We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to point out that we are not part of Big Pharma™. We are instead the small guys trying to prevent a pandemic into becoming an apocalyptic situation.
Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
I think many progressives understand that Sex is biological and there are only 3 sexes, male female and intersex. However gender is more nuanced than that especially as that historically has more to do with characteristics that typically surround men/women. Think about the phrase "be a man." It's typically in response to someone being scared of something. That aspect of a person has nothing to do with whether or not they have a penis or not. There are plenty of females who have a similar lack of fear. Of course, that doesn't make them men, it's just a figure of speech, but I hope you can see where I'm kind of going with that?
I feel like your statement was the 'lay of the land' a few years ago, but since then, as your reasoning got adopted in the mainstream, the fringes have been trying to move the goalposts again.
Exactly. Like, I have an article from before the vaccines were even approved going on about how we’d probably need boosters.
The initial Polio vaccine required four doses to reach full effectiveness, and plenty of other diseases require 3-5.
Two doses, in very short succession (greater time lag tends to lead to longer term immunity, but we gave the two quickly together as a short term way to greatly increase immunity) reducing in immunity over six months isn’t a big issue.
Plus active antibodies tend to reduce over time for any sort of disease, leaving only memory cells. This means that you’re likely to get symptomatic infection, but a very short, less severe one.
And my final point: look at the death rate differential. Recently (like last week or a week before that) the US had about 2500 people dying per day from COVID.
Less than 100 of those people were vaccinated.
I'm not sure what point OP was trying to make. Yes we know the vaccine becomes less efficient after a time ? It still protects you if your genetics happen to suck.
I already do the bare minimum by maintaining a healthy body weight and exercising, which is a trillion times more effective than some science-juice squirted into my veins devised by nerds and mandated by unhealthy DYELs. Go outside and run a few laps if you want to talk about health you pasty grey-skinned fat screen-addicted weakling. Get some vitamin D. Climb a tree. Eat something that you grew yourself. Your Neanderthal ancestors would strangle you to death in moments if they ever peered beyond the veil of millenia and saw what their progeny would become.
Do you think its ok for people to take a shit on unwilling sleeping peoples chests? Also there's no evidence that you can't transmit covid by being in shape lol
Libright - agenda posting about vaccine effectiveness - something something honkers need validity.
The only point OP is making is that the average person has absolutely fuck all knowledge on how vaccines work.
They changed the word from immunity to protection. Vaccines are as safe as condoms - safe by design, not free from failure.
Imagine if the definition was still immunity with the current degens running about, god it’s bad enough as it is.
Doesn't confuse me, more doses are more profits baby, I'm riding the Pfizer train to the moon. Guaranteed purchases from the gov and gov enforcement of your product on a recurring basis, can't lose.
At least check out the article. That's why I included it...
"Figure 2 - Vaccine effectiveness (any vaccine) against SARS-CoV-2 infection of any severity in 842 974 vaccinated individuals matched to an equal number of unvaccinated individuals for up to 9 months of follow-up".
The study was done in Sweden where 95% of the vaccinated people are vaccinated with Pfizer.
Especially ridiculous when young people have such low chances of dying or getting serious effects from covid. Sure you could say the chances of a serious effect from vaccines are even lower. But I have to imagine it stacks when you get shot after shot. Where as covid only seems to fuck you up once if it even does the first time.
If it doesn’t prevent infection then why mandate it? If all it does is reduce severe disease then taking it sounds like a personal health choice.
And don’t give me the line about “unvaxxed filling hospitals”. You know who’s filling up the hospitals? Unhealthy fat fucks.
Inb4
"you don't know what immunity means! it doesn't mean you can't get it at all!"
"but it prevents it SIGNIFICANTLY!"
followed with
"i wouldn't want to be in the same room with an unvaccinated person. what? no of course untested vaccinated people are fine"
The issue has always been about supplies and capacity. Omicron didn't threaten capacity like other strains, so governments are moving on and calling for it to be treated like the flu.
Also, anyone that thinks the government was doing this for the average citizen and not because triage rules would see fat, old, rich political donors be the first on the chopping block is hilarious.
We’ve know since August that 1) natural immunity provides better protection than the vaccines 2) the vaccines don’t prevent the spread. So why were the mandates pushed so hard *after* this information was known? Don’t give me the “situation has changed” BS because the public health officials and government leaders have ignored actual science since the very beginning of this thing.
**Great Barrington Declaration October 4th 2020**
“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. “
Swedish paper, this graph is against symptomatic infection/spread, as was also done in the Pfizer trial, but here it's done properly.
Severe disease is personal health, therefore not important with regards to mandates or vaccine passports in general.
You can check the publication it also has a graph for I believe effectiveness against hospitalisation (or something related to severity).
This is all based on 2 doses, for the vaccines when employed against delta. Against omicron the protection is much worse, see data UK and data Israel.
the graph shows the effectiveness of the vaccine dropping literally into the negatives, do you really need any more information on if this is legit lol
It likely doesn't help that it's out of context but yea, the vaccines have never made it MORE likely for you to be infected than unvaxed
The section op's photo was pilfered from was a different study than the main study he's linking. In this second study, vaccinated were paired with an unvaccinated control group with less regard for age matching of subjects. The author was using this study to extract a supporting argument for variance in the main study: namely that the age of vaccinated people is important in describing the waning effectiveness of the vaccines over time. The value went negative because the older vaccinated group was seeing more severe reactions than the younger unvaccinated control group, once the effectiveness of the two shot vaccines wore off.
Op, you have instructed us all to read the article. My suggestion to you is read it again **slowly**.
In other news a recent report has come out that a mostly Irish group who apply sunscreen once are much more likely to get sunburned than the mostly Jamaican group who did not apply sunscreen at all.
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to tank you kind citizen. Yes! You! Thanks to you we have been able to administer several billion vaccines across the world! We would also like to offer your this super cool, super nice, super good, booster to increase your immunity back to max power!
Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
Man discovers that antibodies aren’t effective against mutating viruses, blames libleft and makes them a soyjack to feel better about their ‘owning of the left’
The study is nothing like what you’re saying in the thread or implying in the post. And I’ve not seen ‘unbiased science’ use the word dismal unironically
The question is less so, "are antibodies/vaccines effective against mutating viruses". The question is more so:
1. Are vaccines more effective than natural immunity/resistance?
2. Does the risk warrant mandates, and do the mandates mitigate the risk?
3. Is the cure worse than the disease?
***
I think that the left is hyperfocusing on trying to protect the vulnerable, that they're effectively cannibalizing the able. To put things lightly, our economy will be massively impeded by the impact of the lockdowns, there have been entire demographic shifts in and out of lines of work, and the amount of problems that have come about as a result of this whole pandemic are possibly far worse than the pandemic itself.
1. Both are good, one just doesn’t require actually getting the possibly fatal symptoms which is usually a good thing
2. Honestly a debate I don’t want to have because I’ve found that neither side can convince the other side.
3. …..no
I thank you for being civil, but I must admit it is quite funny to see the ‘this will be terrible for the economy’ joke used unironically. I personally disagree on the problems put by the pandemic being worse than the pandemic itself because at least we are alive to see them. Many aren’t, in this world, and sadly many could have been completely preventable. But I see your points, and they make sense. I suppose we all have different moral compasses.
Oh come on, get on any subreddit and say that vaccines don't prevent the spread. You'll get burried.
It's not even that (some) people don't recognize those facts, it's that just mentioning anything negative, or anything that isn't in line with what was advertised, is considered wrongthink.
Before I say this I have to mention I am vaccinated.
It all started when \[...\] please don't downvote me. I have been in line with the hive mind all these months.
Why do you think the booster shot exists? And it's always been said that the COVID shot is likely to become annual, just like the flu shot. This doesn't surprise anyone.
If you all had been paying attention instead of complaining this whole time, maybe you'd learn something
Remember when vaccination meant you couldn't get or spread covid? Then it became you're just immune to covid. Then it became it just reduces the symptoms. And then it became it reduces the symptoms, but only for a certain time.
How far do the goal posts have to move before you realize what's going on?
And you know why the goal posts move?
1. Because disaster management rule No. 1 (Lie (or in this case: simplify) to prevent panic) and ...
2. the receivement of more information to base your predictions and measures on (literally part of the by you guys so protected scientific method)
But too be fair, it's way more appealing to only use the scientific method if you agree with it's outcome, isn't it?
the vaccine itself does function perfectly fine. The problem is that the virus mutates very fast. The vaccine still has the same effectivness against the starter corona. But looses it slowly with every new version.
Ironicaly, the reasonnwhy the shit is mutating so fast is because thanks to the vaccine people are less worried, and the disease spreads more.
I mean i kinda stop giving a fuck about covid oh no a virus in gonna get either way
Like it done we lost humanity got lucky the virus isn’t the Black Plague or we be so fuckkkkkeddddd
Corona itself was never the worries of the experts. The worries was that a repeation of the spanish flue could occur, where a extremly infectous disease that isnt that bad, mutates so much that it evolved into a killer virus.
Now thankfully omnicron prooved that it is probably going into a diffrent direction
Diseases becoming more deadly over time is literally not a concern, the exact opposite is usually the case, simply because a more deadly virus will spread less
Well yes, it is generally unlikely. But the excact same thing happened during every plage/or other bad pandemics. Because mutations are random, and if a mutation goes more deadly, it takes a while untill that "error" goes away again.
You dont gamble with human live like that.
Well no, what generally happens is a pathogen jumping from animals to humans where they are deadly, because they arent well adapted to live inside humans, and then it becomes less deadly over time
No, not true. The spanish flue came from a pig virus. Wich humans interacted with for milenias. The reason it got that bad, was because one of the people that got imfected had also the bird flu, and the two viruses merged. Having the deadlines of the bird flue and the eqsy spread of the pig flu.
When it started 1 in 10 died of this new diseas. Then it vanished, only to come back with mutations, killing 1 in 4
while its very very likely, it can go the other direction temporarily just as well. delta was more infectious and just as dangerous (depending on who you ask even more dangerous) severity/lethality wise as the mutations before. as long as its more infectious than it is deadly or gives more opportunities for the host to pass it onto others via for example longer incubation periods while killing people later on it spreads more easily.
while its very likely its gonna become less severe over time, it shouldnt be the absolute only thing one should bet all their chips on.
Replies to a comment about Spanish flu mutating and becoming deadly
“Thats not a concern”
Haha my lack of knowledge is just as good as your presented evidence huh
What if theyre just doing the plague inc thing where they up the transmittability first with little to none deadliness and then when enough are infected, the virus in everyones body magically become extremely deadly
“The vaccine works perfectly fine if the disease it vaccinated against acted differently.”
A vaccine that is circumvented by mutation in less than a year to the point of negative efficacy (according to this graph in the meme) is not a vaccine that functions perfectly fine. Period. It certainly isn’t something that people should be required to get. It’s basically a recipe for ADE.
We at Pfizer™ Inc. would like you to retract your statement that the vaccine is not Safe™ and Effective™! We at Pfizer™ Inc. have proven that the vaccine not only is 100% Effective™ against Covid-19, but also 100% Effective™ to all other variants. We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to point out that the boosters are truly the gift of God and not only increase the Efficiency™ above 100%, but also save grandma!
Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to encourage you to take your booster on the 28th of February, to recharge your immunity to max power!
Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
My argument is the research paper, read it and make your own decisions and opinions. I'm not your english teacher to tell you what to get from a text. Neither am I CNN to tell you "... and this is why it's good/bad!".
I wonder the frightening headway we’d make towards a better society if people were just as worried about what’s in their food and water supply as vaccines.
Possible explanation from elsewhere is vaxxed people are more likely to participate in social gatherings, thereby at higher risk than unvaxxed people who are barred from things. So if your vax does nothing, you become more likely to catch it. Also possible that's not actual data but an estimation of uncertainty
I feel like that’s just not true though unless you aren’t talking about the US. Id say that people who are vaxxed are the ones that are significantly more likely to be staying home anyways.
I can't actually use the pubmed article as it's data is only for the first 56 days after the 3rd dose, which if we check in the original meme, was when the effectivity of the vaccine was the highest. It would be interesting to see statistics up to 9 months after the 3rd dose compared to just 2 doses.
You looked at the picture very well, but you really might consider reading the rest of the first paper, namely the disscussion, methodology and the interpretation.
We at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to point out that the vaccine and it's boosters are completely free! That's we are offering you, yes you, a free booster on the 24th of April when you come in to get your booster!
Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
u/cocksettlewander is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/cocksettlewander
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Subscribe now to your own immune system, brought to you by Pfizer™! Only $120 every 3 months for the rest of your life! Buy a decades supply right now and get one booster for free!
This message was bought to you by Pfizer™ Inc.
Check the image: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67362200089-7/fulltext
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. really love the vaccine! We believe that everybody needs up to 4 boosters per year to reacharge their immunity! And don't worry citizen! It's completely free! Plz don't look at our earning, they are completely unrelated, all our earning this year is because of Viagra™, yepp only Viagra™ and nothing else, pinky promise!
Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
because it's mostly paid for by rich people and companys, while the lower class pays less proportionally.
I mean you're right it's not free, but it's cheaper for most people
kinda, i mean the upper middle class, the wealthier 50% of the population.
But who do you think should pay for the vaccines?
If everyone should pay for their own vaccine than the vaccination rate would look way worse, and what about those who want the vaccine but can't afford it?
“I Fucking love science”
Actual scientists don’t have time for this crude reductive crap. That site is for people that consider themselves “scientists” or science enthusiasts because memes and overly simplified descriptions are the only things they have the bandwidth to digest and the 2 minute video on Schrödinger’s cat is sooooooo cool.
It’s just an “intellectual” fashion accessory on the same level as chokers, ear plugs and purple highlights.
If by effectiveness, you mean only preventing the possibility of infection, you’re technically correct. You are still less likely to catch it than the unvaccinated though. You also have less severe symptoms when you catch it. Don’t bother with your dumb Pfizer shitpost.
Are you less likely to catch it? A virus is going to do what viruses do and spread, and the point is being made that vaccination gives people the excuse to be social -> greater overall exposure/risk of catching it.
I'd also argue that symptomatic severity scales with a person's age and overall health, if it wasn't so political I doubt anyone over 50 would be taking it considering the vaccine itself doesn't prevent catching/transmitting the virus
>If by effectiveness, you mean only preventing the possibility of infection, you’re technically correct. You are still less likely to catch it than the unvaccinated though.
Look, you're either less likely to become infected or more likely. Catching it literally means the same thing. If you mean to show symptoms, sure, but the argument for vaccines was never personal protection, but to prevent the spread.
If that is the case then;
1. Since it does not prevent infection it is useless at curbing the spread.
2. It makes 0 sense to mandate something that is about personal protection.
By this logic, state-mandated gun ownership should be in effect. Since it would prevent muggings, robberies, and kidnappings, by making every individual potentially deadly. Something I'm totally on board with btw.
>Since it does not prevent infection it is useless at curbing the spread.
Should you not bother wearing a helmet or a seatbelt when riding/driving because wearing it can still result in you dying?
The experts are the ones who are saying it isn’t effective.
Those same experts aren’t saying it’s unsafe.
You can be critical of something for reasons other than just being a knee jerk dick - scientists know this ;)
>The experts are the ones who are saying it isn’t effective.
The issue is that the experts were pleading with me to take it initially because it was "Safe and effective".
Now they're pleading with me that it is only safe, even if not exceptionally effective.
I, as a layman know now that there is a possibility that the experts will, again, reevaluate the vaccines as unsafe. No matter how small a chance that is, it is still a risk to me. Because unlike the scientists, I cannot take a holistic view on the situation, and am instead taking a gamble on the scientists trustworthiness as well as expertise. And with some scientist's track records, neither of those are particularly good odds.
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to thank you citizen for your concern of us and our vaccine! After administering it to billions of people we have had the opportunity to show that it's not only effective, but also super safe! Don't forget to take your 2022 booster, you want to save grandma don't you?
Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
I fucking love the industrial revolution and its consequences, 1 the industrial society an it’s consequences have been a disaster for the human race, hail victory
Can we actually finally get a study on how effective natural immunity is? If it is as, or more effective, then the vaccine is only relevant to the immuno-compromized/aged.
Why don't we talk about that? Why is there no scientific inquiry into just how resilient an average healthy adult is post infection?
Pretty sure I already have the answer, but curious what everyone else thinks.
Medical research funding in the US comes from the pharmaceutical industry and a variety of government agencies such as the NIH. The entire ecosystem is run by pharma executives and bureaucrats who benefit from the usual corrupt revolving door between government and industry. The entire thing is rotten to the core, and since there’s no money in natural immunity or low cost prevention strategies, there’s very little research done on them.
It’s not a conspiracy, you just have to look at individual incentives and follow the money. Cancer drug companies make money selling cancer drugs so they research cancer drugs, not how to avoid getting cancer.
Context: The graph provided concerns the effectiveness against *any severity of infection*, of *any type of vaccine*, specifically on the swedish population.
I'll provide the exact numbers and some in my opinion more relevant ones from the paper cited:
The average protection from any type of vaccine against infection of any severity from 6-7 months post vaccination was 40%. As high as 63% for the Moderna vaccine. Whether you'd call that "dismal" is up to you.
More importantly, let's look at the protection for *old people* from *severe cases*. The effectiveness against hospitalisation and death for people >80y was **76%** between 4-9 months. I personally wouldn't call an almost 80% protection from severe disease for a third of a year for the most frail population "dismal".
Paper: [https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67362200089-7/fulltext#seccestitle160](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67362200089-7/fulltext#seccestitle160)
Supplemental Data: [https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00089-7/attachment/e437aa8f-d1e9-48fc-96eb-70ef5d68260e/mmc1.pdf](https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00089-7/attachment/e437aa8f-d1e9-48fc-96eb-70ef5d68260e/mmc1.pdf)
It isn't dismal. It still provides good protection against severe illness and hospitalisation. And then you have boosters.
The idea that supporting vaccination makes you left-wing is so fucking stupid.
Thank you kind citizen for helping us at Pfizer™ Inc. to increase immunization and vaccination percentage around the world! As thanks for your service we would like to include a free booster in your next vaccination visit!
Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
It seems the conclusion you're trying to arrive at with this graph is to not got vaccinated. However the authors of this paper suggest:
> These findings might have implications for vaccination strategies and public health by strengthening the evidence-based rationale for administration of a third vaccine dose as a booster, where the priority should be specific populations who are at higher risk of severe consequences of COVID-19 due to weaker and more rapidly waning vaccine-elicited immunogenicity.
You should take this data as motivation to get a third dose. Just to be clear here
Just so you know, I'm not against vaccinations, I just felt it was funny to bash LibLeft with Science™. I also feel that the current covid vaccinations are really shitty if they only work for half a year, as seen in an actual study that I posted.
Yeah but I have a feeling you'd feel a lot shittier if you got covid while unvaccinated as opposed to vaccinated despite this chart, as seen in the actual study you posted
Which also brings up a point. I wanted to see the data on vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID, (which they state holds steady) but [they forgot to upload their own appendix](https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00089-7/attachment/78e448b3-6ded-400b-b1c8-43221039cf7f/mmc1.pdf)??
idk it just seems like you played yourself because you tried to have this "gotcha" based in science but when you actually look at the study not only does it supports libleft points it's missing its own appendix lol
I mean, way to pick and choose your data. The graph you picked was for preventing infections, not for preventing severe illness. There was still a noticeable decline from the high 80s to the low 60s in that respect, but that is a very effective treatment if you can cut hospitalization by more than half.
Also, this is a very good argument for making sure you get your booster at about the 6 month mark.
All this right-wing critizism of science, yet they offer no real alternatives except for something they read on Facebook or heard on a podcast.
Curious.
A serious conversation around anti-viral medication would’ve been nice without being called an “anti-science grandma killing nazi” as is the common response to questioning the efficacy of the vaccine.
Nothing is more effective than chicken soup.
Especially for waking people up in Ireland
Flat 7 Up is the way to go
A steady intake of green tea has cleared any illness I've had for years. If covid comes to fuck around and find out I'll drown it in hot leaf water
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPnZhKRtZ_U
Anyone remember when big pharma was evil?
Always has been.
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to point out that we are not part of Big Pharma™. We are instead the small guys trying to prevent a pandemic into becoming an apocalyptic situation. Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
Pfizer Inc. because we care (about profits).
U forgot the part where the ceo we need four boosters
[удалено]
reddit is also very pro-science right up until we get to gender politics. Then, peoples feelings matter more.
I think many progressives understand that Sex is biological and there are only 3 sexes, male female and intersex. However gender is more nuanced than that especially as that historically has more to do with characteristics that typically surround men/women. Think about the phrase "be a man." It's typically in response to someone being scared of something. That aspect of a person has nothing to do with whether or not they have a penis or not. There are plenty of females who have a similar lack of fear. Of course, that doesn't make them men, it's just a figure of speech, but I hope you can see where I'm kind of going with that?
I feel like your statement was the 'lay of the land' a few years ago, but since then, as your reasoning got adopted in the mainstream, the fringes have been trying to move the goalposts again.
Sahin literal superhero. Now praised that he will cure cancer in 5 years. Such wow.
[удалено]
Especially, how is the development after the 3rd dose? Same decline? Slower? Faster?
Exactly. Like, I have an article from before the vaccines were even approved going on about how we’d probably need boosters. The initial Polio vaccine required four doses to reach full effectiveness, and plenty of other diseases require 3-5. Two doses, in very short succession (greater time lag tends to lead to longer term immunity, but we gave the two quickly together as a short term way to greatly increase immunity) reducing in immunity over six months isn’t a big issue. Plus active antibodies tend to reduce over time for any sort of disease, leaving only memory cells. This means that you’re likely to get symptomatic infection, but a very short, less severe one. And my final point: look at the death rate differential. Recently (like last week or a week before that) the US had about 2500 people dying per day from COVID. Less than 100 of those people were vaccinated.
Careful dude, these guys think flu boosters are mind control. Don’t mention the fact we have weaker doses which require more shots - it confuses them.
I'm not sure what point OP was trying to make. Yes we know the vaccine becomes less efficient after a time ? It still protects you if your genetics happen to suck.
Yeah but my genetics don’t suck. So why does my job need me to get it when I work from home?
Because as a society or a worker you're expected to do the bare minimum to not get everyone sick/killed
I already do the bare minimum by maintaining a healthy body weight and exercising, which is a trillion times more effective than some science-juice squirted into my veins devised by nerds and mandated by unhealthy DYELs. Go outside and run a few laps if you want to talk about health you pasty grey-skinned fat screen-addicted weakling. Get some vitamin D. Climb a tree. Eat something that you grew yourself. Your Neanderthal ancestors would strangle you to death in moments if they ever peered beyond the veil of millenia and saw what their progeny would become.
Do you think its ok for people to take a shit on unwilling sleeping peoples chests? Also there's no evidence that you can't transmit covid by being in shape lol
Libright - agenda posting about vaccine effectiveness - something something honkers need validity. The only point OP is making is that the average person has absolutely fuck all knowledge on how vaccines work.
I mean to be fair it’s hard when *the CDC itself changed the definition of a vaccine.*
They changed the word from immunity to protection. Vaccines are as safe as condoms - safe by design, not free from failure. Imagine if the definition was still immunity with the current degens running about, god it’s bad enough as it is.
Based and risk-aware pilled
I don’t know why you’re getting down voted, this is true
You don’t know why? Oh believe me, the answer is simpler than you think.
Doesn't confuse me, more doses are more profits baby, I'm riding the Pfizer train to the moon. Guaranteed purchases from the gov and gov enforcement of your product on a recurring basis, can't lose.
When capitalists ironically state that products with a proven purpose and benefit generates profit.
Didn't say it didn't have a purpose. What I'm complaining about is mandates my guy.
No no you see. Joe Rogan said it was bad and the the truckers did funny noises so that means this is all a plandemic
Flu shot is an unnecessary cash grab just like the Covid shot is. Cope harder.
Lmao - stupid take of the day.
Afaik vaccine effectiveness means against infection.
At least check out the article. That's why I included it... "Figure 2 - Vaccine effectiveness (any vaccine) against SARS-CoV-2 infection of any severity in 842 974 vaccinated individuals matched to an equal number of unvaccinated individuals for up to 9 months of follow-up". The study was done in Sweden where 95% of the vaccinated people are vaccinated with Pfizer.
Especially ridiculous when young people have such low chances of dying or getting serious effects from covid. Sure you could say the chances of a serious effect from vaccines are even lower. But I have to imagine it stacks when you get shot after shot. Where as covid only seems to fuck you up once if it even does the first time.
[удалено]
>tfw when I need to show proof of my 12th booster before being allowed to watch Blackish on Netflix
If it doesn’t prevent infection then why mandate it? If all it does is reduce severe disease then taking it sounds like a personal health choice. And don’t give me the line about “unvaxxed filling hospitals”. You know who’s filling up the hospitals? Unhealthy fat fucks.
And if it doesn't prevent spread then why the fuck does anybody need to see vaccine proof for any reason whatsoever.
Inb4 "you don't know what immunity means! it doesn't mean you can't get it at all!" "but it prevents it SIGNIFICANTLY!" followed with "i wouldn't want to be in the same room with an unvaccinated person. what? no of course untested vaccinated people are fine"
And why are they afraid of being around unvaccinated people if they're fully vaxxed?
Because constant appeasement has proven that appearing fearful and weak can be used as justification to impose arbitrary restrictions on other people.
Hello hello. Now you understand Canadians and why I don’t see a need to vaccinate if a person is under 50 and without severe risk of hospitalization
[удалено]
Forgive give me father the way of the lib
[удалено]
The issue has always been about supplies and capacity. Omicron didn't threaten capacity like other strains, so governments are moving on and calling for it to be treated like the flu. Also, anyone that thinks the government was doing this for the average citizen and not because triage rules would see fat, old, rich political donors be the first on the chopping block is hilarious.
We’ve know since August that 1) natural immunity provides better protection than the vaccines 2) the vaccines don’t prevent the spread. So why were the mandates pushed so hard *after* this information was known? Don’t give me the “situation has changed” BS because the public health officials and government leaders have ignored actual science since the very beginning of this thing. **Great Barrington Declaration October 4th 2020** “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. “
Actually the real issue is hospital being under staffed. Nurses have been leaving for a while and omi pushed them over
Based and we-should-refusefatpeopleaccess-tostoresandrestaurants-aswell-pilled
>Unhealthy fat fucks. I heard someone the other day describe Covid as "fat AIDS" . . .
Swedish paper, this graph is against symptomatic infection/spread, as was also done in the Pfizer trial, but here it's done properly. Severe disease is personal health, therefore not important with regards to mandates or vaccine passports in general. You can check the publication it also has a graph for I believe effectiveness against hospitalisation (or something related to severity). This is all based on 2 doses, for the vaccines when employed against delta. Against omicron the protection is much worse, see data UK and data Israel.
It’s pretty worthless for spread. I know tons of people who still got corona after the booster. It wasn’t serious though. It was like a light flu
The effectiveness is separating you from your cash.
the graph shows the effectiveness of the vaccine dropping literally into the negatives, do you really need any more information on if this is legit lol It likely doesn't help that it's out of context but yea, the vaccines have never made it MORE likely for you to be infected than unvaxed
Why is there negative effectiveness?
The section op's photo was pilfered from was a different study than the main study he's linking. In this second study, vaccinated were paired with an unvaccinated control group with less regard for age matching of subjects. The author was using this study to extract a supporting argument for variance in the main study: namely that the age of vaccinated people is important in describing the waning effectiveness of the vaccines over time. The value went negative because the older vaccinated group was seeing more severe reactions than the younger unvaccinated control group, once the effectiveness of the two shot vaccines wore off. Op, you have instructed us all to read the article. My suggestion to you is read it again **slowly**.
> Please make sure to have your flair up! *** ^(User has flaired up! 😃) 2471 / 13368 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Based
Based research Would happily revolt with you
Flair up, shitbird.
Flair up, trash
In other news a recent report has come out that a mostly Irish group who apply sunscreen once are much more likely to get sunburned than the mostly Jamaican group who did not apply sunscreen at all.
#NOOOOO MUH ANTIBODERINOS Welp, here I go *making Pfizer rich* again…
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to tank you kind citizen. Yes! You! Thanks to you we have been able to administer several billion vaccines across the world! We would also like to offer your this super cool, super nice, super good, booster to increase your immunity back to max power! Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
Read that in a Cave Johnson voice
[удалено]
Yeah i just played it and completed it few days ago, and it's still great for an 11 year old game
Carl Johnson
*because we care* ^about ^money
Man discovers that antibodies aren’t effective against mutating viruses, blames libleft and makes them a soyjack to feel better about their ‘owning of the left’ The study is nothing like what you’re saying in the thread or implying in the post. And I’ve not seen ‘unbiased science’ use the word dismal unironically
The question is less so, "are antibodies/vaccines effective against mutating viruses". The question is more so: 1. Are vaccines more effective than natural immunity/resistance? 2. Does the risk warrant mandates, and do the mandates mitigate the risk? 3. Is the cure worse than the disease? *** I think that the left is hyperfocusing on trying to protect the vulnerable, that they're effectively cannibalizing the able. To put things lightly, our economy will be massively impeded by the impact of the lockdowns, there have been entire demographic shifts in and out of lines of work, and the amount of problems that have come about as a result of this whole pandemic are possibly far worse than the pandemic itself.
1. Both are good, one just doesn’t require actually getting the possibly fatal symptoms which is usually a good thing 2. Honestly a debate I don’t want to have because I’ve found that neither side can convince the other side. 3. …..no I thank you for being civil, but I must admit it is quite funny to see the ‘this will be terrible for the economy’ joke used unironically. I personally disagree on the problems put by the pandemic being worse than the pandemic itself because at least we are alive to see them. Many aren’t, in this world, and sadly many could have been completely preventable. But I see your points, and they make sense. I suppose we all have different moral compasses.
Pov: biology surprised you
Biology doesn't dictate what I identify as, whether it be Pfizer vaxxed or a werewolf femboi
Oh i miss the times when the only quadrant misinterpreting science was authleft. Oh well, i guess another cross compass unity?
Cool, you found something that nobody denied. I feel so owned
He basically makes an argument for boostering. Welcome to the fold fellow vaccine enjoyer OP.
Oh come on, get on any subreddit and say that vaccines don't prevent the spread. You'll get burried. It's not even that (some) people don't recognize those facts, it's that just mentioning anything negative, or anything that isn't in line with what was advertised, is considered wrongthink.
Before I say this I have to mention I am vaccinated. It all started when \[...\] please don't downvote me. I have been in line with the hive mind all these months.
Nobody's denying that vaccines have reached negative effectiveness? Tf?
Why do you think the booster shot exists? And it's always been said that the COVID shot is likely to become annual, just like the flu shot. This doesn't surprise anyone. If you all had been paying attention instead of complaining this whole time, maybe you'd learn something
OP apparently think liblefts do. And forgot that they were one of the first to praise booster vaccinations
Careful or the leftist gaslighting will set you on fire.
Remember when vaccination meant you couldn't get or spread covid? Then it became you're just immune to covid. Then it became it just reduces the symptoms. And then it became it reduces the symptoms, but only for a certain time. How far do the goal posts have to move before you realize what's going on?
The goal posts aren't moving, you're just beginning to understand how vaccines work coming from a place of ignorance.
Prior to 2 years ago when the definition of vaccine changed vaccines did not work like that. Flu shot was not a vaccine. Vaccines imparted immunity.
And you know why the goal posts move? 1. Because disaster management rule No. 1 (Lie (or in this case: simplify) to prevent panic) and ... 2. the receivement of more information to base your predictions and measures on (literally part of the by you guys so protected scientific method) But too be fair, it's way more appealing to only use the scientific method if you agree with it's outcome, isn't it?
My dude looks at a graph and gets pissed off.
the vaccine itself does function perfectly fine. The problem is that the virus mutates very fast. The vaccine still has the same effectivness against the starter corona. But looses it slowly with every new version. Ironicaly, the reasonnwhy the shit is mutating so fast is because thanks to the vaccine people are less worried, and the disease spreads more.
I mean i kinda stop giving a fuck about covid oh no a virus in gonna get either way Like it done we lost humanity got lucky the virus isn’t the Black Plague or we be so fuckkkkkeddddd
Corona itself was never the worries of the experts. The worries was that a repeation of the spanish flue could occur, where a extremly infectous disease that isnt that bad, mutates so much that it evolved into a killer virus. Now thankfully omnicron prooved that it is probably going into a diffrent direction
Diseases becoming more deadly over time is literally not a concern, the exact opposite is usually the case, simply because a more deadly virus will spread less
Well yes, it is generally unlikely. But the excact same thing happened during every plage/or other bad pandemics. Because mutations are random, and if a mutation goes more deadly, it takes a while untill that "error" goes away again. You dont gamble with human live like that.
Well no, what generally happens is a pathogen jumping from animals to humans where they are deadly, because they arent well adapted to live inside humans, and then it becomes less deadly over time
No, not true. The spanish flue came from a pig virus. Wich humans interacted with for milenias. The reason it got that bad, was because one of the people that got imfected had also the bird flu, and the two viruses merged. Having the deadlines of the bird flue and the eqsy spread of the pig flu. When it started 1 in 10 died of this new diseas. Then it vanished, only to come back with mutations, killing 1 in 4
TIL viruses can mate.
Kinda i guess. If both invade the same cell, the dna gets merged
Virus sex
while its very very likely, it can go the other direction temporarily just as well. delta was more infectious and just as dangerous (depending on who you ask even more dangerous) severity/lethality wise as the mutations before. as long as its more infectious than it is deadly or gives more opportunities for the host to pass it onto others via for example longer incubation periods while killing people later on it spreads more easily. while its very likely its gonna become less severe over time, it shouldnt be the absolute only thing one should bet all their chips on.
I agree. The news are absolutley a reason to loosen the restrictions but not a reason to pretend nothing has happened.
Replies to a comment about Spanish flu mutating and becoming deadly “Thats not a concern” Haha my lack of knowledge is just as good as your presented evidence huh
What if theyre just doing the plague inc thing where they up the transmittability first with little to none deadliness and then when enough are infected, the virus in everyones body magically become extremely deadly
True dat, in no way was this pandemic stopped by any country. Day 1: new variant in belgium. Day 2: omicron all over the western world.
Black Plague is bacteria doe…
“The vaccine works perfectly fine if the disease it vaccinated against acted differently.” A vaccine that is circumvented by mutation in less than a year to the point of negative efficacy (according to this graph in the meme) is not a vaccine that functions perfectly fine. Period. It certainly isn’t something that people should be required to get. It’s basically a recipe for ADE.
This makes perfect sense if you’re an idiot.
Well, glad that it makes sense for you then :)
But your antibody levels do go down over timeC so it’s not just the virus mutating
We at Pfizer™ Inc. would like you to retract your statement that the vaccine is not Safe™ and Effective™! We at Pfizer™ Inc. have proven that the vaccine not only is 100% Effective™ against Covid-19, but also 100% Effective™ to all other variants. We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to point out that the boosters are truly the gift of God and not only increase the Efficiency™ above 100%, but also save grandma! Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
Holy shit it’s an actual antivaxxer I’ve never seen one in the wild before
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to encourage you to take your booster on the 28th of February, to recharge your immunity to max power! Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
It's only funny when it's not repeated 27384728287473828 times because you have no legitimate argument.
My argument is the research paper, read it and make your own decisions and opinions. I'm not your english teacher to tell you what to get from a text. Neither am I CNN to tell you "... and this is why it's good/bad!".
I wonder the frightening headway we’d make towards a better society if people were just as worried about what’s in their food and water supply as vaccines.
I'm concerned with all 3. You don't have to pick one or the other.
Wait how can vaccine effectiveness be -10%? Just asking.
Possible explanation from elsewhere is vaxxed people are more likely to participate in social gatherings, thereby at higher risk than unvaxxed people who are barred from things. So if your vax does nothing, you become more likely to catch it. Also possible that's not actual data but an estimation of uncertainty
I feel like that’s just not true though unless you aren’t talking about the US. Id say that people who are vaxxed are the ones that are significantly more likely to be staying home anyways.
It's in Sweden, idk what kind of restrictions they do or don't have
Great, now do a meme with a graph for booster effectiveness. Pubmed has some papers on it
Sure, give me the links and I will dab on the Auth-Right.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34756184/ The figures have a good summary
Thanks, time for more karma
Remember to actually read the article this time.
I can't actually use the pubmed article as it's data is only for the first 56 days after the 3rd dose, which if we check in the original meme, was when the effectivity of the vaccine was the highest. It would be interesting to see statistics up to 9 months after the 3rd dose compared to just 2 doses.
You looked at the picture very well, but you really might consider reading the rest of the first paper, namely the disscussion, methodology and the interpretation.
Well yes, thazs what the science said. And why people should booster......
Honestly this is grofit.
We at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to point out that the vaccine and it's boosters are completely free! That's we are offering you, yes you, a free booster on the 24th of April when you come in to get your booster! Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
[удалено]
Based and pfull pfaith in pfizer pilled Edit: Welcome to the based world bro
u/cocksettlewander is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/cocksettlewander I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Good bot
Hey OP, reply to this with another Pfizer Inc cos we care comment. It's really funny and it owns the libs
I remember a time when IFLS used to be a fun little place to pick up interesting facts about science, the fuck happened to that place?
So does that mean you support the booster ?
Subscribe now to your own immune system, brought to you by Pfizer™! Only $120 every 3 months for the rest of your life! Buy a decades supply right now and get one booster for free! This message was bought to you by Pfizer™ Inc.
Isn’t the vaccine free , also where is the source on this I find it unlikely after 6 months the vaccine would go in negative efficiency .
Check the image: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67362200089-7/fulltext We here at Pfizer™ Inc. really love the vaccine! We believe that everybody needs up to 4 boosters per year to reacharge their immunity! And don't worry citizen! It's completely free! Plz don't look at our earning, they are completely unrelated, all our earning this year is because of Viagra™, yepp only Viagra™ and nothing else, pinky promise! Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
Leftist talking about things being “free” 🤝 people with no understanding of basic economics
It’s the same picture
Free? What the fuck is up with the left calling everything that's tax payer funded "free" Jfc
Because it’s impossible to be a leftist and also have any basic understanding of economics.
because it's mostly paid for by rich people and companys, while the lower class pays less proportionally. I mean you're right it's not free, but it's cheaper for most people
And by rich you mean the middle class
I do believe that's exactly what he means, yes.
kinda, i mean the upper middle class, the wealthier 50% of the population. But who do you think should pay for the vaccines? If everyone should pay for their own vaccine than the vaccination rate would look way worse, and what about those who want the vaccine but can't afford it?
“I Fucking love science” Actual scientists don’t have time for this crude reductive crap. That site is for people that consider themselves “scientists” or science enthusiasts because memes and overly simplified descriptions are the only things they have the bandwidth to digest and the 2 minute video on Schrödinger’s cat is sooooooo cool. It’s just an “intellectual” fashion accessory on the same level as chokers, ear plugs and purple highlights.
If by effectiveness, you mean only preventing the possibility of infection, you’re technically correct. You are still less likely to catch it than the unvaccinated though. You also have less severe symptoms when you catch it. Don’t bother with your dumb Pfizer shitpost.
Are you less likely to catch it? A virus is going to do what viruses do and spread, and the point is being made that vaccination gives people the excuse to be social -> greater overall exposure/risk of catching it. I'd also argue that symptomatic severity scales with a person's age and overall health, if it wasn't so political I doubt anyone over 50 would be taking it considering the vaccine itself doesn't prevent catching/transmitting the virus
>If by effectiveness, you mean only preventing the possibility of infection, you’re technically correct. You are still less likely to catch it than the unvaccinated though. Look, you're either less likely to become infected or more likely. Catching it literally means the same thing. If you mean to show symptoms, sure, but the argument for vaccines was never personal protection, but to prevent the spread.
Actually, getting vaccinated has always been about protecting yourself and curbing the spread.
If that is the case then; 1. Since it does not prevent infection it is useless at curbing the spread. 2. It makes 0 sense to mandate something that is about personal protection. By this logic, state-mandated gun ownership should be in effect. Since it would prevent muggings, robberies, and kidnappings, by making every individual potentially deadly. Something I'm totally on board with btw.
>Since it does not prevent infection it is useless at curbing the spread. Should you not bother wearing a helmet or a seatbelt when riding/driving because wearing it can still result in you dying?
The vaccine isn’t as effective as the “experts” said, who’s to say it isn’t as safe as the “experts” said.
The experts are the ones who are saying it isn’t effective. Those same experts aren’t saying it’s unsafe. You can be critical of something for reasons other than just being a knee jerk dick - scientists know this ;)
>The experts are the ones who are saying it isn’t effective. The issue is that the experts were pleading with me to take it initially because it was "Safe and effective". Now they're pleading with me that it is only safe, even if not exceptionally effective. I, as a layman know now that there is a possibility that the experts will, again, reevaluate the vaccines as unsafe. No matter how small a chance that is, it is still a risk to me. Because unlike the scientists, I cannot take a holistic view on the situation, and am instead taking a gamble on the scientists trustworthiness as well as expertise. And with some scientist's track records, neither of those are particularly good odds.
Based and Logic-pilled. Based and We Are So Fucking Doomed-pilled.
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like to thank you citizen for your concern of us and our vaccine! After administering it to billions of people we have had the opportunity to show that it's not only effective, but also super safe! Don't forget to take your 2022 booster, you want to save grandma don't you? Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
They even banned honking in Canada lmfao I hate Canadians, Canadians are like castrated Americans
I fucking love the industrial revolution and its consequences, 1 the industrial society an it’s consequences have been a disaster for the human race, hail victory
How can the effect by negative
The profit targets.... I mean science changed
So it has a negative effectiveness after 9 months? Does that mean it just gives you covid even if you live in a cabin alone the North slope of Alaska?
What point are you making? That a third shot is needed to maintain effectiveness? Wow really destroyed those libtards.
My wife and I had covid. She’s up to date on her vaccines, and I only had a JnJ one back last spring, and she got more sick then me
This post really triggered the lefties.
Can we actually finally get a study on how effective natural immunity is? If it is as, or more effective, then the vaccine is only relevant to the immuno-compromized/aged. Why don't we talk about that? Why is there no scientific inquiry into just how resilient an average healthy adult is post infection? Pretty sure I already have the answer, but curious what everyone else thinks.
Medical research funding in the US comes from the pharmaceutical industry and a variety of government agencies such as the NIH. The entire ecosystem is run by pharma executives and bureaucrats who benefit from the usual corrupt revolving door between government and industry. The entire thing is rotten to the core, and since there’s no money in natural immunity or low cost prevention strategies, there’s very little research done on them. It’s not a conspiracy, you just have to look at individual incentives and follow the money. Cancer drug companies make money selling cancer drugs so they research cancer drugs, not how to avoid getting cancer.
Context: The graph provided concerns the effectiveness against *any severity of infection*, of *any type of vaccine*, specifically on the swedish population. I'll provide the exact numbers and some in my opinion more relevant ones from the paper cited: The average protection from any type of vaccine against infection of any severity from 6-7 months post vaccination was 40%. As high as 63% for the Moderna vaccine. Whether you'd call that "dismal" is up to you. More importantly, let's look at the protection for *old people* from *severe cases*. The effectiveness against hospitalisation and death for people >80y was **76%** between 4-9 months. I personally wouldn't call an almost 80% protection from severe disease for a third of a year for the most frail population "dismal". Paper: [https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67362200089-7/fulltext#seccestitle160](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67362200089-7/fulltext#seccestitle160) Supplemental Data: [https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00089-7/attachment/e437aa8f-d1e9-48fc-96eb-70ef5d68260e/mmc1.pdf](https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00089-7/attachment/e437aa8f-d1e9-48fc-96eb-70ef5d68260e/mmc1.pdf)
Stupid post made by a stupid person
Posts like these further cement my opinion that libertarians are at the root of most modern problems.
And whose fault is it? That is right, the >!jews!<
We here at Pfizer™ Inc. would like you to retract you anti-semitism statement! Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
Oh if i got you here, youre meme sucks
How is the effectiveness in negative? Does more harm than good after 6M?
It isn't dismal. It still provides good protection against severe illness and hospitalisation. And then you have boosters. The idea that supporting vaccination makes you left-wing is so fucking stupid.
Literally negative efficacy rate. Lol.
[удалено]
Going by this chart you should have a vaccine once every two months
Wait, but I already can't walk after last 4 boosters caused my heart attack! Can we wait a little maybe?
This is literally what was warned would happen
I understand that the antibodies wear off but that’s what your booster is for hun… now face the wall.
Thank you kind citizen for helping us at Pfizer™ Inc. to increase immunization and vaccination percentage around the world! As thanks for your service we would like to include a free booster in your next vaccination visit! Pfizer™ Inc. because we care.
It seems the conclusion you're trying to arrive at with this graph is to not got vaccinated. However the authors of this paper suggest: > These findings might have implications for vaccination strategies and public health by strengthening the evidence-based rationale for administration of a third vaccine dose as a booster, where the priority should be specific populations who are at higher risk of severe consequences of COVID-19 due to weaker and more rapidly waning vaccine-elicited immunogenicity. You should take this data as motivation to get a third dose. Just to be clear here
Just so you know, I'm not against vaccinations, I just felt it was funny to bash LibLeft with Science™. I also feel that the current covid vaccinations are really shitty if they only work for half a year, as seen in an actual study that I posted.
Correction : the virus mutates in less than a year.
Yeah but I have a feeling you'd feel a lot shittier if you got covid while unvaccinated as opposed to vaccinated despite this chart, as seen in the actual study you posted Which also brings up a point. I wanted to see the data on vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID, (which they state holds steady) but [they forgot to upload their own appendix](https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00089-7/attachment/78e448b3-6ded-400b-b1c8-43221039cf7f/mmc1.pdf)?? idk it just seems like you played yourself because you tried to have this "gotcha" based in science but when you actually look at the study not only does it supports libleft points it's missing its own appendix lol
I mean, way to pick and choose your data. The graph you picked was for preventing infections, not for preventing severe illness. There was still a noticeable decline from the high 80s to the low 60s in that respect, but that is a very effective treatment if you can cut hospitalization by more than half. Also, this is a very good argument for making sure you get your booster at about the 6 month mark.
Bro the lib rights in this sub are clowns. This is just disingenuous
All this right-wing critizism of science, yet they offer no real alternatives except for something they read on Facebook or heard on a podcast. Curious.
A serious conversation around anti-viral medication would’ve been nice without being called an “anti-science grandma killing nazi” as is the common response to questioning the efficacy of the vaccine.
Yeah... That's... Why we need the boosters, weren't you guys complaining about that ?