Vaccine

Partisan? You clearly don't understand the difference between fact and opinion. One study after the next has found no link between the vaccine and fertility. Partisan opinion, however, is you calling the foremost experts in the world "lab jockeys' and ignoring what they have already found on the basis that the NIH has funded a study that isn't even looking at the vaccine's effect on fertility. Rather, it is providing a grant to fund studies on the impact of taking the vaccine on the menstrual cycle, and which it specifically says are not looking at fertility. So, when you claim that "if it wasn't an issue NIH wouldn't be studying it", you're absolutely right. It is not an issue and they aren't studying it. That is probably the case because the NIH has already funded studies that did this and guess what moron? For example, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33608302/ and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34058573/. The NIH also funded a study that addressed the impact of dumbfuck anti-vaxxers like you promoting vaccine hesitancy on this very basis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34181273/. And another about how anti-vaxxers are spreading your exact kind of bullshit on social media to scare women. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34181273/. You are such a dumbshit.

How many studies finding no link between the vaccine and fertility before you finally agree? 5? 10? 100? Or are you like most anti-vaxxers, and the answer is one more than ever comes out because there will never be enough studies refuting your partisan, unsupported belief?
You obviously are not a "menstruating person". Because the menstrual cycle has nothing to do with fertility :rolleyes:

Soup. Samich.
 
Wouldn’t matter. We have great long term vax studies on all sorts of vaccines. It doesn’t stop the anti-vax folks from convincing each other that they need to spread measles around Disneyland.

The anti-vax loons have been around for decades. They just finally found people gullible enough to believe them this time.
Reminder: The CDC/NIH/Fauci-backed pause of the J&J vaccine did more to invigorate vaccine hesitancy in the US than any other factor.


May be an image of text that says 'Daily COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people Shown the rolling -day average per 100 people in the total population. For vaccines that require multiple doses, each individual dose is counted. LINEAR LOG Our World in Data Add country 0.8 0.6 J&J Pause 0.4 0.2 United States Dec21,2020 2020 21, Apr 15, 2021 Source: Official data collated by Our World in OurWorldinData.org/coronavirus BY Jun 2021 Sep 4, 2021 Last updated September 2021, 10:30 (London time)''Daily COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people Shown the rolling -day average per 100 people in the total population. For vaccines that require multiple doses, each individual dose is counted. LINEAR LOG Our World in Data Add country 0.8 0.6 J&J Pause 0.4 0.2 United States Dec21,2020 2020 21, Apr 15, 2021 Source: Official data collated by Our World in OurWorldinData.org/coronavirus BY Jun 2021 Sep 4, 2021 Last updated September 2021, 10:30 (London time)'
 
It will count when the covid vax is treated like any other vaccine. I can’t say for sure when I am due for my tetanus booster. I just get the shots when the doc tells me.

Now, will covid end up being annual, biannual, decennial, or just a childhood innocuoation? I don’t know, and I don’t need to know. That’s the point. We will have normal when we stop second guessing everything.
Reminder: The CDC/NIH/Fauci-backed pause of the J&J vaccine did more to invigorate vaccine hesitancy in the US than any other factor.


May be an image of text that says 'Daily COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people Shown the rolling -day average per 100 people in the total population. For vaccines that require multiple doses, each individual dose is counted. LINEAR LOG Our World in Data Add country 0.8 0.6 J&J Pause 0.4 0.2 United States Dec21,2020 2020 21, Apr 15, 2021 Source: Official data collated by Our World in OurWorldinData.org/coronavirus BY Jun 2021 Sep 4, 2021 Last updated September 2021, 10:30 (London time)''Daily COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people Shown the rolling -day average per 100 people in the total population. For vaccines that require multiple doses, each individual dose is counted. LINEAR LOG Our World in Data Add country 0.8 0.6 J&J Pause 0.4 0.2 United States Dec21,2020 2020 21, Apr 15, 2021 Source: Official data collated by Our World in OurWorldinData.org/coronavirus BY Jun 2021 Sep 4, 2021 Last updated September 2021, 10:30 (London time)'
 
It will count when the covid vax is treated like any other vaccine. I can’t say for sure when I am due for my tetanus booster. I just get the shots when the doc tells me.

Now, will covid end up being annual, biannual, decennial, or just a childhood innocuoation? I don’t know, and I don’t need to know. That’s the point. We will have normal when we stop second guessing everything.
Even doctors get second opinions on everything.

The Great Barrington Declaration
The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.
Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.
Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.
Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.
As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.
The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.
Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.
Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.
On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.
SIGN THE DECLARATION
Co-signers
Medical and Public Health Scientists and Medical Practitioners
Dr. Alexander Walker
, principal at World Health Information Science Consultants, former Chair of Epidemiology, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, USA
Dr. Andrius Kavaliunas, epidemiologist and assistant professor at Karolinska Institute, Sweden
Dr. Angus Dalgleish, oncologist, infectious disease expert and professor, St. George’s Hospital Medical School, University of London, England
Dr. Anthony J Brookes, professor of genetics, University of Leicester, England
Dr. Annie Janvier, professor of pediatrics and clinical ethics, Université de Montréal and Sainte-Justine University Medical Centre, Canada
Dr. Ariel Munitz, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Boris Kotchoubey, Institute for Medical Psychology, University of Tübingen, Germany
Dr. Cody Meissner, professor of pediatrics, expert on vaccine development, efficacy, and safety. Tufts University School of Medicine, USA
Dr. David Katz, physician and president, True Health Initiative, and founder of the Yale University Prevention Research Center, USA
Dr. David Livermore, microbiologist, infectious disease epidemiologist and professor, University of East Anglia, England
Dr. Eitan Friedman, professor of medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Ellen Townsend, professor of psychology, head of the Self-Harm Research Group, University of Nottingham, England
Dr. Eyal Shahar, physician, epidemiologist and professor (emeritus) of public health, University of Arizona, USA
Dr. Florian Limbourg, physician and hypertension researcher, professor at Hannover Medical School, Germany
Dr. Gabriela Gomes, mathematician studying infectious disease epidemiology, professor, University of Strathclyde, Scotland
Dr. Gerhard Krönke, physician and professor of translational immunology, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany
Dr. Gesine Weckmann, professor of health education and prevention, Europäische Fachhochschule, Rostock, Germany
Dr. Günter Kampf, associate professor, Institute for Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Greifswald University, Germany
Dr. Helen Colhoun, professor of medical informatics and epidemiology, and public health physician, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Dr. Jonas Ludvigsson, pediatrician, epidemiologist and professor at Karolinska Institute and senior physician at Örebro University Hospital, Sweden
Dr. Karol Sikora, physician, oncologist, and professor of medicine at the University of Buckingham, England
Dr. Laura Lazzeroni, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and of biomedical data science, Stanford University Medical School, USA
Dr. Lisa White, professor of modelling and epidemiology, Oxford University, England
Dr. Mario Recker, malaria researcher and associate professor, University of Exeter, England
Dr. Matthew Ratcliffe, professor of philosophy, specializing in philosophy of mental health, University of York, England
Dr. Matthew Strauss, critical care physician and assistant professor of medicine, Queen’s University, Canada
Dr. Michael Jackson, research fellow, School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, New Zealand
Dr. Michael Levitt, biophysicist and professor of structural biology, Stanford University, USA.
Recipient of the 2013 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.
Dr. Mike Hulme, professor of human geography, University of Cambridge, England
Dr. Motti Gerlic, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Partha P. Majumder, professor and founder of the National Institute of Biomedical Genomics, Kalyani, India
Dr. Paul McKeigue, physician, disease modeler and professor of epidemiology and public health, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Dr. Rajiv Bhatia, physician, epidemiologist and public policy expert at the Veterans Administration, USA
Dr. Rodney Sturdivant, infectious disease scientist and associate professor of biostatistics, Baylor University, USA
Dr. Salmaan Keshavjee, professor of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School, USA
Dr. Simon Thornley, epidemiologist and biostatistician, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Dr. Simon Wood, biostatistician and professor, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Dr. Stephen Bremner,professor of medical statistics, University of Sussex, England
Dr. Sylvia Fogel, autism provider and psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital and instructor at Harvard Medical School, USA
Tom Nicholson, Associate in Research, Duke Center for International Development, Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, USA
Dr. Udi Qimron, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer, professor and expert in virology, immunology and cell biology, University of Würzburg, Germany
Dr. Uri Gavish, biomedical consultant, Israel
Dr. Yaz Gulnur Muradoglu, professor of finance, director of the Behavioural Finance Working Group, Queen Mary University of London, England
 
You obviously are not a "menstruating person". Because the menstrual cycle has nothing to do with fertility :rolleyes:

Soup. Samich.
You beat me to it. Sometimes I wonder why we even bother to point out the obvious. Just let GoldenGate's post speak for itself.

That's why I believe so strongly in unrestricted free speech. Why silence or cancel anyone, let their own words repeatedly remind us how stupid, racist, evil etc they are. Why let them hide.
 
In this case, the study itself is good. Read that.

People drawing conclusions and citing the study? Often weak.

Be especially cautious if they claim "such and such a study proved that A is not true". 90% of the time this means that someone tried to prove A, but failed.
You're babbling.
 
Partisan? You clearly don't understand the difference between fact and opinion. One study after the next has found no link between the vaccine and fertility. Partisan opinion, however, is you calling the foremost experts in the world "lab jockeys' and ignoring what they have already found on the basis that the NIH has funded a study that isn't even looking at the vaccine's effect on fertility. Rather, it is providing a grant to fund studies on the impact of taking the vaccine on the menstrual cycle, and which it specifically says are not looking at fertility. So, when you claim that "if it wasn't an issue NIH wouldn't be studying it", you're absolutely right. It is not an issue and they aren't studying it. That is probably the case because the NIH has already funded studies that did this and guess what moron? For example, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33608302/ and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34058573/. The NIH also funded a study that addressed the impact of dumbfuck anti-vaxxers like you promoting vaccine hesitancy on this very basis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34181273/. And another about how anti-vaxxers are spreading your exact kind of bullshit on social media to scare women. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34181273/. You are such a dumbshit.

How many studies finding no link between the vaccine and fertility before you finally agree? 5? 10? 100? Or are you like most anti-vaxxers, and the answer is one more than ever comes out because there will never be enough studies refuting your partisan, unsupported belief?

Sorry, we’re you linking guidance for long term effects on fertility for men and women?

It wasn’t a study, it was guidance. It wasn’t for adolescents… and I’m glad that they concluded you should appropriately time your IVF treatments based on recent vaccinations as well as your ability to donate eggs and/or sperm post vaccination.

It was at about that point in the first publication that it was clear you don’t know what you are talking about. I should have just trusted my instinct that such emotional involvement in your posting demeanor belied your lack of objectivity.

“People may start their fertility treatment immediately after being vaccinated, unless they wish to have a second dose before pregnanated, unless they wish to have a second dose before pregnancy, it adds.

The guidance also states that those who are donating their eggs or sperm for the use of others can still have a covid-19 vaccine.”
 
My Fortune 100 company I work for just sent out an email that they are closely looking a federal employee guidelines.

What are the benefits of me getting the vaccine after I have had covid March 2020?

Some are looking into religious exemptions.
I'd pose that question to your doctor and not us numbskulls. I wouldn't be surprised if it takes a long time to implement if it can even be implemented at all. I suspect you will have plenty of lead time to comply if necessary.
 
How long did it take for It to come out that Talcum powder caused Ovarian Cancer?

We only have Scientific Theories on the long term affects of this “vaccine”. The probability is good (maybe even great) that there won’t be any serious long term affects, but to speak down at those who are have legitimate skepticism is quite self righteous.
Is it weird that the same people who were all for canceling college sports due to the possibility of myocarditis (incorrect, BTW) are so quick to dismiss the idea that the vaccine can have long-term effects? What happened to their "abundance of caution"? Those people are worse than self-righteous, They are simply selfish and cowardly. For several, there's a complete lack of independent thought. It's hilarious to see them slobber all over each other - or talk to themselves. Nuthugger? Same person? Funny either way.
 
Easy. When 50 studies establish that Covid-19 vaccines do not negatively impact fertility, that is credible.
Why because they are all referencing each other in a circle jerk?

If you are on the same side as someone who believes that local elected officials adopting local ordinances is a "dictatorship", you also are not credible.
If you are on the same side as someone who believes that local elected officials adopting local ordinances drafted by unelected officials is not a "dictatorship", you also are not credible.

And you are not credible if you ignore the fact that
Delta is Dying

An earlier study at the Cleveland Clinic of more than 52,000 health-care workers from December 16, 2020 to May 15, 2021 (just before Delta became dominant in the U.S.) found that both natural immunity and vaccine immunity provide good protection against infections. Not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated was reinfected. Their risk of infection was no higher than for vaccinated people, whether they were previously infected or uninfected.

Moreover, natural immunity thus far appears to be at least as long-lasting as vaccine immunity. Even before vaccines were widely available, studies indicated that four types of immune memory persist for more than six months after infection. The Cleveland Clinic results suggested that natural immunity provides protection against reinfection for ten or more months, leading the authors to conclude that previously infected Covid-19 patients are “unlikely to benefit” from vaccination. Another study found that convalescent individuals maintained immunologic protection for 12 months without vaccination, though protection could be enhanced by vaccination.

Covid-19 treatments have improved as well. Several versions of monoclonal antibodies have been authorized and are now readily available. These medicines are highly effective at keeping early Covid-19 from progressing, thus decreasing the risk of hospitalization or death by 70 percent to 85 percent, particularly for people at high risk of developing severe disease. Steroids and new, more effective ICU protocols have also led to lower Covid-19 mortality.
 
Is it weird that the same people who were all for canceling college sports due to the possibility of myocarditis (incorrect, BTW) are so quick to dismiss the idea that the vaccine can have long-term effects? What happened to their "abundance of caution"? Those people are worse than self-righteous, They are simply selfish and cowardly. For several, there's a complete lack of independent thought. It's hilarious to see them slobber all over each other - or talk to themselves. Nuthugger? Same person? Funny either way.
Those people are worse than self-righteous, They are simply selfish and cowardly ANTI-IMMUNE SYSTEM religious freaks.
 
Easy. When 50 studies establish that Covid-19 vaccines do not negatively impact fertility, that is credible. When desert hound cuts and pastes an anti-vax manifesto by an anonymous "pathologist/veteran/graduate of good undisclosed medical school who went to had a prestigious unidentified residency" form a fringe conspiracy website that even he is too embarrassed to identify, that is not credible. When you deny 50 studies because "you never know" and "only time will tell", and "we don't have crystal balls", that is not credible. When you are on the same side as crush on any issue, you are not credible. If you are on the same side as someone who believes that local elected officials adopting local ordinances is a "dictatorship", you also are not credible. And you are not credible if you are on the same side as someone who believes "strict construction" of a constitutional provision stating that a county may make and enforce "all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances ... not in conflict with general laws", should be interpreted to add "except mask mandates".
If you don't agree that we should do a national random survey to estimate the prevalence of #COVID antibodies and T-cell immunity By age and state, you are not credible.

Martin Kulldorff

@MartinKulldorff


For informed public health policy, it is urgent that @CDCgov quickly do a national random survey to estimate the prevalence of #COVID antibodies and T-cell immunity. By age and state. @CDCDirector @RWalensky

4:07 AM · Sep 13, 2021·Twitter Web App
 
Back
Top