Vaccinated people spread covid

[ClaireH]

The government is telling us that vaccinated people can infect the same people.

So we still believe that the risk of doing the research is worth the risk of a pandemic? As long as we are willing to take that risk, I believe the risk of any individual is small.

In reading your post it just dawned on me that this has a dual purpose. In addition to flip-flopping making it extremely hard to believe formerly credible sources like CDC, NIH, and to a lesser extent since US is under the thumb of NIH/CDC WHO, the media needs to step it up regarding gain-of-function information…credible information would be nice. Yet, national media mostly leaves GoF out of the national conversation by their abundance of whether or not to vaccinate articles.

Scientists who believe gaining knowledge overrides the risk of unleashing (literally) deadly diseases onto humans are wrong. In their minds (at least from what some have stated publicly) their goal to be the first team to discover a new virus is worth the risk of the well-being of populations. The daily distraction of umpteen articles about whether or not one should be vaccinated blinds half of the public to the fact that they shouldn’t be doing this type of research in the first place. Understandably from their end, it’s better to not talk about the benefit/risk factor since the risk absolutely outweighs the benefits of choosing to go down this path of insanity using gain-of-function. Since we’re all arguing about being pro or con for the jabs, it should suit them perfectly for undeterred missions seeking infected animals not currently in contact with humans.

 

[LibertyKid]

Your entire understanding of how vaccines work is wrong. Your education is not my responsibility. Bigly is a Trump word. Where were you the last five or six years?

In what way am I wrong? And for the most part not a Trumper and didn't like Trump as a person.

 

[zaangalewa]

I believe that younger people have been getting and diagnosed with Covid since day 1. Isn't it plausible that the media want to report that number to support their narrative.
True story, no BS here. My son since he was 2 every year would get a very dry croupy cough due to allergies in the fall. Like clockwork last year, it hit again (My son is was 14). But because of Covid, when i took him to the Dr. they of course had to test him. The Dr. said more than likely it's just the cough and prescribed the typical steroid as usual. This was a Wednesday. I have my son every other week and had him since Sunday. Saturday rolls around and no news on the Covid test, so I call. The nurse said it was Positive. My mouth hit the floor. By Thursday my son's cough was gone, due to the steroid. No other symptoms. My wife and I and my Ex's side all get tested. Everyone was negative, even though my son and I were always at close contact. My Daughter and my son, are at close contact. No one got this virus despite how transmissible it is.

So from personal experience, I do question the validity of the initial tests. I question the statistical numbers. I question the transmissibility of this virus. Covid is real, people are dying of it. But I also can't help but think that there is a bigger narrative that is being pushed, that is absolutely frightening everyone, even those whom this virus can't harm. ...

There exists by the way in the moment not any clear decision whether children should be vaccinated or not. Interesting in this context could it be to know whether your child is now immune against coivd-19. A normal vaccination is perhaps much more effective because of boost effects than a natural vaccination via an uncalculable covid infection with enourmous risks.

But no one is able to make any experiment in such a direction. The delta variants are for sure more infectious. Here in Germany very most of our politcians suggest to vaccinate everyone beginning from the age of 12 years. They say a herd immunity needs a vaccination of 85%. But numbers are not a god. Every vaccination has also a minimal risk. So what is better to do in case of children? Our scientists still don't have enough data which could justify such a decision - what doesn't mean this is a wrong decision. If someone has to act fast then he is often not able to collect all data before he acts. The risks of a vaccination are for sure more easy calculable than the risks of an infection.

Concrete example. My wife knows someone who knows a young sportsman, who was vaccinated and had a short time later an heart muscle inflammation. I guess if he had not be vaccinated then covid-19 had for sure killed him. So he was lucky because he went to the doctor when he felt something was wrong. This was the best what he was able to do. It needs also medical support after an vaccination. This is by the way the only serios complication, which I know concrete. I guess this is only one case under thousands of vaccinated people.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

In what way am I wrong? And for the most part not a Trumper and didn't like Trump as a person.

Not my job to explain to a presumably grown man that the vaccine does not actually infect you with covid.

 

[pknopp]

In reading your post it just dawned on me that this has a dual purpose. In addition to flip-flopping making it extremely hard to believe formerly credible sources like CDC, NIH, and to a lesser extent since US is under the thumb of NIH/CDC WHO, the media needs to step it up regarding gain-of-function information…credible information would be nice. Yet, national media mostly leaves GoF out of the national conversation by their abundance of whether or not to vaccinate articles.

Scientists who believe gaining knowledge overrides the risk of unleashing (literally) deadly diseases onto humans are wrong. In their minds (at least from what some have stated publicly) their goal to be the first team to discover a new virus is worth the risk of the well-being of populations. The daily distraction of umpteen articles about whether or not one should be vaccinated blinds half of the public to the fact that they shouldn’t be doing this type of research in the first place. Understandably from their end, it’s better to not talk about the benefit/risk factor since the risk absolutely outweighs the benefits of choosing to go down this path of insanity using gain-of-function. Since we’re all arguing about being pro or con for the jabs, it should suit them perfectly for undeterred missions seeking infected animals not currently in contact with humans.

If this is bad enough to practically shut the country down, it's bad enough to STOP the research. Until we do that I do not believe anything we are told.

 

[Lesh]

If this is bad enough to practically shut the country down, it's bad enough to STOP the research. Until we do that I do not believe anything we are told.

That makes ZERO sense

 

[pknopp]

That makes ZERO sense

It makes perfect sense. We did stop our participation in it from 2014-2017.

 

[ClaireH]

That makes ZERO sense

If you’re not being facetious you need to read up. That’s the first and last time I’ll ever use that expression on here telling somebody to “read up” but honestly you need to ….I’ve read many of your posts.

What is Gain-of-Function Research & Who is at High Risk? – Alliance for Human Research Protection

ahrp.org

 

[Lesh]

It makes perfect sense.

Maybe if you're a Q freak or something.

Not to rational humans

 

[Lesh]

If you’re not being facetious you need to read up. That’s the first and last time I’ll ever use that expression on here telling somebody to “read up” but honestly you need to ….I’ve read many of your posts.

Great. Explain the "logic" of that

 

[ClaireH]

Great. Explain the "logic" of that

I was too quick in my response I admit. I understand losing patience with other posters so much better now as opposed to even a few weeks ago lol

What is Gain-of-Function Research & Who is at High Risk? – Alliance for Human Research Protection

ahrp.org

 

[pknopp]

Maybe if you're a Q freak or something.

Not to rational humans

Are you saying Obama was a Q freak?

 

[Lesh]

I was too quick in my response I admit. I understand losing patience with other posters so much better now as opposed to even a few weeks ago lol

What is Gain-of-Function Research & Who is at High Risk? – Alliance for Human Research Protection

ahrp.org

So you don't agree that when faced with a medical emergency we should stop all research?

Because that was the stupid claim

 

[ClaireH]

So you don't agree that when faced with a medical emergency we should stop all research?

Because that was the stupid claim

If you’re not going to read the article I linked there’s no sense to discuss anything Lesh.

For all readers actually interested in information and are too pressed for time to read the article, here is the important information:

“ “Gain-of-function” is the euphemism for biological research aimed at increasing the virulence and lethality of pathogens and viruses. GoF research is government funded; its focus is on enhancing the pathogens’ ability to infect different species and to increase their deadly impact as airborne pathogens and viruses. Ostensibly, GoF research is conducted for biodefense purposes. These experiments, however, are extremely dangerous. Those deadly science-enhanced pathogens can, and do escape into the community where they infect and kill people. What’s more, this line of research can be used for biological warfare.

 

[Lesh]

If this is bad enough to practically shut the country down, it's bad enough to STOP the research. Until we do that I do not believe anything we are told.

That is what you said. Obama has nothing to do with what we do or don't do now.

Or did you not make yourself clear?

 

[Lesh]

If you’re not going to read the article I linked there’s no sense to discuss anything Lesh.

You seem as lost as that idiot.

 

[pknopp]

That is what you said. Obama has nothing to do with what we do or don't do now.

Or did you not make yourself clear?

I note that we need to stop. You said only Q freaks do that. I note that we did that from 2014-17 under Obama, hence.................

My question.......are you saying Obama was a Q freak?

 

[Lesh]

I note that we need to stop. You said only Q freaks do that. I note that we did that from 2014-17 under Obama, hence.................

My question.......are you saying Obama was a Q freak?

So you were NOT talking about stopping all research NOW?

Like i said. You did not make yourself clear.

So what you are actually talking about is G of F which is not currently going on...is it?

What is it that yo want to stop then? Or do you even know?

 

[Lesh]

If you’re not going to read the article I linked there’s no sense to discuss anything Lesh.

Just curious...how did you happen on that particular article?

 

[ClaireH]

Just curious...how did you happen on that particular article?

I look for scientific articles before logging onto this board. There is always something fascinating to learn but it takes actively searching or subscribing (free) to various science updates- I get emails (signed up for free) for different science magazines like Science Daily, Nature, Science, as this info isn’t much covered by national news. Here is a link for great science info updates. You can go there and sign up for free for email updates.

Find news

NSF's mission is to advance the progress of science, a mission accomplished by funding proposals for research and education made by scientists, engineers, and educators from across the country.

www.nsf.gov