but an inherently hard one because cancer cells are biochemically so much like normal ones).

    Even if not DNA, nor with a mechanism to get the mRNA accurately transcribed and integrated into a cell’s genome (reverse transcriptase sucks), we are talking about “genes.” Starting from DNA plasmids multiplied in E. Coli bacteria, but in the end it’s mRNA coding for proteins of interest. It just turns out this protein replacement approach sucks so far. I’ve seen mentioned issues like if given IV, the micelles solid lipid nanoparticles not surprisingly mostly end up in your liver, which is not necessarily where you want them to be.

    A really big issue is one that makes them safer than replication competent virus vaccines, they just don’t pump out the desired proteins for very long. So you require so many dosings which also must be IV or IM that you start to have toxicity problems with the lipids. Although from recent readings that story is better. But whatever the causes for failures, both BioNTech and Moderna started focusing on much lower profit and much bigger headache vaccines in 2018. At I’m sure at the normal painstaking pace for that, but made enough progress that along with the SARS type coronavirus vaccine researchers they were ready to pounce on SARS-CoV-2 as soon as the first sequences were published from the PRC.

    • Thanks: vhrm
  97. Sub says:

    Not that I imagine this comment will make it through moderation, but all of you people acting like what is being injected now is somehow even remotely the same technology to what previous vaccines use are complete bullshit artists.

    Giving your own cells instructions to produce viral proteins is a completely different strategy from using attenuated/killed virus, or having a viral vector provide those instructions to your cells. The potential for autoimmune side effects from this strategy should be obvious to anyone who isn’t a complete moron, and that is something that may not show up until years from now.

    Not to mention, there are now several studies out which show that the spike protein itself is capable of causing tissue damage, so instead of rolling the dice on potential COVID infection related damage, people who choose to get one of these experimental shots are in fact taking a 100% chance of possible spike protein caused damage. If you feel like that is a worthwhile gamble vs COVID infection have at it, but trying to pressure or shame people who would rather take a 100%-X chance on that damage via infection vs a 100% chance via injection with a highly experimental drug is sickening. Especially when that recent Nature paper indicates that most of the T-cell immune recognition from SARS comes from the nucleocapsid and not the spike protein, so you aren’t even offering lasting immunity for participation in the human guinea pig project.

    What is going on right now is the most Mengele-esque experimentation on humans imaginable, and if the geniuses over at Pfizer and J&J(you know, the asbestos baby powder people) end up being wrong about the long term side effects of these drugs, we could see one of the most horrific outcomes humanity has ever seen. There is good reason why back when adults were in charge of the FDA and CDC vaccine approval times were measured in decades(see varicella vaccine development timeline), throwing money at a problem does not substitute for longitudinal research.

    Links to the research papers for those of you who want to think for yourselves instead of just uncritically accepting “trust us” from the sorts of people who shoved Vioxx out the door.

    SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE2
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2020/12/04/2020.12.04.409144.full.pdf

    SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 induces fibrin(ogen) resistant to fibrinolysis: Implications for microclot formation in COVID-19
    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.05.21252960v1.full

    SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alone may cause lung damage
    https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-04-sars-cov-spike-protein-lung.html

    SARS-CoV-2-derived peptides define heterologous and COVID-19-induced T cell recognition
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x.pdf

  98. At work a lot of guys refuse to get the vaccine citing all kinds of non-scientific fears. In reality the bad effects of vaccines are flare ups of auto immune disease. You don’t turn into a frog, the immune response to the antigen may be so aggressive your body starts to attack it’s own tissues. The Anthrax vaccine in the military is reputed to be quite strong, my brother thinks it gave him psoriasis.

  99. Mr. Anon says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    Vaccines along with all other drugs and biologics main and kill some of the people they’re given to. This is not news, and in a way, not even particularly interesting unless of course you’ve got a real connection to someone who rolled snake eyes.

    Yet pharma companies have a liability shield against suits brought for damages done by vacciness. That might be one reason why they are so keen on them.

    VAERS has now reported something like 3-4,000 deaths that have followed hard on the heels of a CoV vaccination. Of course the CDC officially maintains that there have only been a few deaths. Those other few thousand cases were just coincidental.

    I mean, fifteen year old boys die of heart attacks all the time:

    You die a month after a positive Corona Virus test? You died of COVID.

    You die two days after getting a Corona Virus vaccination? You’re just unlucky.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  100. xinc says:
    @clifford brown

    This is just flat out idiotic.

    What do you think the long term effects of a virus that may have emerged out of a Chinese bio lab are?

    I’d much, much rather have the vaccine than get some virus that has been shown to inject segments into the host DNA.

    Everyone should get vaccinated. Don’t be a baby about it.

    • Replies: @Je Suis Omar Mateen
  101. Mr. Anon says:

    From Zerohedge – a good article by Niall Ferguson on how a competent country handles a pandemic:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/niall-ferguson-how-ikes-1950s-america-beat-asian-flu-science-common-sense

    Somehow, people in the 1950s managed to deal with a pandemic virus without to a need to change everything, institute a “Great Reset”, or usher in a “New Normal”.

    • Thanks: Mark G.
  102. Clearly, vaccines are a smart choice for oldsters like me, but how young do you have to be to make it, all in all, a better idea to skip getting vaccinated?

    There’s no reason not to get vaccinated.

    The whole anti-vax thing is stupid. Granted not as stupid as “diversity is our greatest strength” or “nation of immigrants”–objectively/logically insane stuff our elites spew all the time. There actually have been a few vaccines developed that did the wrong thing and actually made the situation worse. So it’s at least possible that a particular vax could be a mistake. There is just zero evidence that this is the case here.

    The anti-vax nonsense usually boils down to some sort of naturalistic fallacy that covid is “natural” and we know the risks and the vax is “artificial” and the risks unknown. It’s complete nonsense.

    –> Vax is “experimental”
    Both the Xi virus and the vax are “experimental”. The Xi virus came out of the Wuhan lab 18 months ago. The vax out of German and American labs 14 months ago. Neither has a long track record.

    –> The Vax “messes with your DNA” or “hijacks your cells”
    Neither the virus nor the vax mess with your DNA.

    Both the virus and the vax “hijack” your cells to make proteins. However, the virus “hijacks your cells” to make complete copies of itself. (That’s how viruses replicate! They aren’t bacteria, they don’t have their own cells, they hijack your cells’ protein manufacturing to make copies of themselves. Do people not know this?) The adenovirus based vaxes “hijack your cells” in the same manner–they’re a virus. However, the mRNA vaxes only “hijack your cells” to make the spike protein. They don’t replicate themselves. mRNA vaxes are actually less “sinister” and “hijacky” than any virus, as they aren’t self-replicating.

    –>The difference …
    With the mRNA vax your cells replicate a bunch of spike protein, which your immune system can recognize as an invader and build antibodies to.

    While with the virus your cells replicate the virus–which attacks your vascular system!–and keeps replicating it. A bunch of people get sick. A few percent have to head to the hospital. Something like 0.5-1%–mostly old or with “issues”–die. But even a decent tranche of people who recover have lingering long term issues. Mortality is significantly enhanced for months. And we don’t know the long terms effects. The virus is “experimental”.

    In contrast, the risk from the vaccine–also “experimental”–seems to be nugatory. Essentially no one dies. If you’re worried about the vax killing you, you should worry about lightening and sharks, and certainly don’t go near a car.

    –> Bottom line:

    Vax — your body builds a bunch of spike protein. Short term risk is trivial. (Orders of magnitude below the virus.) Long term risk is–of course–unknown, but none seen so far and no reason to think it’s not essentially zero.

    Virus — your body builds a whole bunch of virus, until sufficient immune response to stop it. You get the spike protein just like the vax … plus a nasty vascular attack on your body. Short term risk, is moderate. Long term risks are already noticeably and appear to moderate as well.

    Vax — trivial to nonexistent risks.
    Virus — moderate risk, orders of magnitude great than vax

    • Troll: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @onetwothree
    , @Anon
  103. @Reg Cæsar

    I dated an artist in Denver who was very proud of a picture she had painted of a masturbating hermaphrodite.

    She told me about this painting when we were masturbating together. One of her shticks was reciting a monologue in front of an audience at an art gallery, wearing garters and stockings and nothing else.

    I watched.

    She was a good girl who happened to have inherited a house right downtown, with a nice view of the city lights.

    • Replies: @TTSSYF
    , @Buffalo Joe
  104. @clifford brown

    From a reply to Jack D:

    Actually, the way to determine long term side effects is you do just that, you study the long term side effects of a drug. That is how medical tests worked in this country until about a year ago.

    Which turns out not to be the case. Not sure when the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) system was created, but skimming their archives of no longer in effect ones it goes back to at least 2005.

    I think the fear mongers have been running our public healthy policy over the past year.

    “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that [is] it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not before.” That, however, doesn’t mean it isn’t a crisis, as over half a million Americans could attest if you could interview their shades, and for the latest see India for what happens when the authorities take a Panglossian approach to such an existential threat. They’re way beyond the point where you lose people at much higher rates because you can’t give the more serious cases supplemental oxygen. What “bending the curve” was all about, and mostly achieved in the US outside of NYC.

    It is fair and rational to question taking an experimental vaccine for a disease that is not a serious health risk for healthy people under 40. I fully endorse the vaccine for people over 60.

    I have a more nuanced take, but it’s roughly aligned, except as I mention above I take morbidity much more seriously especially since it’s not well understood at the population, epidemiological level. I’m in the age range you fully endorse, but I’m personally much more concerned about getting maimed that getting killed.

    But I take strong exception to your claim these vaccines are “experimental,” or at least the mRNA ones. You can credibly claim they are or were insufficiently tested, but the experiments were started more than a year ago, and now the mRNA companies have enough safety data to make their Biologics License Applications for full licensure from the FDA. Six months is required, which is aligned with the observation that almost all severe side effects show up in the first six weeks, EUA applications requiring two months of safety data from half of those who got the vaccine.

    We’ve also run a huge Phase IV experiment on these long enough I think it’s safe to say they’re beyond the experimental stage. You have to do that sooner or later because as Janssen’s vaccine demonstrated, normal full scale FDA strength vaccine Phase III trails with as few as 15,000 people getting it will never find a rare “signal,” enough cases of rare side effects that are in this case 1 in 500K to a million. I’ve read second or third hand that one of those clots in the brain draining veins actually occurred in their trial of 23,000 or so people getting the vaccine, but … while he’s no academic statistician, Goldfinger had the correct general idea, nobody could distinguish that adverse event from happenstance.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
  105. Mike1 says:

    If I was old I would be getting the vaccine. That said, this is not a “vaccine” in any traditional sense of the word. They have been trying to pass this through FDA and other approval mechanisms for 30 years without success. There is a reason for that: This method of vaccination has proven brutal on the body and damages key organs. Anything over two injections a year is really bad news (hence the magical two doses).

    Like it or not, this is a mammoth experiment on billions of people. It might be fine, it might be really bad.

  106. Mike1 says:

    If I was old I would be getting the vaccine. That said, this is not a “vaccine” in any traditional sense of the word. They have been trying to pass this through FDA and other approval mechanisms for 30 years without success. There is a reason for that: This method of vaccination has proven brutal on the body and damages key organs. Anything over two injections a year is really bad news (hence the magical two doses).

    Like it or not, this is a mammoth experiment on billions of people. It might be fine, it might be really bad.

  107. @AnotherDad

    What’s the risk of forcing the vaccine upon those who would dare disagree with your wisdom? Have you modeled that yet? Have you considered what it might do to your protein?

    Something about vaccines really brings the fascist out in people.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  108. TTSSYF says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    Are you capable of writing fewer than 500 words per reply?

  109. TTSSYF says:
    @Jack D

    Of course with the Covid vaccine this is going to be hard because our society is now in an advanced state of decline and many people no longer trust authority. The thing that blacks and right wing whites share is that neither group trusts our government.

    And why do you think that is? Could it be because they have been lying to us for decades, including the lies about how much Medicare was going to cost, how much Obamacare was going to cost (or save us), or how we just needed two weeks to “flatten the curve”, or how masks don’t work until they do, or how we had to invade Iraq because of WMD, etc. etc. etc.?

    It’s simply the boy who cried wolf. I don’t believe anything this corrupt government says. They did it to themselves…they, and the corrupt media who love death, mayhem, and bloodshed.

    If no one wants to come over to my house for a barbecue because I refuse to tell them whether I’ve been vaccinated or not, I say, good riddance. And if I’m not allowed to fly commercially — well, I’m fine with that, too…especially given the airlines’ stated plan of affirmative action in the cockpits. I’m also okay with dying alone, whether with COVID or something else.

  110. @Steve Sailer

    Steve, my soon to be 104 years old mother got her shots but at the assisted living facility where she resides there are staff members who refuse to be vaccinated. Thing is, when a staff memeber turns up sick everyone goes back into a 14 day lock down. Don’t know what the answer is, staffing is difficult, hey unemploment and stimulus, why work?

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    , @Anne Lid
  111. @clifford brown

    The vaccines make sense for people over 60. However, we do not know the longer term impact of the vaccines, especially as to how it could impact pregnancies. We do not know if there will be a long term auto immune disease response to the vaccines.

    The prudent response would be not to inject all of your population with an experimental mRNA vaccine.

    All true … but for the fact we don’t know any of that stuff about the virus either.

    This isn’t a new vax for whooping cough. The virus is all of four months older than the vax.

    Virus–known bad; small but significant immediate morbidity and mortality; clear raised morbidity and mortality for months afterward. long term issues but already can see lingering issues for a subset of people.

    Vax–no issues seen yet. long term issues unknown; none seen.

    Virus=vax + a potentially nasty vascular attack on your body.

    Prudent response would be not letting your population be infected with the Xi virus.

    • Agree: reiner Tor, Jack D, vhrm
    • Replies: @AnonAnon
  112. epebble says:
    @Jack D

    Many under 50, under 40 and even under 30 people are getting Covid (and dying) in India in their second wave. Obviously, they all survived their first wave. I think this virus may be worse than what we have generally seen before. It seems capable of fast mutations and continuing to be deadly.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  113. @Buffalo Joe

    Wow! 104! Whatever happens, and whatever has happened, you and your mom and your family can be very proud. That is wonderful!

  114. TTSSYF says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    This falls under the category of “Too Much Information.”

    • Agree: Dissident
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  115. anon[771] • Disclaimer says:

    Steve is hard at work helping his masters push the vaxx.

  116. @Desiderius

    Desi, I don’t how to respond to you but $5000 a month for assisted living is common, my mom is in a AL facility now and my brother and I have to kick in so she can stay there. But, my youngest child bought a condo last year for $429K which stunned me. My first house cost me $26,000 and the place is still standing and solid. Thing is we boomers couldn’t imagine making $150K just 10 years out of college. When my mother passes away the $5000 per month ends. She can’t pass it on to her grandkids or great grandkids. Stay safe.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  117. Dutch Boy says:

    What do you folks make of the reports by Gilad Atzmon and others of spikes in Covid-related deaths coinciding with aggressive vaccination campaigns? Per Atzmon: “Those who follow my writing are aware of my work on the undeniable correlation between vaccination, Covid-19 cases, deaths and the spread of mutant strains. The IPC confirms my observation, providing more crucial information regarding age groups. “There is a high correlation between the number of people vaccinated per day and the number of deaths per day, in the range of up to 10 days, in all age groups. Ages 20-49 – a range of 9 days from the date of vaccination to mortality, ages 50-69 – 5 days from the date of vaccination to mortality, ages 70 and up – 3 days from the date of vaccination to mortality.” Vaccine-associated deaths among age groups not vulnerable to the worst effects of the virus are particularly concerning, if true.

  118. @That Would Be Telling

    Thanks for the link to the VA study article, also published in Nature like another article I’ve linked elsewhere in the thread. It’s useful to get access to more data.

    To quote directly from the article: “The acute clinical manifestations of COVID-19 are well characterized1,2; however, its post-acute sequalae have not been comprehensively described. Here, we use the national healthcare databases of the US Department of Veterans Affairs to systematically and comprehensively identify 6-month incident sequalae…”

    So, this is a study of veterans who suffered “acute clinical manifestations of COVID-19.” Ask anyone who has survived the disease and they’ll tell you: it is no picnic. Young people have described days of fever and sluggishness. It would not surprise me to find that older, and almost exclusively male, veterans would suffer from the extreme version, and longer. I’m not one of those people who thinks this is a farce of a disease, despite the clown-world reaction to it.

    “The findings show that beyond the acute illness, substantial burden of health loss — spanning pulmonary and several extrapulmonary organ systems — is experienced by COVID-19 survivors.”
    Well, what are we talking about here in “survivors”? I am assuming they’re talking about people who got “acute clinical manifestations,” meaning people who were infected with COVID severe enough to know they were infected, and to seek medical help, whether hospitalized or no. Kindly let me know if your understanding is otherwise? It’s not “infections” which has become conflated with “cases.” As you can tell, I like precise definitions.

    If it is people who got acute COVID, well, we have a rigorous, randomized study with continuous monitoring of people who were diagnosed with an infection (not necessarily “acute clinical manifestations”) and under 2% of those who were infected with COVID developed what I believe the VA authors would call “acute clinical manifestations.” Fewer than 1% had a manifestation so severe that it required hospitalization.

    Now, you can either say that the study was invalid, in which case the mRNA therapy approval was based on a fake study, or you can accept that the study was conducted in a manner that makes it useful. I’ve already noted that the study showed that there were remarkable results for the older participants in the study. Unless you’ve decided that this is year 0 and all knowledge before 2021 can be discarded (since you like redefining terms), then the science says that most cases of infection by COVID are not serious.

    Now, some cases of infection by COVID ARE serious. Acute, to use a term. Some lead to death from COVID. Some have long-term health effects like those demonstrated in the VA study you linked to.

    When Steve asks where do we draw the line, we start with the people likely to suffer acute cases. The other Nature article I linked suggested that 81% of the population had pre-existing TCell immunity to COVID, so that group would not be prioritized for any mRNA therapy. Of the ~20% of the population that are at risk of developing severe COVID, some percentage will get the acute form like that studied by the VA. It would be great if we could treat those people, and as you note, even better if they did not get sick with acute clinical manifestations of COVID-19 int he first place.”

    I think an easy line is 65+ people should get the mRNA therapy. Under 18 should not, and probably under 30 (you can see that under-14’s have died LESS than expected in the year of COVID over at Euromomo.eu if you want to check some Z-scores. Wish they didn’t group 15-44, but you don’t get everything). In the middle is the line: we are looking for a reasonable, science- and data-based way to find it.

    means to the end of arranging for mRNA to create viral proteins inside of cells to closely mimic a real infection and invoke a full immune system response.

    Do you have evidence that they “invoke a full immune system response?” There’s no doubt that the mRNA therapy creates a spike protein. You might check out Mike Whitney’s recent article here at Unz for a different perspective:

    “A reader points to a VERY worrisome finding in the @cdcgov Chicago nursing home report: patients L19, a 49-year-old staffer, and M20, a 77-year-old resident – both had very low PCR threshold counts (the nurse’s was under 17) and NO symptoms. Why does this matter?

    Lower PCR counts mean a person has a heavier viral load – and is thus both more likely to be very sick and more infectious…. These two should have been extremely symptomatic. Instead, the vaccine seems to have protected them from feeling sick – but not from being thoroughly infected and potentially spreading the virus. THIS IS EVIDENCE FOR A POSSIBLE MAREK’S DISEASE OUTCOME, where vaccinated people spread the virus aggressively to the unvaccinated.”

    It strikes me that the approach to COVID is like diphtheria, where the toxin produced by the bacterium is introduced so that the body can recognize and neutralize it. One side effect of this is that people now get diphtheria, but the infection causes no harm as the bacteria that can infect do next produce the toxin. Now, as to Marek’s disease:

    “The deadliest strains of viruses often take care of themselves — they flare up and then die out. This is because they are so good at destroying cells and causing illness that they ultimately kill their host before they have time to spread. But a chicken virus that represents one of the deadliest germs in history breaks from this conventional wisdom, thanks to an inadvertent effect from a vaccine. Chickens vaccinated against Marek’s disease rarely get sick. But the vaccine does not prevent them from spreading Marek’s to unvaccinated birds. “With the hottest strains, every unvaccinated bird dies within 10 days. …

    In fact, rather than stop fowl from spreading the virus, the vaccine allows the disease to spread faster and longer than it normally would, a new study finds. The scientists now believe that this vaccine has helped this chicken virus become uniquely virulent….over the last half century, symptoms for Marek’s worsened.

    Do you admit to this being a possibility with the mRNA therapy?

    The “science” as of mid-November is all but irrelevant five months later
    I know, I know: year 0, and all that. Do I really want to be a wrecker? Of course not, comrade.

    Do you happen to have an update on carefully tracked infections of COVID, as in the original study, to see how many went to the level of “acute,” per the patients in your VA study? If not, the science says: under 2%.

    Seeing as how it’s vascular while being transmitted by respiration.
    What does this mean? I’m at a loss.

    I would hope most of us would be … unhappy if we killed grandmother by neglecting to get a vaccine that at last count seems to be quite safe.
    Wait… I thought we agreed that granny should take the mRNA therapy. Why didn’t she?

    I think we have your position: “This is not a disease you want to get and take a chance on!!! ”
    I.e. there is NO consideration of ANY risk level. That’s absolute, sir. Whatever it might be, it isn’t science. Now go back to your politician and lawyer friends and tell them you done tangled with the science and stomped it into the ground.

    • Replies: @notsaying
    , @Dieter Kief
    , @gda53
  119. Anne Lid says:
    @vhrm

    The virus infects your upper respiratory tract, if you are unfortunate, the lower tract as well. The vaccine introduces that small part of the virus into the bloodstream and with it goes wherever in the body, where the normally acquired virus would never get.

  120. @clifford brown

    It is fair and rational to question taking an experimental vaccine for a disease that is not a serious health risk for healthy people under 40.

    If people are uncertain of the mRNA vaccines then they can get the J&J.

    In rural areas White conservative men aren’t getting either.

    There is a surplus of vaccines in rural areas thanks to talk show hosts pushing conspiracies about trackers and population control.

    They will probably be shipped off to India because our conservative leaders have embraced idiocy.

    https://www.manisteenews.com/news/article/Indoor-events-bring-virus-outbreak-in-Republic-16144729.php

    This type of wanton stupidity is what got Biden elected. Our conservatism is truly a stupid form. Rejecting vaccines while embracing race denial and amoral capitalism. These are the same people that think Detroit just needs more capitalism and that giving Gates a tax cut will somehow create rural jobs.

  121. notsaying says:

    I think there are a lot of unknowns about this disease. We also don’t know, obviously, what new variants might do. I say get vaccinated even if young and healthy. Don’t just focus on death statistics when deciding but consider the unpleasantness of getting sick and possibility of long term effects. We have no idea when or if long Covid symptoms will get better or disappear in some unlucky people.

    Here’s a perfect example of “unexpected” surprises with Covid-19 I just read:

    “Dr Sujay Shad, a senior cardiac surgeon at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital in India, told the New York Times: ‘The current wave of COVID has a different clinical behavior. It’s affecting young adults. It’s affecting families. It’s a new thing altogether. Two-month-old babies are getting infected.’

    We all “knew” it doesn’t affect kids — well it does now.

    Oregon is getting affected by a variant too. They are going to put restrictions back in some counties:

    “In the past few weeks we are caring for more patients with COVID in our (intensive care units) who are sicker, younger, and without underlying medical conditions,’ Oregon Health & Science University Chief Medical Officer Dr Renee Edwards said at a press conference on April 23.”

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9535081/Oregon-Gov-Kate-Brown-defends-throwing-state-COVID-lockdown.html

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @gda53
  122. @Jack D

    Not quite. The OED does allow that “inoculation with a virus” is a definition of vaccination. I guess that means that killed bacteria also don’t count. Take it up with Oxford: they own the language, after all.

    Injection with mRNA doesn’t make it in there. IT is, btw, what I think will be an immense leap forward in treating disease. But it’s not vaccination.

    BTW, diphtheria involves only the toxin the pathogen produces. It’s probably the closest thing we have had to the mRNA therapy, since it does not train the immune system on the bug itself.

  123. @That Would Be Telling

    …clotting in the veins draining the brains of women of a certain age range.

    With so many other factors of the day “draining the brains of women of ” all age ranges, this might be seen as a feature rather than a bug.

  124. @Buzz Mohawk

    Buzz, I see a great future for you in writing paper back novels with a ripped guy and a buxomy babe on the book cover.

    • LOL: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  125. @TTSSYF

    This falls under the category of “Too Much Information.”

    LOL. Says you. Have you had any experiences approaching that? I wrote from experience, and what I wrote there is relevant. If it is too bright for your Victorian eyes, then shield them, God damn it.

    • Replies: @TTSSYF
  126. @vhrm

    Thank you for taking the question seriously: it’s elemental to drawing the line.

    For some people, the mRNA therapy will be life-saving. Of that I have no doubt. According to the article I linked in Nature, 81% of the population has Tcell heterologous immunity to COVID meaning that their immune systems can recognize and fight off the virus from the peptides it expresses both on the spike protein and the nucleocapsid. Those are the people who probably do NOT get severe COVID: they recognize the virus, neutralize it quickly, and become of the mysterious asymptomatic types. If you’re not in the lucky 81%, then turning your body into a virus factory is a threat to both you and all the other 19% people you might infect. Deadly, in fact.

    So the question becomes: if you’re in the 81%, do you get more damaging spike protein into your body from a muscular injection of mRNA therapy, or from inhaling a virus that your system can handle? I don’t know, and I’d love to know. Even more important: how can we identify the 19% of people for whom this mRNA therapy could be the difference between life and death, regardless of age?

    • Thanks: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @nixxer
  127. @Buffalo Joe

    My first job out of college was “writer,” for a sales and marketing company in Boulder. I can honestly say that I was a real “writer” — for money — while most others are always just dreaming…


    My long, blonde hair was better than his, BTW.

  128. People still discuss the sniffles like it’s an interesting topic…… huh, so so weird.

    If C19 were anything but a hoax, how can Cali Governor Douchem declare the CoronaHoax over on June 15th? I never knew that governments can schedule plagues. Amazing stuff.

  129. @Jack D

    “Still, it’s better to skip it altogether by getting the vaccine.”

    If you are young and healthy, why take a risk? For an old boy it’s a no-brainer, but it’s had minimal testing, has some nasty side effects (for some people) up to and including death, and has no long term data available.

    I know Israel have filled their boots with the stuff, but that doesn’t mean we all have to.

    • Replies: @xinc
  130. Anonymous[282] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Then I read alt right media and felt a fool, or a dupe.

    What did you feel foolish about?

    • Replies: @Anon
  131. @Bill H.

    This assumes that 100% of the unvaccinated population will get COVID. In the Pfizer and Moderna studies only 8% of the placebo group contracted CV

    So if you do not get vaccinated you have an 8% risk of contracting CV and if you are fully vaccinated your risk drops from 8% to 1%

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  132. Anonymous[282] • Disclaimer says:
    @RVS

    Whereas, when a person is injected with a mRNA vaccine, the nanoparticles may enter the blood stream and trigger antigen production anywhere in the body, such as the brain or blood vessels.

    Isn’t the same true of traditional vaccines that are injected, such as J&J?

  133. Anne Lid says:
    @Anne Lid

    I forgot to add that the virus particle is too large to just pass through the blood vessels, but the epithelial cells lining them will take them up, express them and ultimately it may lead to clotting in inopportune places. That’s what I gathered from Bhakdi.

  134. @The Alarmist

    Great post, absolutely Golden Box worthy.

    Sailer, educate yourself – check out: https://market-ticker.org

    Denninger’s ongoing quantitative analysis of the CoronaHoax is magisterial, displaying Pulitzer levels of insight and clarity.

  135. Kaz says:
    @The Alarmist

    A large portion of nurses are anti-vax. Can nurses use VAERS? I know a lot of them love getting in the middle of shit they have no idea about.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  136. BenKenobi says:
    @Alexander Turok

    >uses 4chan meme to make pro-globohomo post
    Yep, it’s a shill.

    • Replies: @Alexander Turok
  137. Anon[176] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    Whereas, when a person is injected with a mRNA vaccine, the nanoparticles may enter the blood stream and trigger antigen production anywhere in the body, such as the brain or blood vessels.

    You don’t seem to be accounting for the difference between the traditional vaccine and just flooding your system (as a consequence of the mRNA vaccine) with little spike proteins that aren’t identical with viruses found in the wild.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  138. @Mr. Anon

    Vaccines along with all other drugs and biologics main and kill some of the people they’re given to. This is not news, and in a way, not even particularly interesting unless of course you’ve got a real connection to someone who rolled snake eyes.

    Yet pharma companies have a liability shield against suits brought for damages done by vacciness. That might be one reason why they are so keen on them.

    It’s because our government is cheap, and it’s an open question with how insane our civil legal system is if any company would bother to develop COVID-19 vaccines for our market without their being a “vaccine court” like the one established when Reagan was president for childhood vaccines as we were about to run out of companies willing to market the whole cell pertussis vaccine.

    VAERS has now reported something like 3-4,000 deaths that have followed hard on the heels of a CoV vaccination. Of course the CDC officially maintains that there have only been a few deaths. Those other few thousand cases were just coincidental.

    Sorry for getting intemperate, but the wall to wall stupidity in this latest batch of approved messages is getting to me.

    Almost half the entire nation, 146 million people, have gotten at least one dose of vaccine, and it’s weighted towards the older and less healthy. This may have escaped your notice, but people die every day from non-trauma causes. If you have any actuarial insight as to the number of people from this population who you expect to normally die during the five months vaccines have been administered you might have something useful to contribute to the discussion.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @gda53
  139. vhrm says:
    @Greta Handel

    2. If not, then isn’t relying on the efficacy rate to inform a decision without understanding the distinction between relative and absolute risks — i.e., that there’s less than 1% chance of hospitalization with or without the shots — “foolish”?

    But these were numbers from free living people over a relatively short time period.

    They don’t know how many were even exposed to Covid.

    A more impressive test would be to challenge the participants with known amounts of virus, but that kind of testing I guess is considered unethical.

    Although apparently they’re doing some in the UK now (not on vaccine though)
    https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-04-19-human-challenge-trial-launches-study-immune-response-covid-19

    I wish they started doing this kind of thing a year ago…

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  140. JR Ewing says:
    @another fred

    This is part and parcel with the nonsense that the flu “disappeared”. It did not.

    We mostly quit testing for the flu and instead are calling all respiratory illnesses “covid” and “covid-like”.

    When you’re a politician with a hammer….

  141. @notsaying

    ‘…Oregon is getting affected by a variant too. They are going to put restrictions back in some counties…’

    They’re going to drive everyone outside of Portland and Eugene to secede.

  142. @Anne Lid

    The virus infects your upper respiratory tract, if you are unfortunate, the lower tract as well. The vaccine introduces that small part of the virus into the bloodstream and with it goes wherever in the body, where the normally acquired virus would never get.

    You are extraordinarily, woefully misinformed. COVID-19 is so bad because while it’s transmitted by respiration, it’s a vascular disease that in fact “goes wherever in the body”. See just the latest on this from a huge Veteran Health Administration data set, but have you really, truly, never heard about it affecting people’s toes, the dual male organs of reproduction, micro-clots in people’s hearts, how it gets past the brain blood barrier and can cause a number of effect to that??

    You’re also wrong about the vaccine bit, it’s administered in an area where there’s no major blood vessels, that is muscle, and mostly ends up in immune system parts of your body in the area of injection which of course is no accident, our bodies are “designed” well. But the antibodies, T cells, etc. that it prompts the creation of do get around so they can prevent or limit infection.

    • Replies: @Anne Lid
  143. TTSSYF says:
    @LabMan

    So are you free to dispose of the mask?

  144. fredtard says:

    I just skimmed the comments, so somebody may have already raised the issue of antibody testing, or the unavailability thereof.

    Up until covid, vaccine efficacy was always and only measured, in both clinical trials and workplace applications (such as rabies for vets or Hep B for surgeons) by blood antibody titer, usually quantitatively. Now, the only way to get a SARS-COV2 antibody test without paying through the nose is to donate blood. Yet they’re giving away PCR-spike protein RNA sequence tests almost everywhere.

    Antibody testing is routine, time-tested. But it’s being poo-pooed in the case of covid. Think of all the questions, on both personal and societal levels that could be answered by widespread antibody testing. Was I previously infected? How long does vaccine immunity last? How long does naturally-acquired immunity last? Why take the shots if I already have immunity? Ahhh, maybe that’s a reason to banish and ignore what we’ve done for every previous vaccine.

    I’ve read the CDC guidance on antibody testing from mid-March 2021. At that time, 60 antibody tests had been issued EUAs by the FDA. None are characterized as quantitative, merely qualitative or semi-quant. Some look for antibodies against only segments (of varying lengths and locations) of the spike protein (S-1 subunit), and some look for antibodies against the nucleocapsid (N) protein also. The shots only generate S-1 antibodies, so a S-1/N antibody test could distinguish between shot and natural immunity.

    Anecdotally, I’ve talked to several people who have tested positive (PCR) after getting the shots. And why shouldn’t they? If the shots do what we’re being told they do, spike protein is produced, and that’s what the test is for.

    So, donate blood, get an antibody test, and then decide if you need the shots.

  145. TTSSYF says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Sure, but I don’t have to tell everyone about it, especially when it’s off-topic.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  146. TTSSYF says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    And I see you’re also capable of lying.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  147. @anonymous

    Be all that you can be, but if that isn’t very much, that’s OK.

  148. Anne Lid says:
    @Buffalo Joe

    I am one of those staff members who refuses. It’s not because I love my staycation, it’s because of the relentless propaganda. They talk about COVID day and night, plaster public places with signs, and they lied too much. Last year, shortly after starting work at a nursing home I felt a headache and moodiness, sure signs (for me) that a flu is developing. I was told to stop scaring people with my silly mask (at the time masks were told to be unnecessary by the state experts), a thermometer was pointed at my forehead and I was declared fit. Not that I thought it was covid, but I naively thought that people with the flu should not work with frail old people. The day after I had proper fever and stayed home. By the time I returned residents started dieing and the mood was grim. I am sure I went through C, whether I infected the residents or they infected me, is unclear. So they can shove their touted vaccines. I would take Sputnik, but for what? I have naturally acquired immunity. Since then I tested twice +, no symptoms. After the death wave occasionally a few residents test + randomly, sometimes without anyone else around them being positive, also asymptomatics. Most of my workmates got vaccinated because they want to travel back to visit their countries (the English are a minority among the workers).

    • Thanks: vhrm
  149. @vhrm

    Let’s just say that declaring a vaxx 94% efficacious without any idea how many participants subsequently came into contact with an infectious dose of the pathogen the vaxx is supposed to protect against is dubious at best; the methodology used is actually a misspecification of the denominator.

  150. notsaying says:
    @TomSchmidt

    “These two should have been extremely symptomatic. Instead, the vaccine seems to have protected them from feeling sick – but not from being thoroughly infected and potentially spreading the virus.”

    I don’t know what we are going to do about this. I have read that the drug companies are going to continue research to find vaccines that will not only stop people from getting sick from Covid-19 but prevent them from transmitting it to others.

    We have no idea how long this will take though.

    The government is not explaining to people that vaccinated people can pass Covid-19 along to other people even though that fact clearly drives many of their decisions. I myself have been vaccinated and have realized the problems the unvaccinated will cause to the vaccinated. I don’t want to keep on wearing masks and maintaining social distancing due to the unvaccinated. The people choosing to be unvaccinated scream about freedom but I am afraid it will be them keeping the rest of us in chains.

  151. northeast says:
    @anonymous

    Well, that’s depressing.

  152. nixxer says:
    @TomSchmidt

    Well, after reading all your comments you’ve finally convinced me that if everyone got the vaccine this whole so-called “pandemic” will be snuffed out. Like you said, it’s not 100% effective, but I couldn’t live with myself if I turned out to be the asymptomatic “vector” that presented the virus to someone who was vaccinated and it broke through. If I get vaccinated, the chances of that happening are far less.

    I was not sure but I just booked my appointment for my first shot for tomorrow morning. Thanks.

  153. I have had three “experimental” shots of transfer factor which is manufactured in Cuba, and supposed to boost the immune system–at least according to my doctor, although that does not seem to be any scientific evidence that it is helpful with Covid-19. However I do feel great, so the placebo effect is powerful.

    However they were using it in Cuba for people over 65 while waiting for a vaccine, and seem to have had pretty good outcomes with Covid-19 in Cuba. (Islands seem to do a lot better with this disease than continents, with the exception of the British Isles, which are connected to Europe by a tunnel.)

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33069187/

    However I am getting a vaccine tomorrow, so if I cease posting effective tomorrow, then you can put me down as a vaccine victim.

  154. Anne Lid says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    So I’m a numpty, nothing new about that. I had covid toe, weeks after my initial bout, have no idea how the virus works. So I was factually wrong, you say? Probably you are right about that. Even so, I don’t want the blasted vaccine, because I am sick to my stomach with the way the C hysteria and the vaccine are pushed.

    • Replies: @vhrm
  155. HA says:
    @dcthrowback

    “Trusting the same people who said every death w/ COVID was the cause (line one on death certificates as protocol no matter what!!! – change in march 2020 CDC guidelines) of death while dwelling on 570K deaths like a CNN ticker while also simultaneously trusting those same folks who are wholly uninterested in the documentation, tracking and publication of vaccine related side effects is really something, but our #teamVIRUS bros in the chat are just those folks.”

    To the extent this is another grip about mislabeling, you could address it in the same way that the issue was addressed in the case of COVID itself. I.e., look at excess death rates among the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated and compare.

    Then again, the just-a-flu bros assured us in these pages a little over a year ago that excess death rate comparisons were the only reliable method of figuring out what COVID was doing. Professional covid skeptic Alex Berenson agreed.

    But then, after having to keep explaining away freakish spikes like these they seem to have lost all interest in those curves for some strange reason. Which is too bad, since as of March 13, those curves have dropped BELOW average and have since then just kept going down. In other words, we’ve issued significantly fewer death certificates than normal over this last month and a half.

    Be sure and remember all that if, for some other mysterious reason, the just-a-flu bros again take a sudden interest in excess death figures again. It wouldn’t surprise me.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @TomSchmidt
  156. @TTSSYF

    Ouch! I am wounded!

    My reply was perfectly relevant to his comment.

    More important is the question of why this bothers you so much.

    • Replies: @TTSSYF
  157. Grumpy says:
    @Torn and Frayed

    The Japanese have been very reluctant about the vaccine. This will attract attention as the Tokyo Olympics approach. Less than one million Japanese out of 126 million have been fully vaccinated.

    Of course, Japan has had only 80 covid deaths-per-million. Minnesota (now 35.5 percent fully vaccinated) has had more than 1200 covid deaths-per-million.

  158. vinteuil says:
    @I, Libertine

    From the day of the announcement of Operation Warp Speed from the White House Press Briefing room until Election Day, we saw a parade of Democrat politicians and various leftist influencers stare into a television camera and proclaim to the world that they would never trust a vaccine developed while Trump was is office.

    That really happened, right? That’s not just my long term memory playing tricks on me, as it sometimes does, right?

    But the “vaccine” in the current “vaccine hesitancy” phenomenon we’re seeing consists of vaccines developed while Trump was in office. That’s also true, right?

    Yes, all that really happened. Your memory is not playing tricks on you.

    We have not always been at war with EastAsia.

  159. xinc says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    “why take a risk?”

    You’re taking a risk no matter what. Would you rather get a virus that was made in a Chinese bio lab?

    Don’t be a coward.

    • Agree: Jack D
    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
  160. fredtard says:
    @fredtard

    My error: PCR measures RNA, not protein.

  161. @xinc

    “Everyone should get vaccinated. Don’t be a baby about it.”

    Only a baby runs to the hospital for the sniffles. Only a baby takes an experimental prick for the sniffles. You kinda got it all backwards, my Covimbecile.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  162. @TTSSYF

    “Are you capable of writing fewer than 500 words per reply?”

    Pfizer pays That Would Be Shilling by the word.

  163. Anon[378] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Succumbing to the hysteria and getting the vaccine.

  164. TTSSYF says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I just don’t like hearing about other people’s sexual exploits, just as I don’t like hearing about their medical issues. No offense, Buzz, as I read and like most of your comments. I’m just grossed out by hearing about other people’s personal affairs. It’s just me, not you.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  165. @Alexander Turok

    I wish.

    I’m actually looking for a line, like the author of the post mentioned. Of course, if you want an interesting line graph, you can check out the 14-and-under graph here:
    https://euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/

    Now, the 15-44 line doesn’t look good; but my guess is that 14-29 would still show a deficit of deaths over the last year of COVID, and 30-44 an excess.

    But that’s just a scare graph on the internet. Based on actual death data. From governments not yet as pozzed as the US government, nor as owned by pharmaceutical companies. So, useless?

  166. @I, Libertine

    “But it’s different when we do it!”

  167. @Kaz

    I just use it to query the data, so I don’t know how one submits reports

  168. @notsaying

    The bit you quoted actually suggests the opposite from what you wrote: the vaccinated will become a SEVERE threat to the unvaccinated if a Marek’s disease situation arises. In that case, anyone NOT getting vaccinated is asking for it.

    “I myself have been vaccinated and have realized the problems the unvaccinated will cause to the vaccinated. I don’t want to keep on wearing masks and maintaining social distancing due to the unvaccinated. The people choosing to be unvaccinated scream about freedom but I am afraid it will be them keeping the rest of us in chains.”

    I think it’s fair after some point in the USA to decide: everyone who wanted a vaccine could have gotten one by now. If you weren’t vaccinated and you get COVID, tough. Masks off (not that they work unless N95 in any case) for all, and open everything up..

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @notsaying
  169. @That Would Be Telling

    All you need to know about the vaccines is the following: there’s a voluntary, incomplete, half-assed system for tracking adverse events after vaccination called VAERS. But no mention of official data tracking of this giant experiment. If that sounds sensible to you, go ahead and get vaccinated.
    By the way, this trick of not recording or testing for the data you might not like is common in medical “science”. For example, in the rushed covid vaccine trials, they carefully avoided recording deaths in the control group and vaccine group. Like lawyers say, never ask a question you don’t know the answer to. Except for these guys it’s never ask a question for which you know the answer will make you look bad. How much you want to bet deaths are no different with and without the vaccine? A small numbe of people die from covid; a small number of people die from the vaccine (so far; watch out for ADE when the next corona virus comes long.)

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  170. @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    Lots of people can empathize with your fear of needles, Je Suis. No need to play the phony Internet tough guy so much. Just come out and admit “I am scared of needles” and you’ll feel better.

  171. @Steve Sailer

    My name is JohnnyWalker123 and I am scared of needles.

  172. Damn.

  173. @Steve Sailer

    LOL Steve. I am not afraid of needles. Stick me all you want.

    I just had a tooth extracted by my favorite oral surgeon. Four months from now, when his bone graft has had a chance to grow, he will screw in an implant made in Switzerland. I go to him because he is the best and because he understands physics and mechanics, unlike lots of soft-handed doctors and dentists.

    Last year, he went skiing in Utah. I respect that, because Utah has the best snow.

    What I am afraid of is this whole damned world, which you otherwise seem to understand. But: when it comes to a bad flu virus, you and Ron go all “old lady nerd” on us. Really, Steve, do you know what you are writing about?

    Sure, it’s bad, but so are a lot of things. Do we shut down America and destroy livelihoods for those?

    I’ll have a new tooth in four months, to go with the other two that my excellent, strong, masculine surgeon has given me. To the tune of may thousands of dollars, BTW. He’s worth it.

    But will I still have to wear a mask when I see him?

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Bernard
  174. @TTSSYF

    Thanks. I respect that. I know I am pushing the envelope sometimes.

    Thank you for your comments and your honesty.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
  175. notsaying says:
    @TomSchmidt

    No, I understand you and wrote what I meant.

    I expect the vaccinated will be inconvenienced protecting the unvaccinated. From the perspective of the unvaccinated, being around those people who got the current vaccines available makes them vulnerable to infection from the vaccinated.

    You solution is easy and logical but can you actually see us just telling people, to heck with you, we’re all going back to normal and if you get sick, you get sick? I don’t see us doing that and don’t know what we will do instead. Who knows though maybe the unvaccinated will scream so loud for restrictions to end that we give in to them. They won’t be willing to accept the consequences though. It’s like the anti-cop people: You can depend on them calling the police when they get into trouble no matter what they said before.

    • Troll: Je Suis Omar Mateen
  176. @I, Libertine

    You are correct, Sir. Additionally, Fraudsident Fkface complained about the process being slow but got his second shot even before Trump left office.

  177. @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco

    This assumes that 100% of the unvaccinated population will get COVID. In the Pfizer and Moderna studies only 8% of the placebo group contracted CV

    So if you do not get vaccinated you have an 8% risk of contracting CV and if you are fully vaccinated your risk drops from 8% to 1%

    For the purposes of making an application for a FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) those Phase III studies only had to run long enough for two months to have passed for half of those getting the vaccine, and with the double or better blinding, that would be true for the placebo arms of the trials. What makes you think people in or outside the study aren’t going to eventually breath in an infective dose of the virus?

    (While the FDA would like more data, ethically the drug companies have to eventually unblind the studies and offer all the placebo subjects the vaccine, or in the case of Novavax they’re doing a “crossover,” in a blinded fashion everyone gets the opposite of whatever they first got, if vaccine then placebo injections. Phase III tests starting this year like Sanofi/GSK’s V2.0 will be giving the control arm with an already proven vaccine, the existing “standard of care.”)

  178. Alden says:
    @Sick of Orcs

    Cal state prison system is in the process of releasing 76K violent felons really because of the danger of covid hoax.

    So either the prison medics think covid hoax is rampant or it’s an excuse to get more black thugs on the streets just in time for summer riot season.

  179. Alden says:
    @Ralph L

    I doubt you know any younger women at all. You’re just repeating a women hating idea popular among your incel woman less old buddies. Start a website womenhaters.org

  180. Rashomoan says:
    @anonymous

    Have these recruits no pride?

  181. @Steve Sailer

    Easy, easy does it. Can’t we all just agree to disagree here? I mean, those who think they’d be better off vaccinated can get it pretty easily by this point. Those of us who think they’d be worse off, or who just couldn’t give a rat’s ass either way [raises hand], can pass on it, leaving more doses for those who do. We non-participants should not affect the health of you Ronatards, and we will die off quicker anyway due to natural selection. It’s a win/win!

    The wheel is turning and you can’t slow down.
    You can’t let go and you can’t hold on.
    You can’t go back and you can’t stand still.
    If the COVID don’t get you, then the lightning will.

  182. @Diversity Heretic

    “I’m sixty-seven and would much rather take my chances with a coronavirus which human immune systems evolved to handle relatively well”

    Lots of evolution has been going on in humans since late 2019.

  183. @Bill H.

    I can never remember: Is the vaccine unnecessary because so many people have gotten covid already or because so few have gotten it?

    Can you guys get together and work that one out and then let me know?

  184. @BenKenobi

    Well, 4chan did know about corona before anyone else did. 4chan is somewhat like the old Slate Star Codex comment section.(now moved to DSL) Denizens range from liberal to conservative to libertarian to far-right, but because the latter are tolerated the whole website develops an undeserved far-right reputation. The differences is that while in SSC the moderation was strict and the culture was to avoid trolling and personal attacks, on 4chan trolling and personal attacks are considered the highest form of debate.

    If wanting to hang anti-vaxxers from trees makes me globohomo, I’ll gladly jump on the anal and immigration bandwagon.

  185. @fredtard

    For clinical trials serological tests like for antibodies is a surrogate endpoint, and for a 100% lethal pathogen like the rabies vaccine you mention the best acceptable one, along with some T cell testing I would hope.

    Here we had no existing “standard of care” for vaccination, a much less lethal or causing morbidity pathogen, and a pandemic in which no 2020 vaccine trial had the slightest difficultly getting enough cases in their control/placebo arms to be able to statistically prove with sufficient confidence their vaccine actually worked for real, against community transmitted COVID-19, by the time they had enough safety testing for an Emergency Use Authorization application, and now for the mRNA vaccines six months of safety data for Biologics License Applications for full licensure.

    We are doing serological tests of all sorts to all sorts of populations. For the earliest Phase III vaccine trials where the control arm was a placebo, it’s one thing that can ethically be done once the study is unblinded so the control arm subject can be offered the vaccine. Although of course everyone will also be followed for the two year formal length of the clinical trial to see if they get COVID-19; again, real endpoints are preferred over surrogate ones. That may have to be changed if variants that partly escape vaccine immunity start circulating, and ethically would have to be if we got a total escape.

    One reason to get at least one dose of a vaccine if you already have natural immunity is that we believe you’ll get better overall immunity. And serological tests are not close to 100% reliable, are expensive, and maybe more expensive if it’s been long enough after getting COVID-19 that the original fleet of antibodies etc. has faded. Obviously this must happen sooner or later because otherwise sometime before you exited childhood your blood would have run out of space for red blood cells from all the colds, stomach “flus” etc. you got. For antibodies, memory B cells develop and even refine your response over a number of months after an exposure to an antigen, we believe in part to anticipate being exposed to mutations AKA variants of the original pathogen.

    • Replies: @gda53
  186. @Diversity Heretic

    I’m sixty-seven and would much rather take my chances with a coronavirus which human immune systems evolved to handle relatively well

    It’s too bad this only kills oldsters, or else it would make a great eugenic selection mechanism.

  187. @Greta Handel

    Studies are done over limited periods of time in order to report results in a timely fashion. If your chance of catching covid over 3 months is X then your chance of catching covid over 3 years is a lot higher.

    Think about it.

    • Agree: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Greta Handel
    , @Travis
  188. Bernard says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I’ll have a new tooth in four months, to go with the other two that my excellent, strong, masculine surgeon has given me.

    Better check on that Buzz, I’ve had one installed and in the midst to getting a second put in. In my experience it goes; 1 Bone graft, wait a minimum of 3 months, often slightly longer. 2. Get implant installed, wait a minimum of three months (almost never), but probably more like six. 3. Return for the final installation of the abutment and crown.
    It will be a year, or close to if your dentist is competent and it sounds like he is.
    A final note. Be sure to use a very good dentist or a prosthodontist for the crown. An oral surgeon specializes in the bone and gums, the placement of the crown is a different issue. Given that it seems you’re a man of some means, I’d suggest a prosthodontist. You don’t want to do it twice. I learned the hard way.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  189. @JimDandy

    “Young, healthy, unvaccinated people with virtually no chance of dying from Covid need to protect other young, healthy, unvaccinated people with virtually no chance of dying from Covid?”

    Do young, healthy, unvaccinated people only interact with other young, healthy people?

    Maybe on a nuclear submarine cruise, I suppose.

  190. Anonymous[301] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    It’s up to those who think they need the unapproved vaccine to get it, Not the people who do not need it.

    Come on man!

  191. @Erik Sieven

    Vaccinated people are likely to socially distance less than unvaccinated people.

    But that’s a good thing!

    The point of the vaccines is to get this whole experience over and done.

    • Agree: PiltdownMan
    • Troll: Je Suis Omar Mateen
  192. Anonymous[301] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mike Tre

    Exactly!

    WTF is wrong with this guy.. I thought he had come to his senses about this whole thing but he hasn’t, he just stopped writing about it for a while..

  193. Travis says:
    @Steve Sailer

    The vaccine is not necessary for healthy people and under the age of 40 because they probably already had COVID or have a strong enough immune system to fight it without getting sick. Most people under the age of 40 do not even get a fever when they infected and a third have zero symptoms so will never know they are have acquire immunity.

    But those over the age of 60 should get the vaccine , as they are the ones who do get sick from COVID. Thankfully 80% of the elderly have been vaccinated. Not sure why they insist on the young adults getting vaccinated since they are now immune. What are they afraid of ? Do they have no confidence that the vaccine will protect them ?

    In typical years 75% of the elderly are vaccinated for the flu , but they don’t insist that younger people get the flu vaccine to protect the elderly.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Thanks: Mark G.
  194. Jack D says:
    @Steve Sailer

    It’s kind of like affirmative action – originally we could not abolish Affirmative Action because its beneficiaries were too powerless. Now we cannot abolish Affirmative Action because its beneficiaries are too powerful.

    • LOL: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  195. @The Anti-Gnostic

    The flu vaccine is 40 – 60% effective in any given year. Basically a coin toss, and despite all the jabs, year after year, we’ve never achieved herd immunity from the rolling H1N1 pandemic we’ve been in since the early 20th century.

    The former is because our bodies don’t develop either natural or vaccine immunity to conserved parts of the flu virus, the parts that can’t change or “the virus won’t virus.” Every six months experts guess what the primary circulating strains will be some months in advance for a hemisphere’s flu season to allow time to prepare and administer vaccines and they don’t always get it right.

    The latter sort of happened because the two mid-century flu pandemics first replaced H1N1 with H2N2, and then H3N2. Then in 1976 some idiots at a bioweapon lab accidentally released a H1N1 strain believed to have been isolated in the 1946-57 period, and it started circulating in younger folks who’d never been exposed to H1N1 after it was replaced by H2N2. Since then we have both circulating plus type B strains, except as you note the flu all but disappeared for the 2020-21 northern hemisphere season. Although it could well come back, it’s still out there and I gather we don’t understand the flu well enough to predict what will happen. Like we didn’t predict this.

    What this says for COVID is uncertain; unique among the RNA viruses coronaviruses have a proofreading mechanism, but mistakes AKA mutations of course still happen. When the virus gets into a situation of intense competition, either inside a single human’s body that doesn’t throw it off quickly, or starts hitting a brick wall of natural and vaccine immunity, more competitive variants can emerge. Like the British one which mostly just transmits better.

    Given that we’ve hardly begun developing COVID vaccines, and we have plenty of “eternal” vaccines against RNA viruses that mutate at much higher rates since they invoke responses to conserved parts of the viruses, a good guess is that we’ll go back and forth with the virus until it runs out of tricks. Perhaps somewhat like what happened when measles split off from rinderpest sometime in the period 5th to 15th Century AD. Rinderpest is the second virus eradicated from the earth, BTW, after of course smallpox.

  196. joe_mama says:
    @I, Libertine

    This drove me nuts as well. I remember chatting with my long time lefty acquaintance last fall, and him telling me how no way he’s getting such a quickly vetted experimental shot. Fast forward to last month, and he sends me his vaccination selfie.

    I also remember Gavin Newsom on the news proclaiming that CA won’t be getting some rushed out Trump shot. I also remember Kamala Harris famously proclaiming she wouldn’t get the shot either if Trump was for it.

    Is everyone’s memory really that bad? Are their brains incapable of cognitive dissonance? Or do they just have no shame?

    • Agree: res
  197. @Steve Sailer

    What’s with the non sequitur snark, scared boomer?

    I suppose if you’ve always felt you need to “modernize your RNA” and roll the dice with a real-life David Cronenberg The Stand adaptation because Davos Man assured you it’d be a good idea then you’d be all gravy with shooting up every child in the White population with a radically unnecessary, radically unvetted gene therapy because children playing frisbee outdoors fifty miles away might cause you to drop dead. Yet I doubt you’ve always felt this–it’s the untimely (you thought) jab of the fear of death that taught you this unwisdom.

    After all, I’m sure there’ll be lots of Haitian, Nigerian, and Somalian orphans Davos Man conveniently forgot to “jab” in need of some love Children of Man style once your grandkids turn out to be sterile. And what will you be able to do, but cheer it on?

    An ironic end to your career, some might say; but then, as listening to the local Chamber of Commerce honchos enjoy their barbeque every day has taught me, you boomers are just as bad as Larry Auster’s negroes on C-Span. With those every fifth word is “black black blackety blackety black”; with you it’s “gold golf golfety golfety golf.” So you have priorities, at least. But some have others . . . .

    • Troll: S. Anonyia
  198. @Steve Sailer

    OK, that was too much. I apologize for the insult. I wanted to introduce that new term of mine, but I really didn’t mean it to sound that way, especially as applied to you. I respect your opinions on 98% of the stuff you write about. This is just a part of the 2% I disagree with you on. I should have stayed off of this thread. Again, sorry about that one.

    Plus, I could have picked out a better version of The Wheel.

  199. @notsaying

    What problem ?

    I fail to see how unvaccinated people pose any risk to those who are vaccinated.

    • Replies: @notsaying
  200. @Achilleus

    Eh, I think the extended lockdowns and outdoor mask mandates are far more evil to young people than the vaccine. Vaccine is like a flu shot- pretty unnecessary but if it opens up international travel sooner, gets workplaces to stop forcing its employees to take random COVID tests, and gets the crazy COVID-lovers to shut up faster, let’s get the shots and get it over with.

    Also, suicide rates apparently fell during the pandemic. Similarly fell during WWI/WWII- there are a lot of mentally unstable people out there who are actually enjoying the pandemic. A lot of people like feeling like they are part of some “great event.” They will resist going back to normal for years.

  201. @Bernard

    Thanks, but I’ve done this two times before. Both my oral surgeon and my dentist are the best.

    One thing I discovered a quarter of a century ago, when I moved here to the Northeast from Colorado, was that — yes — they do have more and better professionals here. You know, people like me! LOL. Maybe that’s why I am here and making double what I could have made in Colorado.

    I have two implants about a decade now from this surgeon and this dentist. My dentist went to Columbia. He was a pitcher on their baseball team. You need to know how I make my decisions. Both of these guys are — shall we say — guys. Guys I respect and admire.

    I like them, and they never have failed me.

    • Replies: @Bernard
  202. @Alden

    They have their own agenda for releasing people, but don’t they have access to, like, the COVID vaccine?

  203. PiltdownWoman lost a cousin last week to Covid-19. He was fifty, but had type 1 diabetes. It took three days, from his checking into the hospital after testing positive. A college friend is on a ventilator right now, and it is not looking good. Going by the numbers these days, the odds were against my knowing any Covid-19 patients personally.

    I’m glad I’m vaccinated, as also my wife, and adult twentysomething kid. The Piltdowns figure that personal savvy and calculating of odds is not superior to following advice on medical matters. Especially the merits of vaccination, which have been established for a long time.

  204. Achilleus says:

    OT: WuFlu and/or “Vaccine” long-term effects may be the least of SoCal Steve’s worries…

    https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2021-05-01/76-000-california-inmates-now-eligible-for-earlier-releases

  205. @Buzz Mohawk

    Bro, I love reading about your exploits. Keep it coming!

    • Thanks: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @TTSSYF
  206. Bernard says:
    @Steve Sailer

    “Young, healthy, unvaccinated people with virtually no chance of dying from Covid need to protect other young, healthy, unvaccinated people with virtually no chance of dying from Covid?”

    Do young, healthy, unvaccinated people only interact with other young, healthy people?

    Maybe on a nuclear submarine cruise, I suppose.

    Once everyone over 40 and those with a health conditions have had the opportunity to be vaccinated, I could care less what people do. When it becomes “only the flu” for the greater population, then the hell with any more restrictions, it’s over. If people don’t want to get vaccinated, then let them suffer the consequences, if any. Enough is enough.

  207. @Diversity Heretic

    Giving children or even young people an experimental, unapproved vaccine

    For a group of people who don’t have much faith in the government generally speaking, you sure are placing a lot of faith in the FDA approval process. Sounds like a red herring to me.

  208. vhrm says:
    @Anne Lid

    I fought through a some of the same sentiment, but there’s that “don’t cut off your nose to spite your face” idea that comes into play.

    Whereas i think much of the response to Covid ranged from ineffective to treasonous the vaccines are a bright spot. Decide whether you want to get one on its own merits rather than looking at it as part of the cloud of propaganda and paternalism that we’ve been living under. i.e. don’t look at it as giving in or letting “them” win etc. That’s my $0.02 on it.

    • Agree: S. Anonyia
    • Replies: @Anne Lid
  209. joe_mama says:
    @The Alarmist

    There’s a big issue of trust as well regarding vaccines. Had a relative who was given the Pneumonia vaccine in the last 6 mos as a precaution. On the second dose, their arm swelled up and got hard and red at the shot location, in addition to other odd symptoms that occurred as well.

    They had to go into the urgent care and almost the ER. The thing that was most disconcerting about it all, was that the doctors would not admit that it was due to the vaccine. It was just a coincidence that a cellulitis developed at the shot location along with the other side effects. We were just stunned at how completely obtuse they were about the whole thing.

    After that experience, it of course makes us wary about the corona vaccine. I just assume that some bad reactions are covered up so as to keep the official numbers low. Exactly how many are covered up though? A lot? Just a few? Our public health officials have sure done a good job of squandering public trust this past year.

    • Agree: Ben Kurtz, Adam Smith
  210. Bernard says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I have two implants about a decade now from this surgeon and this dentist. My dentist went to Columbia. He was a pitcher on their baseball team. You need to know how I make my decisions. Both of these guys are — shall we say — guys. Guys I respect and admire.

    Funny, I’m a lot the same way. My guy is a former Professor from a prestigious dental university, I love to chat him up. Alas, the procedure he performs involves my mouth, and therefore doesn’t often allow for lengthy discussions.

  211. TTSSYF says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    You mean they don’t publish Penthouse Forum anymore?

    • LOL: Buzz Mohawk
  212. notsaying says:
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco

    Here in the US the unvaccinated don’t pose much of a risk to the vaccinated because the vaccines used here are so effective. What I do expect is that all of us will be required to keep on wearing masks and continue social distancing because of them.

    But some of the other vaccines out there are not nearly as effective. In many other countries a lot of the vaccinated will still get sick and of course the unvaccinated will get sick too. Everybody around the world will need to get great vaccines to nip this in the bud.

    • Troll: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @Greta Handel
    , @TomSchmidt
  213. @Steve Sailer

    You addressed only the weaker half of DH’s argument. I’d like to hear what you think about the first part of his comment.
    To restate: why should those at little risk from the virus take an experimental vaccine in order to protect those at higher risk who refuse to take it? Do the young have such obligations to the old, and are these in some way reciprocated?
    You said we should take the vacc because we like the kind of curmudgeon who refuses it. Well, maybe, but how much?
    Further, I think your conception of death is different to ours, hence our disagreement. If an old, sick person dies, that is not a tragedy. When I am old and sick I will expect to die and I’ll not urge the young to make sacrifices just to give met a few more months or years.
    If a young, hale person dies from a vaccine side effect or any other cause, that is a tragedy, however rare it may be.
    If the young want to take one for the team (and the risk is, of course, very low) then good on them. Just be clear-eyed about what you are asking of others, and perhaps reflect on what choices you would have made if there’d been an experimental vaccine available against the Asian Flu when you were young.

    • Replies: @Ben Kurtz
  214. Anon[280] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    https://budesonideworks.com/

    Think about treatments. Early treatment for Covid changes the risks/benefits analysis for the vaccines. The above was taken by a 90 year-old very bright lady, who is overweight and had lymphoma 2 years ago. She reports her Covid symptoms disappeared after the third inhalation.

  215. JimDandy says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Exactly, what about nuclear submarines and island paradise communities of the young and beautiful like the one depicted in Leonardo DiCaprio’s The Beach?

    I think young, healthy people who decide to skip the jab are engaging in different reasoning than old/sick people who make the same choice due to “their own foolishness over vaccines.” I can understand why you think that it is the former group’s responsibility to protect the latter group, but I respectfully disagree. As another commenter wrote: “I’m not anti-vaxx, but I am pro safe vaxx, and the jury is still out on all of the COVID vaxxes.”

  216. Ben Kurtz says:
    @Torn and Frayed

    Studies coming out of Israel suggest that the Covid-19 vaccines are not, in fact, particularly “leaky” — they do quite a good job of curbing spread, not just reducing symptoms and disease severity in vaccinated individuals.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-israel-vaccine-int-idUSKBN2AJ08J

    The clinical studies supporting the emergency use authorizations weren’t designed to test the question of transmission reduction, so fear-mongers like the Evil Weasel Dr. Fauci made a big deal of saying ‘we don’t know if this vaccine is effective at stopping transmission, so we all have to assume the worst and continue to wear masks and constantly live in fear.’ But that was the evil coercive misleading thing, really — because the vast majority of vaccines do a pretty good job of stopping transmission, and it would have been much more honest to acknowledge at the time that while we didn’t yet know it to a scientific certainty, it is a pretty darn good bet that the vaccines would have a strong anti-transmission effect.

    Now that we know this anti-transmission effect exists, it provides some rational basis for advising low-risk younger people to take the vaccine — it will reduce the risk that some 20 year old gives the virus to some 80 year old who has allergies and cannot take the vaccine. That’s not nothing, and it wasn’t something we had solid data to back up until recently.

    Yet on balance I’m not really sold on the blanket idea of having all 16+ year old people take an unlicensed vaccine that is still in some sense experimental. (All the Covid-19 vaccines are currently distributed under an “Emergency Use Authorization”, not a full license, and long-term safety data by definition does not yet exist.) If someone is a young person who has a lot of contact with older folks, particularly those who might not have had the vaccine for some reason, I can see the moral argument in favor of going out on a limb and getting the jab. But for the average healthy adult below age 50 or so who does not regularly hang out with too many 70 year olds? Why risk the unknown unknowns?

    An even bigger pet peeve is the urge among Democrats to vaccinate all those people who are known to have survived an actual case of Covid. Again, I can sort-of understand going after the 70+ year old survivors as a precaution — it is a good bet that at some point the acquired immunity might fade, and someone that age doesn’t want to learn the hard way that his immunity has lapsed given how hard this disease is on old folks. (President Trump got a single vaccine dose as a booster shot shortly before leaving office, I read somewhere.) But for all the survivors below age 50, it seems the better use of everyone’s time is to at the very least wait until there are good studies out that show very clearly how many months must go by, on average, before survivor’s immunity materially fades, and then base vaccination decisions on that information.

    • Thanks: vhrm
  217. Ben Kurtz says:
    @Nikolai Vladivostok

    [P]erhaps reflect on what choices you would have made if there’d been an experimental vaccine available against the Asian Flu when you were young.

    Almost literally, there was:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957%E2%80%931958_influenza_pandemic#Vaccine_and_aftermath

    https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/asian-influenza-pandemic

    Millions of people took a vaccine that had been rushed to market in a matter of months, and hundreds of thousands of lives were most likely saved.

    Of course, the 1957 Asian flu was fairly hard on infants and children and far less hard on adults and seniors — the opposite of Covid-19 — so it’s apples-and-oranges in at least that one respect.

    (Our gracious host might be slightly too young to have been an elementary school age kid in 1957, but if he missed it I’m sure it was only by a few years.)

    • Replies: @Nikolai Vladivostok
  218. @Ben Kurtz

    Thanks. I meant to say the Hong Kong flu of ’69.

  219. Ben Kurtz says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    Pathogenic viruses that host primarily in humans virtually never outrun our ability to vaccinate. Look at the list of childhood vaccines that we’ve been giving for many decades — smallpox, measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus and polio, to name the most prominent. Though we’ve updated and tweaked the formulations from time to time, we’ve never seen one out-mutate our vaccine development efforts. There are perhaps a dozen more vaccines we’ve been widely using for about two decades now (chickenpox, Hep A , Hep B, Rotavirus, HPV, etc.) with similar results.

    So I’m not overly worried that coronavirus — which mutates relatively slowly — will outrun our vaccine technology.

    (HIV is a sneaky exception — seemingly, because it attacks the immune system itself while mutating freely, we’ve never been able to develop a vaccine for it.)

    The flu virus, in addition to having a bunch of variant families and the ability to mutate quite readily, also hosts widely in birds and swine, which I think is a key reason why we have not yet been able to get ahead of it — vastly more places to hide and mutate before jumping back to people, with vastly poorer surveillance relative to what we can achieve in viruses that affect only humans. But perhaps that is much an organizational and logistical challenge as it is a pure biotechnical challenge. We need much better monitoring and sampling across Chinese, South American and other third-world poultry and pig farms — maybe that will help the formulation team guess better every year, giving us flu shots with far higher efficacy rates.

    • Thanks: TomSchmidt
  220. @epebble

    The virus is highly likely to evolve toward being more transmissible. It’s modestly likely to evolve toward being less lethal. But it’s capability to be transmitted before symptoms appear makes the second less likely than the first.

  221. Dnought says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    Then in 1976 some idiots at a bioweapon lab accidentally released a H1N1 strain believed to have been isolated in the 1946-57 period, and it started circulating in younger folks who’d never been exposed to H1N1 after it was replaced by H2N2.

    ?????

    Never heard of this. Got a citation?

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  222. @HA

    Something to keep in mind about the CDC’s excess death graph

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

    is that the most recent weeks are _always_ below the expected trend line of deaths because death notices trickle in for up to eight weeks after the actual death. The CDC reports deaths on the date occurred, not on the date when they heard about them, so deaths in a given week keep rising for the first couple of weeks or so.

    But, as you suggest, we may actually drop below the long term expected death line either lately or in the future.

    • Replies: @HA
  223. Mr. Anon says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    Sorry for getting intemperate, but the wall to wall stupidity in this latest batch of approved messages is getting to me.

    I’m inclined to feel the same way when I see one of your posts. But then I believe in free speech, so I don’t begrudge you your right to voice your opinion as I voice mine.

    Anyway, you are deflecting. Perfectly healthy people have gotten the jab and died. Perhaps a lot of them. It’s a small fraction of the total number of people innoculated, however if they were at low risk, then they exchanged a small chance of dying of the disease for……………dying.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  224. gda53 says:
    @Old and Grumpy

    Snotty outburst?

    Just looks like reasoned, informed common sense to me.

    What’s wrong with Steve? He take the blue pill by mistake?

  225. gda53 says:
    @Hans

    Apparently he has, which is why he has not responded.

    If you cannot put forward an intelligent and reasoned response, then…….just say nothing. And hope no one notices.

    • Replies: @xinc
  226. AnonAnon says:
    @AnotherDad

    “Vax–no issues seen yet.”

    Where do you come up with that? VAERS, the federal side effects database, has a 3 month backlog. It has 118,000 reports just for CoVid vaccines alone, an amount it typically gets in one year. There are numerous reports of clots, neurological issues, heart attacks, myocarditis, strokes, out of control blood sugar, and numerous other serious illnesses, including deaths, occurring in people soon after being vaccinated.

    Steve, your post might as well have a “Sponsored by Pfizer” disclaimer on it as far as I’m concerned. You’ve been irrational about CoVid from day one and I still can’t tell if it’s organic or paid for. It’s your choice to take an EUA vaccine. I personally like to see a good 10-20 years of use behind [fully FDA-approved] meds and vaccines before I feel comfortable taking them. How often have we seen some vaccine or medicine released on the market only for it to be removed a few years later? Thalidomide, Vioxx, rotavirus vaccines to name a few. Why do you think this vaccine will be any different? The abridged testing is not a confidence booster. It has an enormous number of adverse reports after just a few months in use.

    I’m certainly not having my children, who have a near-zero chance of dying or even becoming seriously ill from CoVid get these vaccines. Sorry Comrades, I and my kids are not responsible for your or anyone else’s health. I promise not to go out and about while sick but I’m not getting a vaccine with less than a year of long term data and truncated testing behind it, particularly one with novel technology that’s fooling around with my RNA and/or DNA. There is no reason to be terrified of CoVid. Get your vitamin D to optimal levels plus take vitamin C, zinc, quercitin, and melatonin. Get ahold of some ivermectin. Follow the FLCC I-mask protocol.

  227. Marquis says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Hilarious coming from the most scared blogger on the internet. Hopefully this is all archived one day so future generations can see how fear turns an otherwise smart, rational person into someone with the reasoning abilities of your average superstitious Amazonian tribesman.

    • Replies: @TTSSYF
  228. Marquis says:
    @vhrm

    You don’t understand what’s going on. The vaccine neither prevents you from getting the virus or passing it on.

    • Disagree: vhrm
  229. Xavier B says:

    It is absolutely crazy that nobody here talks about ivermectin, a safe drug which 1) works as well as vaccines as prophylaxis and 2) is a great treatment

    Please you all, take a look at THIS :

    https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/00000/review_of_the_emerging_evidence_demonstrating_the.4.aspx

    https://ivmmeta.com/

    The alternative is not vaccines vs nothing, it is vaccines (with side effects) vs ivermectin (without side effects).

    • Thanks: JimDandy
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
  230. @TomSchmidt

    Reasonable. Thanks again. – – Grandma should get the shot, those under thirty shouldn’t. Dr. Fauci is out telling people, kids should get be vaccinated – retired Swedish chief-epidemiologist Johan Giesecke says that too: Kids should get the vaccine; he looks a bit depressed these days (coldest winter in forty years in Sweden – so maybe he just suffers from an understandably severe winter depression slouching into spring – that’d be a tough one (Ivor Cummins).
    May I add one more: Epidemiologist Knut Wittkowski, banned from YouTube, said in an interview with the German old-style liberals from Achgut / indubio last week: Lockdowns help to breed CO-19 variants, and some of them – like the Spanish variant, are quite strong and did cause the third wave in Europe. So: Lockdowns are costly in epidemiological hindsight too.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  231. @Steve Sailer

    Think about it.

    I think that you didn’t want to answer my two questions.

  232. xinc says:
    @gda53

    LOL

    If a person has to recite their list of degrees as if to prove they’re not insane, chances are they’re insane. Just because someone earned a degree somewhere isn’t proof they’re not a blithering idiot.

    Some podcast made by a guy in a darkened basement with ads for miracle cures doesn’t fill me with a lot of confidence.

    • Agree: Dissident
  233. xinc says:
    @AnonAnon

    Enjoy your Chinese bio weapon and hope you don’t present it to older loved ones who may be vaccinated but are not entirely immune.

  234. @Inquiring Mind

    90% of our prisoners already had COVID , so have no need to get vaccinated aged because they have acquired natural immunity.

  235. @Alden

    Prisoners get “free” medical and can be segregated at will. Releasing these vermin is the State fomenting chaos again.

  236. @Buffalo Joe

    You’re just like my Boomer Dad. Greatest guy in the world and unimaginably dense about anything inter-generational.

    Never change!

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
  237. @notsaying

    Exceptional! vaccines, too?

  238. @Dnought

    Then in 1976 some idiots at a bioweapon lab accidentally released a H1N1 strain believed to have been isolated in the 1946-57 period, and it started circulating in younger folks who’d never been exposed to H1N1 after it was replaced by H2N2.

    ?????

    Never heard of this. Got a citation?

    Wikipedia is frequently a good place to start, there’s 23 citations for that article. Of course it includes this sentence, “However, the World Health Organization as well as scientists in China and the Soviet Union had denied the theory of laboratory leak.” The WHO’s corruption isn’t a new thing.

    • Thanks: Dnought
  239. Travis says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Most people under the age of 50 have already recovered from COVID and have acquired immunity. The latest CDC estimates conclude that up to ~52% of Americans aged 18-49 have already been infected. The report also calculated that only 24% of those over the age of 65 have been infected with COVID since the pandemic began

    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html

    Getting the vaccine after your immune system already defeated this virus seems foolish and potentially dangerous with no upside benefit. SInce the majority of adults under the age of 50 already recovered from CV we should expect that less than half of them will choose to get vaccinated, since they are already immune.

  240. @Anon

    You don’t seem to be accounting for the difference between the traditional vaccine and just flooding your system (as a consequence of the mRNA vaccine) with little spike proteins that aren’t identical with viruses found in the wild.

    You’re right. No vax is identical to the virus it’s a vax for … or it wouldn’t be a vax. All of them involve exposing you to slightly different proteins. (A different bug, or the same bug but killed–replication destroyed.)

    Do i want my immune system to be exposed to

    a) a bunch of stabilized spike proteins floating around for a few days

    or

    b) the unstabilized version of the spike attached to the Xi virus, ready to schwapp!! through my cell walls infect my cells and force them to replicate more copies of the Xi virus which can go attack/damage my vascular system.

    Hmm … i think i’ll go with “a”.

  241. @That Would Be Telling

    When the virus gets into a situation of intense competition, either inside a single human’s body that doesn’t throw it off quickly, or starts hitting a brick wall of natural and vaccine immunity, more competitive variants can emerge.

    It sounds like vaccines apply the same selection pressure to respiratory viruses as antibiotics do to bacteria.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  242. @Dieter Kief

    Would love the link on Knut.

    As to grandma getting the shot: it’s because we don’t have diagnostic tests to find the 19% of the population with no pre-existing T cell immunity to the disease. Those people are at severe risk.

    As to children, I send you to this link. The guy is a bit of a ranger, but there is an experiment you can run in there. Go to the CDC’s VAERS database and look up the adverse reactions to vaccines,including the mRNA therapy, and you’ll get a table. In the five months that we have been injecting COVID, according to the CDC, we have had 3607 death from the mRNA treatment. That next closest vaccine over YEARS of data is for Haemophilus B at 1363. The Sabin live virus for polio and Hep B are both about 890. So COVID mRNA treatment is much deadlier than ANY known virus, and this in months, not years, of use.

    But now we have a death total and a number of users. We can estimate the risk of death from the mRNA therapy: its low, and probably lower for elderly than risk of death from COVID. By contrast, the risk of death from the vaccine for children FAR EXCEEDS their risk of death from COVID. That one isn’t hard to calculate, if any responsible medical leader would do so.

    Maybe Giesecke?

  243. @notsaying

    One theory making the rounds is that the unvaccinated will serve as a reservoir keeping COVID alive, and maybe breeding a new, more virulent strain that could take down the vaccinated. The requirement is coming.

    “Everybody around the world will need to get great vaccines to nip this in the bud.”
    Um, the disease budded, fully flowered, and was wilting by the time we started injecting mRNA therapy, with declining case numbers. It had probably burned itself through the population; CDC estimates were that 1*3rd of Americans at a minimum had had the infection.

    India is just catching up now.

  244. @Alexander Turok

    Here’s some scary data I found on the internet. At CDC’s website, the VAERS system. You can check it, if you like.

    Go to https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html

    Agree to their disclaimer.
    Click VAERS Data Search
    Group Results By Vaccine Type
    Scroll down to “Event Category” and select Death
    Click SEND

    If you do this, you’ll find that the mRNA therapy has the highest death toll of ANY vaccine or mRNA therapy administered over all the years that VAERS has been tracking data. More than twice as many death events as the second-highest, a vaccine for Haemophilus, which actually kills young people. The mRNA therapy accomplished these kills in five months, compared to years for everyone else.

    Now, if you’re honest, you’ll go figure out the death risk from the mRNA therapy, and then the death risk (numbers of under-30s who’ve actually died from COVID, not from a motorcycle accident with COVID) for under 30s from COVID. If your numbers show a higher risk from COVID, share them with us.

    Otherwise, drop the political attitude and embrace the science.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  245. @onetwothree

    What’s the risk of forcing the vaccine upon those who would dare disagree with your wisdom? Have you modeled that yet? Have you considered what it might do to your protein?

    Something about vaccines really brings the fascist out in people.

    Who said anything about “forcing”?

    I’m not interested in “forcing”–i.e. government coercion–anyone to get the vax. You don’t want to get the vax. Don’t get it.

    I’m talking about the anti-vax arguments. They are stupid.

    ~~~

    Logically there are two solid arguments against getting any particular vaccine. (Like i said this isn’t like “nation of immigrants” or “diversity is our greatest strength” it is possible a particular vaccine is a bad idea.)

    1) It doesn’t work, or makes the infections worse.
    We already know this is not true of the major vaccines for the Xi virus. They are highly effective.

    2) Mortality/morbidity with the vaccine is actually worse than without it.
    We already know this is not true for the short run. Direct mortality directly from the vax is orders of magnitude below the virus. And it cuts mortality/morbidity from the virus significantly. (Israel is a good test bed for Pfizer–they’ve alienated the epidemic and deaths have plunged. US deaths have now plunged.)

    The only remaining question is long term. Is there some long term health effect from the vax that is worse than the virus? A non-trivial group of people continue to have issues after being infected by the virus and mortality is raised at least months out from the infection (VA study).

    In contrast, from the vax–nothing so far. And there is no good scientific reason/argument for there to be something. And extremely unlikely for there to be something worse than the virus.
    Basically the virus gets you the spike protein exposure of the vax + any damage from the infection and damage to your vascular system.

    ~~

    It’s of course possible for individuals to free ride off the folks getting vaxxed and go through their whole lives without getting the virus or the vax.

    But given vaccine hesitancy and the new variants popping, this is much more likely to end up like the flu, where it is endemic and everyone eventually gets one strain or another at some point.

    Given that, strikes me as foolish not to go the vax route and get the exposure/protection and skip the Xi virus’s attacking your vascular system and potentially degrading your long term health (even if it doesn’t kill you).

  246. nixxer says:
    @TomSchmidt

    It’s irresponsible for you to make this claim.

    These are unverified reports which are provided for full disclosure, but you have no clue as to their provenance or reliability.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  247. @Bill Jones

    Thanks for the link, Bill. I wonder if the three nuns who died are counted among the vaccine deaths in the VAERS database (seems unlikely) or if they are simply counted as so called “covid” deaths. This is another unfortunate example of what happens to people who take the poison needle.

  248. @TomSchmidt

    Now, if you’re honest, you’ll go figure out the death risk from the mRNA therapy, and then the death risk (numbers of under-30s who’ve actually died from COVID, not from a motorcycle accident with COVID) for under 30s from COVID. If your numbers show a higher risk from COVID, share them with us.

    Tom, thanks for the link.

    But your setup above in not the question. The question is not death risk from mRNA vax vs. under 30 covid death rate. It is death risk from mRNA vax for under 30s vs. covid death rate for under 30s. Apples to apples.

    Old people die more. The 2nd dose of the Pfizer turned me into a bucket of sludge on day 2. (Fever and headache all day. I still did a couple short walks with another mom, but felt like turning around immediately.) I had a hard fever break–drenched in sweat–the 2nd night and was golden. Victory over spikey. But some people–mostly old and/or poor health will die.

    If you drilled into this, then write up the data. You’ll be an anti-vax hero. But only apples to apples matters.

    ~~

    What is clear is the overall apples to apples. We are vaccinating people much faster than the epidemic has ever run … and the death rate is plummeting.

    Mortality from vax is not just < covid, it is << covid.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    , @NotNorm
  249. @AnonAnon

    “Vax–no issues seen yet.”

    Where do you come up with that? VAERS, the federal side effects database, has a 3 month backlog. It has 118,000 reports just for CoVid vaccines alone, an amount it typically gets in one year.

    @AnotherDad is overstating the case, but so are you. In what “typical” year do we give additional vaccinations to 56% of our adults and counting of at least one dose of a new vaccine? Adults typically only get a flu vaccination yearly at a lower fraction of the population, looks like a bit more than 10% less, plus they should get a TDaP booster every 5-10 years (5 if you’ve suffered a penetrating wound, 10 if not). There’s also a set of vaccines older people should get starting at age 50 with the new one against shingles (really, you don’t want to get that sequela of chicken pox).

    I’d like some citations on the claim VAERS “has a 3 month backlog” that makes any difference. Because I just downloaded a set of records and they’re really serious about making it easy, have a nice tutorial with screen shots. This easy interface limits you to 10K at a time, so beyond the obvious I limited it to 2021, Moderna, men, and cases scored as serious, which reading the first few is accurate.

    Although for one an idiot RN gave someone “traumatic hemmorhagic bursitis” by injecting into the left shoulder joint! Those sorts of … errors will happen and must be factored in by regulators. Plenty of allergic reactions, but the majority not requiring epinephrine (what’s in an epi pen); don’t take that observation far, I didn’t check very many cases, but it’s easy to generate reports grouped by symptoms if you want. The latest record with a recorded date in the description was 4/18. The data set claims it’s as of 4/23.

    Then I did a not scored as serious, Janssen, men from 30-59, got about 3600 records. Skimming it, plenty of the adverse events are ones you’d rather avoid or worse, but also saw “Achy knees. sore arm, tired” and that was it. And that’s useful data, as was my V-safe reporting of very minor symptoms after my first Pfizer/BioNtech dose. That’s a parallel system the CDC is running for normies using SMS and smartphone web pages, they amazingly seem to be doing everything right. Someone in the U.K. wondered if he should do a Yellow Card report because he had an intense craving for kabob. He decided yes, it might be useful for a researcher sooner or later.

    Was reminded some people smoke a pack of cigarettes a day, and then searched on “cigarette” and got four hits. Or how about this self-report which caught my eye:

    Nothing for the first two hours; malaise and fatigue from hours 2-8 post-vaccination, with a return to vibrancy around 1500 local time. Around 1700, fatigue returned. Took a 3 mile walk between 1700-1800. Consumed two beers @ 7% ABV between 1800-1845. Around 1830 began feeling tingling, chills and muscle and joint pain which continues. The pain is similar to DOMS that occurs after a robust workout; did not have a robust workout today. I’m fully functional, able to eat and able to otherwise function, so the symptoms are manageable.

    Useful data. But serious? And the latest records easily searched for dates are as of 4/21.

    From the other end, your claim is inconsistent with the Janssen rare blood clot issue: it got its EUA on 2/27, a Saturday, so assume shots went into arms starting on Monday April 1st. On April 13th the CDC and FDA recommended a pause based on six cases of the much discussed rare blood clot out of as I recall seven million doses administered and reported to the CDC (both numbers went up later). I can well believe there’s a serious backlog for non-serious cases, but that Janssen timeline sure indicates the examination of VAERS data is properly prioritized. And the load would not seem to be overwhelming, for example about 1930 records from my first search.

  250. @The Alarmist

    Thank you for another excellent comment Mr. Alarmist.

    “I am pro safe vaxx…”

    Vaccines are considered “unavoidably unsafe” by congress. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act eliminates manufacturer liability for a vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects.

  251. @The Anti-Gnostic

    When the virus gets into a situation of intense competition, either inside a single human’s body that doesn’t throw it off quickly, or starts hitting a brick wall of natural and vaccine immunity, more competitive variants can emerge.

    It sounds like vaccines apply the same selection pressure to respiratory viruses as antibiotics do to bacteria.

    This is universally true, not just limited to respiratory viruses, or vaccine vs. natural immunity as I noted.

    For example antibiotics originally and sometimes still do come from molds which secrete them to kill or suppress bacteria that are trying to eat the same food they are, this works because there’s significant biochemical differences between bacteria and molds and us. Bacteria that blindly secrete anti-antibiotic compounds don’t tend to win when they’re in competition with bacteria that can spend all their resources on growing and dividing. Etc.; ecology at this level is an actually useful field to study.

  252. gda53 says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    How many deaths or adverse reactions do you suppose have occurred that have NOT been reported on VAERS?

    You believe that there have been many more deaths from the Covid than were reported (“from” or “with”? – CDC reported “from” was just 6% of “with” BTW), yet believe there have not been many more adverse reactions and deaths from the “vaccines”?

    Seems you’ve built a circular wall around yourself that prevents common sense permeating it. There’s your wall to wall stupidity!

  253. gda53 says:
    @TomSchmidt

    “THIS IS EVIDENCE FOR A POSSIBLE MAREK’S DISEASE OUTCOME, where vaccinated people spread the virus aggressively to the unvaccinated.”

    See Israel and most other states that have started an aggressive “vaccination” campaign, and consequently “cases” have spiked.

    Most recently, see Ontario, where the Premier has instigated the most draconian shut-downs to prevent the “3rd Wave”. We now know the “3rd Wave” is a result of the increased vaccinations, and those “vaccinated” spreading to others, or catching it themselves (we’re not if it’s one or both)

    Meanwhile, they intentionally lied about this (the drug companies did warn against the first 7 to 14 days after “vaccination”, but never in any explicit or plain language), and blamed it on “variants” and India.

  254. @HA

    Prefer the euromomo.eu excess death graphs. You can see the death spike from COVID in there. In some countries it’s really extreme.
    https://euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/

    The spike in Spain saw a Z Score of 40. That’s ridiculously bad. COVID was an extreme flu if it was just a flu.

    But there’s interesting anomalies in there too. Denmark killed fewer people in excess deaths under COVID than it did in 2017. Cyprus’ exceeds death line is a flatline, with a tiny peak in 2017 that matches 2020. Belgium hit a Z score of 25, while next door neighbor Luxembourg didn’t get as extreme as 2018, and more importantly: Luxembourg doesn’t show ANY death spikes in the past, the way Spain, Ireland, Greece, Belgium, and a few others do.

    That’s genuinely interesting, frankly. Some countries don’t seem to get the flu, considering previous years, and some do, even though they’re neighbors. Luxembourg is wealthier and whiter than Belgium; maybe low winter sun affects Belgium more?

    Last thing on death charts is Spain. It seems they had several spikes of excess deaths in the past, and a super spike from COVID. But their “excess deaths” line never seems to go BELOW the expected number of deaths. In other words, they’ve never had a respite in excess dying with a period of low dying to make up for the excesses. Somethings screwed up there.

    • Replies: @HA
  255. gda53 says:
    @notsaying

    “We all “knew” it doesn’t affect kids — well it does now.”

    Sorry, but this is just more scare tactics BS. From the NY Slimes

    India has a death rate a full order of magnitude below the US and a population of 1.4B people.

    How many 2 month olds exactly are dying Dr? 1? That’s a statistical anomaly, not a relevant fact.

    1 of 1,400,000,000? Please. Get a grip.

  256. @AnotherDad

    I take your point, AD. I don’t have the data on under-30 death rate from the mRNA therapy. (THe CDC presumably does. Be nice to see a true risk eval.) I only have the gross numbers, which allows me to calculate a death rate from it. As you note, it is almost certain that more people will die from COVID than the therapy, probably more than 11 nines certain, and that the therapy at this time has a lower chance of death than COVID. If .8% of infected people die from COVID, we would need to see 800,000 of the 100MM people who’ve taken the shot die from it to compare. If that happens, the horror.

    We are vaccinating people much faster than the epidemic has ever run … and the death rate is plummeting.
    What was happening to the “death rate” before we started giving people the mRNA therapy? Was the death from COVID rate (which means… people per 100,000 dying from it? People who got it dying from it?) declining before we started? That’s answerable.

    As you know, I elsewhere cited rigorous scientific study data, used to justify an emergency declaration for the very mRNA therapy you took, that showed that the death rate from COVID over a roughly 6-month period was 0. 3 severe cases out of more than 180 diagnosed infections, and exactly one hospitalization in the closely-monitored control group.

    Since Pfizer is involved, and they made a lot of money selling Lipitor to people who did not need it and would not benefit from it, you do have to wonder. Selling wonder drugs to people who benefit from them saves lives. Selling wonder drugs to people who do not benefit from them is only for profit purposes.

  257. @nixxer

    I’m not the CDC, of course. Is there a rule as to when their data should be accepted and when rejected? The question for this topic was: what are the relative risks? Their data indicate a small risk of death at this time from the mRNA therapy. How does that compare?

    If you’re not a little shocked by that report from them (be honest: have you checked the numbers before now?), given that its easily available (good job, CDC) and hasn’t been presented anywhere that I’ve seen in major media (bad job, narrative pushers), then you probably don’t remember swine flu in 1976.

    • Replies: @nixxer
  258. @Steve Sailer

    Both. 60 million Americans contracted COVID prior to October and another 70 million since then (according to the CDC.) 30% never had any symptoms , just like on the Diamond Princess cruise ship. Almost half the people on the cruise ship contracted CV , most people on the ship never contracted CV , even though they failed to wear masks and often slept with an infected spouse. The virus was present in 90% of the cabins and food was delivered daily by infected staff , yet half the people never contracted CV despite living among hundreds of infected people without masks for weeks.

    Most Americans who have survived the past 14 months without getting sick probably have strong immune systems, which is the reason they never got sick. Many of them were infected with CV and never realized it, because the symptoms were so mild.

    Infections have been in a steady decline since January. The risks of catching CV are now lower than ever because 70% of the population is now immune due to the vaccines and natural acquired immunity. We have reached herd immunity. The spread has been declining for months, hospitalization have declined for months and deaths have been declining for months. The Pandemic has ended in the United States.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  259. gda53 says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    “One reason to get at least one dose of a vaccine if you already have natural immunity is that we believe you’ll get better overall immunity.”

    My understanding is just the opposite (see Bhakdi et al). IOW, the vaccine may/will interfere negatively with natural immunity.

    I guess the proof is in the pudding, though the Big Pharma warnings about the ‘initial 7 to 14 days after the shot’ seem to confirm that they acknowledge this FACT (along with the spike in cases in Israel and elsewhere once “vaccination” was ramped up). We see the same thing here in Ontario.

    “We believe..”
    “We are doing serological…..”

    Is this reference to “WE” an indication that you are associated with Big Pharma? “We” should know that if you are, so ‘fess up.

  260. Anne Lid says:
    @vhrm

    Thank you for your concern. My scientific education is rudimentary, and more education would not necessarily help me, because my understanding is limited by my IQ. One thing I learned the hard way: if someone lies without shame, he will do it again and worse, alcoholic childhood friend and established scientist alike.

  261. nixxer says:
    @TomSchmidt

    “I’m not the CDC, of course” I.e. you’re talking out of your ass.

    I remember the Swine Flu well. So what?

    The bottom line is: the narrative you’re trying to push would end up with many more people dead than if people just did the right, sensible thing and got vaccinated.

    Good work.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  262. HA says:
    @TomSchmidt

    Denmark killed fewer people in excess deaths under COVID than it did in 2017. Cyprus’ exceeds death line is a flatline, with a tiny peak in 2017 that matches 2020.

    The fact is that, taken together in country after country — from India to Chechnya to Germany to Israel to the UK to the US, there’s far more to COVID than can be explained away by glib dismissals about mislabeling or PCR-threshold changes, or whatever else people used to try and pretend COVID was a nothingburger. We can try and nitpick this country or that, but taken together, it’s a pretty startling consensus.

    I’m less intrigued by those countries who had flat death curves despite COVID. It doesn’t surprise me that limiting elective surgeries, traffic-accident-causing hustle and bustle, etc. might well alter the curve downward more than COVID. It doesn’t mean that lives weren’t saved or that COVID wouldn’t have been a big deal absent those restrictions. It just means that the lives that WEREN’T saved were offset by those who because of lockdowns refrained from doing things that in a normal year might kill them. (And some of those prevented elective surgeries are going to happen this year, so there will likely be a bump in that.)

    In any case, if the just-a-flu-bros hadn’t kind of shot themselves in the foot by bringing up excess mortality curves in the first place, it would be the ideal comparison with which to separate out the all-in death figures for the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated. Again, any “mislabeling” of vaccine deaths wouldn’t impact the calculation. It’s too bad. But that’s what happens if one group spends a year trying to dismiss excess mortality calculations even though they themselves were initially demanding that they be given more attention.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  263. HA says:
    @Steve Sailer

    “…the most recent weeks are _always_ below the expected trend line of deaths…”

    Fair enough, though I’m heartened by the lenger-term precipitous decline in the previous months. Fingers crossed, I guess.

  264. @Xavier B

    There is some evidence that ivermectin has antiviral and anti-inflammatory effects, and some doctors in the Dominican Republic have claimed considerable success in treating the disease with this medication, which is also used for dogs, swine and cattle intestinal parasites as well as to rid humans of parasites such as scabies.

    However the problem with ivermectin is that the dose required to have a good antiviral effect may approach the limits of what is safe.

    For comparison, it is known that alcohol kills the virus, thought you would have to drink yourself to death for it to be effective.

    I think this is the main reason why the medical establishment is reluctant to mess with ivermectin. Another fact is that it is difficult for the layperson to correctly measure the dose of ivermectin which has to be related to the weight of the recipient, and that if it is taken in excess of the regular dose or too frequently, it can be dangerous.

    I do have some ivermectin on my medicine shelf that I might use if I got sick, but I would be very conservative with the dosage.

    I had my first vaccination shot today, a dose of Sinovirus, the Chinese vaccine. I am not dead yet.

    • Replies: @Charlie
  265. @TomSchmidt

    Here is Knut Wittkoski talking with Burhard Müller-Ullrich on indubio saying: Lockdown causes new virus-strings

    https://www.achgut.com/artikel/indubio_folge_121_lockdowns_erzeugen_mutanten

  266. @TomSchmidt

    Here is Knut Wittkoski talking with Burhard Müller-Ullrich on indubio saying: Lockdown causes new virus-strings

    https://www.achgut.com/artikel/indubio_folge_121_lockdowns_erzeugen_mutanten

  267. @TomSchmidt

    Here is Knut Wittkoski talking with Burhard Müller-Ullrich on indubio saying: Lockdown causes new virus-strings

    https://www.achgut.com/artikel/indubio_folge_121_lockdowns_erzeugen_mutanten

  268. MEH 0910 says:

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  269. MEH 0910 says:

    OT:

  270. The Boomer with the per-existing condition is the hardest for me to take in all of this. Their fear of mortality, coupled with the narcissism that comes with this generation is almost insufferable. These are the same people that went to Woodstock during a raging pandemic selfishly unfazed by it. Now that they are aged and weak they lock us down and have our kids in masks for their benefit. Its really quite something,

  271. Mycale says:
    @I, Libertine

    Andrew Cuomo also claimed that some Trump vaccine would never fly in his state until it was looked at by “his experts.”

    The fact is Trump got played by all these guys, big time. Trump talked on the stump about how vaccines were progressing very well and a return to normalcy was on the way. Every time he did, Fauci got on TV and said that vaccines weren’t going to be ready anytime soon. Then his media lackeys dutifully reported Trump was lying and spreading misinformation out of line with “the health experts.” Then, of course, Fauci was touting the effectiveness of the vaccines within a week of the election, and the first shot was given in mid-December just as Trump claimed.

    Of course, with Trump gone now they are happily rewriting the entire course of this farce, casting him as the villain with Fauci as the hero. They’re making Biden a hero for getting supply out so quickly even though the Trump admin was meeting his 100 day goal before he was even sworn in. They’re also blaming Trump for “vaccine hesitancy”, completely ignoring the fact that they spent eight months claiming Trump was talking up garbage vaccines and was ready to approve dangerous poison just to get re-elected. It’s crazy but it really shows the power of the media to shape the narrative.

    • Agree: vhrm
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  272. JimDandy says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Would the Swine Flu vaccine be a good issue to bring up in one of these debates? I’m asking for a number of friends–the kind of people I like.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  273. Anon[167] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    That is seriously the dumbest, most child-like reply I’ve seen you give in one of your coronadoom posts yet and that’s saying something, because when it comes to this, and only this, topic, you become the king of “respond to the weak part of somebody’s post and never, ever respond to the substance”.

    Seriously dude, what the hell happened to you? The covidhoax is like the 2016 elections: the sequel, it just absolutely fried a ton of people who otherwise would know better’s brains to a pulp.

    • Replies: @Polite Derelict
  274. TTSSYF says:
    @Marquis

    If I recall correctly, Mr. Sailer is a cancer survivor. So some of his seemingly over-apprehension about the virus could be because his immune system was weakened by cancer treatments.

    • Replies: @Anon
  275. @I, Libertine

    Oddly enough, even though I preferred and voted Trump (cleanest dirty shirt principle), I said I would never get a COVID vaxx when Trump was President, and I haven’t changed my mind.

    It’s funny … all my lib friends and family claimed they would leave the US if W was elected, but at the end of the day, it was me, the guy who voted for him as the lesser-of-two-evils who left the country.

    I’ve been doing a lot of least-worst-choice voting over the past few decades too much; I’d give up my citizenship, but nowadays the US seems like one of the less bad choices among those that are still open to new arrivals.

  276. @JimDandy

    Are you referring to the Gerald Ford era Swine Flu happenings? I was politically aware by that time and as it become more clear the feared major pandemic wouldn’t break out (although a major in its own way flu event was happening during that period), it morphed into the same thing as we saw in 2020 when our ruling trash realized COVID-19 “could be the silver bullet that takes out this administration.: It was portrayed as another feckless action by Ford like the indeed silly Whip Inflation Now (WIN) effort. The inevitable small fraction of bad side effects were hyped and blamed on him, and both presidents did not win their following election.

  277. @TTSSYF

    I’m also capable of humor.

    • Agree: TTSSYF
  278. TTSSYF says:

    Question for you, TWBT. Is it accurate to refer to an annual COVID shot as a “booster”? The annual flu shot is not a booster. I would consider a booster to be like one given for tetanus ever ten years or so.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  279. Anon[996] • Disclaimer says:
    @TTSSYF

    I sympathize with the cancer angle, having had cancer 6 years ago. But cancer is precisely the reason I hesitate about injecting a message to my cells telling them to produce a protein foreign to my body. My cells are stupid enough at reproduction already. (I also have an autoinmune condition, so my body is also pretty stupid at differentiating its own cells from foreign invaders). I had Covid already tho’, and managed pretty well with Ivermectin.

  280. @Anon

    iSteve has gone full-on iBoomer. It’s been embarrassing to watch.

    • Agree: Change that Matters
  281. @The Alarmist

    What I’ve learned over the past year is that being an “anti-vaxxer” is a lot like being a “Holocaust denier.” Question one part of the approved narrative, and the Guardians of the Official Narrative will start screeching and name-calling.

    Then you start looking at other people who have been called the same kind of names, and you realize that instead of being the batshit-crazy “conspiracy theorists” the MSM wants you to think they are, they are merely honest critical thinkers who have stumbled on some inconvenient facts.

    So don’t let them use “anti-vaxxer” as a term of abuse. The alternative — being a credulous, plan-trusting Big Pharma shill like iSteve — is far worse in any case.

    • Agree: The Alarmist
  282. @Steve Sailer

    As if the blog post itself weren’t pitiful enough, Steve is trawling through the comments looking for opportunities to make himself look even more pitiful.

    Does Unz.com offer a retirement plan?

    • LOL: TomSchmidt
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  283. anon[105] • Disclaimer says:

    There’s absolutely no good reason for anyone under 30 and under BMI 25 to get the novel mRNA vax shot.

    That younger and healthier demo has an exceedingly low death rate from the wu flu, low enough that it makes sense for someone like that to consider the costs of injecting yet another alien substance into one’s body instead of just toughing it out with the equivalent of a bad cold.

    As long as the fatties and oldsters are vaccinated, they need not worry about transmissibility from the younger and the height-weight proportionate.

    Unless, that is, you want to argue the vaccines are useless. I don’t think they are, so vaccinated oldsters should be protected or, at the least, suffer much less aggressive symptoms if they do catch the lo mein pain from an unvaccinated teenager.

  284. @PiltdownMan

    Condolences.

    You are quite right.

    When Jenner trialled his smallpox vaccine on 8 year old James Phipps by inoculating him with pus from smallpox wounds several times, he was the only person in the trial, and survived and attended Jenner’s funeral, so one can appreciate that possibly there were risks taken that would not be tolerated today.

    All of the vaccines that are approved today have been tried on literally millions of people, and shown to be effective in most cases.

    Even the Chinese Sinovac vaccine that I was given yesterday, which seems to be one of the lower rated vaccines for efficacy, has an effectiveness rate higher than the flu vaccines that are routinely offered to all Medicare recipients in the United States. (Anyway, you get three doses just to make sure.)

    And I am still alive and well, and have not turned slitty-eyed.

    But there are a lot of people who would turn down a million dollars in cash if you offered it to them on the grounds that there might be a fake 20 dollar bill concealed in the package. Some people are just contrary. That’s the way they are.

    I have heard that a lot of Muslims in Turkey–where they are having a real bad outbreak right now–are refusing the vaccine, because they think it might be made from pork.

    Well, fine, then, die and go to heaven if you want to!

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  285. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  286. NotNorm says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Forced experimental injections into not at risk yoots.

    Boy, that Sailer turned out to be a reeeeal jerk!

    • Agree: Polite Derelict
  287. @TTSSYF

    Is it accurate to refer to an annual COVID shot as a “booster”?

    As you later detail, it would depend on the composition and purpose of such a shot. While it’s not always true, the presumption is that new seasonal flu vaccines are reformulations with at least one new strain out of the 3-4 varieties it protects against. TDaP, tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (whooping cough) vaccines don’t change their formulation, they make sure the body can still attack tetanus etc. toxins, the protection from which evidentially fades with time. And you just don’t want to take chances with lockjaw.

    We’ve now got over a year’s worth of experience with COVID-19 and it looks like natural immunity lasts that long, and so far vaccine immunity looks good, for the mRNA vaccines “at least six months.” We can only learn a day at a time how long these last, and if you look at childhood vaccine schedules a number of them are for three doses. So for “classic coronavirus” it might turn out a 3rd dose booster is required, but it doesn’t look like it would be a yearly thing.

    Now we can split hairs about reformulations to better address variants that are partial escapes from natural and/or vaccine immunity. Best real world data we have is I think the parts of clinical that were done in South Africa, where except for (AZ/)Oxford the “don’t get it” results are not bad, and I think I recall the “prevents hospitalization” results are a lot better. One could argue reformulations that better address these variants while also boosting the response against classic coronavirus are “boosters.” Neither of us gets to define what that word means in the real world, so…..

    Whereas a vaccine against a total escape variant, a true new strain like the flu ones, which is a definite possibly the more desperate the virus gets in the face of natural and vaccine immunity, I sure wouldn’t call a booster, just like the normal annual flu vaccines addressing the same issue.

    Only time will tell what we end up wanting and needing to do. Weasel word “wanting” because suppose we have two options for our massively increasing ability to make mRNA vaccines: top up our own populations against partial escape variants, or see that populations outside the US/~First World get one or more doses of “the good stuff?”

    • Replies: @TTSSYF
  288. @Jonathan Mason

    Even the Chinese Sinovac vaccine that I was given yesterday, which seems to be one of the lower rated vaccines for efficacy, has an effectiveness rate higher than the flu vaccines that are routinely offered to all Medicare recipients in the United States.

    See my just above comment on which I’ll elaborate: flu vaccines aren’t intended to create maximal efficacy, for example only one licensed in the US uses an adjuvant, because we assume they’re only intended to provide protection until the next flu season. That’s because the odds are the next season will require reformulation to deal with one or more new strains because our bodies fail at attacking conserved portions of the virus.

    The strains used are decided months in advance of that hemisphere’s flu season to allow vaccine manufacture (which includes a multi-week mandatory sterility test), distribution, etc. The experts who pick which ones make their best educated guesses, and they obviously get it wrong for at least one type fairly often.

    Whereas your Sinovac dose may/should? give you some protection against partial escape variants, and coronaviruses don’t mutate as rapidly as flu ones, nor have the flu’s feature of its genome split being into multiple segments allowing hybridization with pig and bird flues. But this early in the game we simply don’t know if there will arise total COVID escape variants, true new strains….

  289. anon[579] • Disclaimer says:

    This report shows that the spike protein itself is a big part of the damage done by SARS-2 / COVID-19 to the vascular system. It’s been known for nearly a year that this disease is vascular even though it is spread via the respiratory route. It’s not “just the flu, bro”. The flu doesn’t chew up blood vessel linings…

    The spike protein itself attacks the endothelium. The spike protein attacks the blood vessel walls. The spike protein attacks a key part of the circulatory system. It’s not just what the virus does inside the cell, the spike protein itself damages the endothelium

    https://www.salk.edu/news-release/the-novel-coronavirus-spike-protein-plays-additional-key-role-in-illness/

    In the new study, the researchers created a “pseudovirus” that was surrounded by SARS-CoV-2 classic crown of spike proteins, but did not contain any actual virus. Exposure to this pseudovirus resulted in damage to the lungs and arteries of an animal model—proving that the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease. Tissue samples showed inflammation in endothelial cells lining the pulmonary artery walls.

    The team then replicated this process in the lab, exposing healthy endothelial cells (which line arteries) to the spike protein. They showed that the spike protein damaged the cells by binding ACE2. This binding disrupted ACE2’s molecular signaling to mitochondria (organelles that generate energy for cells), causing the mitochondria to become damaged and fragmented.

    [MORE]

    Previous studies have shown a similar effect when cells were exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but this is the first study to show that the damage occurs when cells are exposed to the spike protein on its own.

    “If you remove the replicating capabilities of the virus, it still has a major damaging effect on the vascular cells, simply by virtue of its ability to bind to this ACE2 receptor, the S protein receptor, now famous thanks to COVID,” Manor explains. “Further studies with mutant spike proteins will also provide new insight towards the infectivity and severity of mutant SARS CoV-2 viruses.”

    The spike protein itself damages blood vessels. This is why in bad cases fluid builds up in the lungs. This is why ‘covid toe’ exists. This is also why people have strokes.

    So creating a lot of SARS-2 spike proteins all through the body wherever there are ACE-2 receptors would be a bad idea?

    Huh.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  290. TTSSYF says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    Okay, but I’m a busy person. Can you please say it in fewer than 500 words?

  291. NotNorm says:
    @AnotherDad

    You assume a 100 pct likihood of infection for an under 30, for your professed apples to apples death rate to death rate compare. Also what death rate definition (IFR, CFR?) should we be comparing?

  292. @Jack D

    That is some Sailerian jujitsu. Well done.

  293. @Sparkylyle92

    AS yo saw in my initial comment that our Pharma Shill responded to, NOBODY died in the control group when they had enough data to approve the mRNA therapy as effective. Only 3 people in the control group of the >180 who got infected with COVID came down with “severe” COVID, and only 1 was hospitalized.

    That’s what rigorous data that was rigorous enough to approve the mRNA therapy said. They cannot have it both ways: if the data are rigorous enough to approve a therapy against infection by COVID, then fewer than 2% of COVID infections are serious.

    The ones that ARE serious are VERY serious. Deadly, in fact. How about we focus on those?

  294. @anon

    So creating a lot of SARS-2 spike proteins all through the body wherever there are ACE-2 receptors would be a bad idea?

    One reason to be suspicious of the vaccines that don’t use 2P or otherwise stabilized version of the spike protein. As Jack D put it, this adds “some molecular twist ties” that keep it in the “pre-fusion” with ACE2 receptors conformation. This article provides a great overview with excellent illustrations of that and why stabilization was believed to be so important, as well as a general history of this sort of thing which goes back to a “written in blood” crude RSV vaccine from the late 1960s.

    So this includes (AZ/)Oxford’s vaccine and maybe Sputnik V (mostly irrelevant until they get their manufacturing act together), whereas the two current mRNA vaccines, Janssen’s and Novavax’s use a stabilized one.

    On the other hand, to an extent this could be a “the dose makes the poison” thing, in which case the short acting mRNA vaccines are further favored, the virus vector ones like Oxford’s as far as I know won’t stop producing their version of the spike protein until the hijacked cells are “used up” by devoting too many resources to this, or killed by the immune system. Produced inside the cells, not sure how much gets released and when and how. Novavax on the other hand delivers a precise dose of stabilized proteins outside of cells, somewhat like an annual flu shot except it includes an adjuvant.

  295. res says:
    @Abolish_public_education

    Say no to drugs, except when we tell you otherwise.

    Everything not forbidden is compulsory. COVID-19 has been wonderful for showcasing people’s inner control freak.

  296. @nixxer

    Ah, so you’re irrational as well as rude: you refuse to compute ratios. Here’s another recent article for you:

    precisely 54 children in the Land of the Free have died from COVID (according to CDC data through April 28).

    Given that there have been roughly 4 million confirmed COVID cases among children, this implies a survival rate of 99.999%

    That’s one out of 74,000 children of the officially confirmed COVID cases, which you have to know understates the number of actually infected. We will go with it.

    There are more than 3600 deaths from COVID mRNA therapy reported to VAERS (health professionals are required to report adverse events. Anyone, of course, can. Do you have information that FluBros are making false reports? That would be useful. My guess: the reports come from health professionals, who can recognize death when they see it.) In order for the Death rate from COVID mRNA therapy to be lower than that from COVID for children, you’d need to have had those deaths spread over 266,666,666 million people injected with it.

    We are nowhere near that number, so death from taking the vaccine is higher than death from COVID rate for children. According to data hosted at the CDC website, but what do they know.

    Now, we have this story from Bloomberg:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-03/victims-of-rare-vaccine-injury-wait-to-see-if-u-s-fund-will-pay

    High school senior Emma Burkey received her “one and done” Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccine on March 20, and within two weeks was in an induced coma following seizures and clotting in her brain.

    She’s making a slow recovery, having recently been transfered from the hospital to a rehabilitation center, and the first round of bills totaled $513,000. The 18-year-old’s family friends in the Las Vegas area started a GoFundMe account to help with medical expenses from the very rare vaccine reaction.

    I guess you figure her egg should be broken to bake your demented omelet. Her risk of dying from COVID was lower than the risk from the numbers at the CDC for death from the vaccine.

    That does NOT apply to older folks, of course. But her next 60 years of life have been screwed up because people like you think she cannot handle the numbers. you might send her a GoFundMe contribution.

    As you would say, “Good work.”

  297. @HA

    Points well taken. Two faces about COVID: the mRNA therapy for it has more death reports in the CDC’s VAERS database than any other treatment cumulatively for years. The number of those deaths is maximally one percent of excess deaths in 2020, most of which should be COVID. Is it worth it to trade one death for 100 lives saved from an illness that’s not a nothing burger? I think most people would agree, and also be glad that they don’t have to make that trade off.

    I’m interested in different country results because there has to be some difference. It’s easy to see that Cyprus could avoid the worst of COVID because, like public health superstars Taiwan, New Zealand, and Japan,it’s an island and can control ingress. But flatline countries like Luxembourg not only had no COVID spike last year (in contrast to utter disaster next door neighbor Belgium), but no previous spikes in flu seasons. That Spain had a spike last year isn’t so shocking: they seem to get one every time there’s a flu outbreak. Not with Z scores over 40, of course; that’s a measure that COVID was extreme in comparison to the flu in one country.

    What is Luxembourg doing that Belgium is not? What could help Spain avoid its nearly annual spikes?

  298. @Mycale

    And if the numbers of dead from the treatments keep rising, Trump will get the blame for that. He really doesn’t realize the setup for him in advocating now for the vaccine. He ought to just shut up and leave it in Biden’s lap. If they push this vaccine for children who don’t need and and they get harmed, they’ll need a scapegoat. Trump will be it.

  299. Charlie says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    There is some evidence that ivermectin has antiviral and anti-inflammatory effects, and some doctors in the Dominican Republic have claimed considerable success in treating the disease with this medication, which is also used for dogs, swine and cattle intestinal parasites as well as to rid humans of parasites such as scabies.

    The Dominican Republic…

    More than 20 countries are now using ivermectin to treat Covid-19 to one degree or another, with promising results, despite the fact the World Health Organization has not approved its use. They include Mexico, Guatemala, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Portugal, Nigeria, South Africa and Egypt.

    https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2021/05/india-just-became-latest-country-to-approve-use-of-ivermectin-to-treat-covid-19.html

    You hit on most of the main points of disinformation about Ivermectin in your reply (you missed liver damage, the blood-brain barrier, and the danger of taking a drug that has been administered four billion times over four decades with almost no adverse reactions). I hope you will own your disinformation when the world is finally forced to admit that Ivermectin reduces the severity of COVID at all stages of the disease, reduces mortality by 75% and is an effective prophylactic.

  300. MEH 0910 says:


    [MORE]

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?
Becker update V1.3.2