FBI Says Covid-19 Most Likely A Leak From Lab

[John53]

Can you quote that? Because I am looking on the Pfizer website and it says nothing about anyone under 12 and the vaccines only being approved for emergency use only in that age range.

From your article...

"The vaccine is now also available under an emergency use authorization for children ages 5–11. This vaccine is about 91% effective in preventing COVID-19 in children ages 5–11."

 

[Subduction Zone]

Can you quote that? Because I am looking on the Pfizer website and it says nothing about anyone under 12 and the vaccines only being approved for emergency use only in that age range.

Where did you get that "emergency use only" claim from? The article that you supplied does not support that. You may be conflating the rapid development due to the emergency with "emergency use'.

The Covid vaccines were developed rapidly because it was a pandemic that was killing millions. The vaccine still went through all of the steps that a vaccine goes through. They were able to vastly increase the time that it takes to make a vaccine because first off the funds were there for the research. Acquiring funds can be the factor that takes the most time in developing a vaccine. One has to pass several stages and raise funds for each stage. In this case the funds were already there they only had to do the research. Second the tests overlapped a bit in timing. That was the one unique emergency move. When a test had advanced to a certain point, but before it was finished all of the way, they deemed that it was safe to start the next round of testing. All tests were completed. But instead of waiting for rock solid answers for test number one before going on to test two they said "close enough" and began the next series of tests.

 

[John53]

Where did you get that "emergency use only" claim from? The article that you supplied does not support that. You may be conflating the rapid development due to the emergency with "emergency use'.

The Covid vaccines were developed rapidly because it was a pandemic that was killing millions. The vaccine still went through all of the steps that a vaccine goes through. They were able to vastly increase the time that it takes to make a vaccine because first off the funds were there for the research. Acquiring funds can be the factor that takes the most time in developing a vaccine. One has to pass several stages and raise funds for each stage. In this case the funds were already there they only had to do the research. Second the tests overlapped a bit in timing. That was the one unique emergency move. When a test had advanced to a certain point, but before it was finished all of the way, they deemed that it was safe to start the next round of testing. All tests were completed. But instead of waiting for rock solid answers for test number one before going on to test two they said "close enough" and began the next series of tests.

I can't for the life of me work out what the problem is. The article sings the praises of the vaccines as both safe and effective.

And the real world results show that to be true. Billions of us aren't keeling over because of the vaccine. I can't remember when I got my first shot, About 18 months or so ago I guess.

 

[Kathryn]

No, once again, just because you caught the disease does not mean that it did not work. Once again, vaccines also ease symptoms if one still gets ill. One of the last persons to catch smallpox was a health worker treating people that caught it. That worker was vaccinated and did survive.

Like I said, it didn't work to prevent disease on me, which is what the definition was till very recently. Most people I know have received the shots, but many have also gotten COVID. Ugh. I personally know several people who got the shots and then got COVID in spite of getting the shots which were supposed to PREVENT COVID, or at least we were told that at the time - of course, that changed. In fact, anecdotal evidence here, but nearly every single person I know who has gotten COVID received the shots. So excuse me if I don't believe that the "vaccine" actually prevented the illness - it MAY HAVE prevented some people from getting it, and it may have prevented some from getting a serious case of it, but let me point something else out that's anecdotal - no, never mind, just read the above post (the True Story Time post) - it really says it all from my perspective.

 

[Kathryn]

From your article...

"The vaccine is now also available under an emergency use authorization for children ages 5–11. This vaccine is about 91% effective in preventing COVID-19 in children ages 5–11."

-1It doesn't say that the vaccine is ONLY available under emergency use authorization for kids ages 5-11.

 

[Kathryn]

a

Of course the article says the shots are safe and effective. I don't know whether they are or not, but I do know they are still for emergency use only for the most part.

 

[Kathryn]

Here's one source where I'm getting the information about emergency use only when it comes to vaccines - among many sources:

COVID-19 Vaccine EUA Recipient/Caregiver Fact Sheets | CDC

Find fact sheets for recipients and caregivers for each COVID-19 vaccine authorized under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).

www.cdc.gov

Oh, and this from the FDA:

"Comirnaty is a monovalent COVID-19 vaccine that is approved for use as a two-dose primary series for the prevention of COVID-19 in individuals 12 years of age and older. It is also authorized for emergency use to provide a third primary series dose to individuals 12 years of age and older with certain kinds of immunocompromise.
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is a monovalent COVID-19 vaccine that is authorized for emergency use to prevent COVID-19 as:

• The first two doses of the three-dose primary series for children 6 months through 4 years of age.
• A two-dose primary series for individuals 5 years of age and older.
• A third primary series dose for individuals 5 years of age and older who have been determined to have certain kinds of immunocompromise.

Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent is authorized for emergency use to prevent COVID-19 as:

• The third dose of the three-dose primary series following two doses of the monovalent Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine in children 6 months through 4 years of age.
• A single booster dose at least two months after completion of either primary vaccination with any authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine or receipt of the most recent booster dose with any authorized or approved monovalent COVID-19 vaccine in individuals 5 years of age and older.

Like I've said, it didn't work for me, in spite of having the two shots and then a booster shot, but maybe it works on some other people. I've neer had an issue with any vaccine before, for the record. I'm not some sort of "anti vaxxer." Heck, I'm not even a Trump supporter! LOL

 

[Subduction Zone]

Like I said, it didn't work to prevent disease on me, which is what the definition was till very recently. Most people I know have received the shots, but many have also gotten COVID. Ugh. I personally know several people who got the shots and then got COVID in spite of getting the shots which were supposed to PREVENT COVID, or at least we were told that at the time - of course, that changed. In fact, anecdotal evidence here, but nearly every single person I know who has gotten COVID received the shots. So excuse me if I don't believe that the "vaccine" actually prevented the illness - it MAY HAVE prevented some people from getting it, and it may have prevented some from getting a serious case of it, but let me point something else out that's anecdotal - no, never mind, just read the above post (the True Story Time post) - it really says it all from my perspective.

No, it never was. That was the common misunderstanding until recently. I brought up the example of the smallpox vaccine to show you that even one of the most successful vaccines ever was not perfect. But it did work. The person that got smallpox survived.

The vaccine both lowers infection rates and saves lives. When the first variation appeared that got around the vaccine both vaccinated and unvaccinated people were getting the disease, but by a huge percentage the ones that died were the unvaccinated.

 

[John53]

Sigh. I got three shots. After the third one, I said "no way am I getting anymore," because I got a pounding headache that could not be reduced, for four days. Prior to that, I got the first one without many side effects and the second one had a few more, but I was still OK with it, which is why I got the third one. Fourth, no way.

Of course the article says the shots are safe and effective. I don't know whether they are or not, but I do know they are still for emergency use only.

I haven't worked out the new quoting system yet. This is for the first paragraph... yes you keep saying and I haven't said I disagree with you. I was commenting on your claim that the vaccine is not approved. Can't remember your exact wording but it was something like that.

For the 2nd paragraph... This article explains how they use the term emergency use authorization. It's not what you appear to think. It doesn't mean it hasn't been properly tested. And testing hasn't stopped

Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines Explained

FDA explains the Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines

www.fda.gov

 

[Kathryn]

No, it never was. That was the common misunderstanding until recently. I brought up the example of the smallpox vaccine to show you that even one of the most successful vaccines ever was not perfect. But it did work. The person that got smallpox survived.

The vaccine both lowers infection rates and saves lives. When the first variation appeared that got around the vaccine both vaccinated and unvaccinated people were getting the disease, but by a huge percentage the ones that died were the unvaccinated.

I guess it's changed again since those first days. Oh and until recently, this was the definition of "vaccine."

Definition: vaccine from 26 USC § 4132(a)(2) | LII / Legal Information Institute

www.law.cornell.edu

Also, this:

According to an archived version of the dictionary's website, Merriam-Webster formerly said a "vaccine" was "a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease."

Now it says this:
The new definition of "vaccine", published in May, reads: "a preparation that is administered – as by injection – to stimulate the body's immune response against a specific infectious agent or disease."

In September, the CDC changed its vaccine definition from “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease” to "a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases," according to the Miami Herald.

So yes, prior to "recently" this was the definition of a vaccine. T he COVID products may be similar to "flu shots" but they aren't vaccines - I don't personally see them PREVENTING disease at all, but hey, that's just my take.

But clearly, words change and meanings change. Just don't act like this "vaccination" prevents disease because I don't see that it does that. It MAY decrease the severity but I don't see any evidence that it prevents COVID from happening to someone.

As of 2022, 6 in 10 deaths attributed to COVID were in vaccinated and boosted people.

Why Do Vaccinated People Represent Most COVID-19 Deaths Right Now? | KFF

This post explores why the share of COVID-19 deaths among those who are vaccinated has risen, Factors include a rising share of the population that is vaccinated, waning immune protection and low uptake of boosters, and changes in immunity among the unvaccinated.

www.kff.org

 

[Kathryn]

I haven't worked out the new quoting system yet. This is for the first paragraph... yes you keep saying and I haven't said I disagree with you. I was commenting on your claim that the vaccine is not approved. Can't remember your exact wording but it was something like that.

For the 2nd paragraph... This article explains how they use the term emergency use authorization. It's not what you appear to think. It doesn't mean it hasn't been properly tested. And testing hasn't stopped

Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines Explained

FDA explains the Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines

www.fda.gov

I already posted links directly to what the FDA definies as Emergency Use Authorization - from the FDA website. Maybe even this particular page, not sure.

 

[Kathryn]

Anyway, I got vaccinated and boosted, and still got COVID. I also had a raging headache for four days after the booster. So no, I'm not going to get another booster. I can't find four days in a row without using vacation time, to lay on my sofa moaning and frankly, I don't want to take the risk.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I guess it's changed again since those first days. Oh and until recently, this was the definition of "vaccine."

Definition: vaccine from 26 USC § 4132(a)(2) | LII / Legal Information Institute

www.law.cornell.edu

Also, this:

According to an archived version of the dictionary's website, Merriam-Webster formerly said a "vaccine" was "a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease."

Now it says this:
The new definition of "vaccine", published in May, reads: "a preparation that is administered – as by injection – to stimulate the body's immune response against a specific infectious agent or disease."

In September, the CDC changed its vaccine definition from “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease” to "a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases," according to the Miami Herald.

So yes, prior to "recently" this was the definition of a vaccine. T he COVID products may be similar to "flu shots" but they aren't vaccines - I don't personally see them PREVENTING disease at all, but hey, that's just my take.

But clearly, words change and meanings change. Just don't act like this "vaccination" prevents disease because I don't see that it does that. It MAY decrease the severity but I don't see any evidence that it prevents COVID from happening to someone.

As of 2022, 6 in 10 deaths attributed to COVID were in vaccinated and boosted people.

Why Do Vaccinated People Represent Most COVID-19 Deaths Right Now? | KFF

This post explores why the share of COVID-19 deaths among those who are vaccinated has risen, Factors include a rising share of the population that is vaccinated, waning immune protection and low uptake of boosters, and changes in immunity among the unvaccinated.

www.kff.org

The second one is clearer. You are making the error of assuming that a vaccine always works 100%. That was never the case. If you lower the rate of spread of a disease enough it will die out. That is what happened with smallpox. There was a worldwide program to fight that disease. But the smallpox vaccine was never 100% effective. Nor is the measles vaccine. The first definition still applies, the second one was written because people had false expectations of the vaccines..

 

[Subduction Zone]

Anyway, I got vaccinated and boosted, and still got COVID. I also had a raging headache for four days after the booster. So no, I'm not going to get another booster. I can't find four days in a row without using vacation time, to lay on my sofa moaning and frankly, I don't want to take the risk.

As time goes on your immunities, both natural and acquired by vaccine will fade. The first time that you got Covid was bad I take it. Do you want to go through that again? It might take a few years, but between the virus naturally mutating and your level of immunity inevitably fading you will probably get very ill again some day. That is the bigger risk.

 

[dybmh]

@Kathryn ,

If something prevents infection 90% of the time, and a person becomes infected after being exposed 91 times, then it's working!

Without knowing how many exposures you had, it really doesn't make sense to say the vaccine didn't work for you.

 

[John53]

I already posted links directly to what the FDA definies as Emergency Use Authorization - from the FDA website. Maybe even this particular page, not sure.

Then I have no idea what the point is you're trying to make.

 

[John53]

Anyway, I got vaccinated and boosted, and still got COVID. I also had a raging headache for four days after the booster. So no, I'm not going to get another booster. I can't find four days in a row without using vacation time, to lay on my sofa moaning and frankly, I don't want to take the risk.

That's fine and your decision. I don't think anyone has said otherwise.

 

[Kathryn]

The second one is clearer. You are making the error of assuming that a vaccine always works 100%. That was never the case. If you lower the rate of spread of a disease enough it will die out. That is what happened with smallpox. There was a worldwide program to fight that disease. But the smallpox vaccine was never 100% effective. Nor is the measles vaccine. The first definition still applies, the second one was written because people had false expectations of the vaccines..

Six in ten people who DIED of COVID in 2022 were vaccinated. So I would say to Pfizer - tweak your "vaccine" to make it more effective as a vaccine.

 

[Kathryn]

That's fine and your decision. I don't think anyone has said otherwise.

Here's the thing though - people who aren't vaccinated are often vilified. In some countries, you had to show your vaccination card to eat out, to go shopping, to go to anyplace indoors basically except for the drug store, etc.

 

[Kathryn]

Then I have no idea what the point is you're trying to make.

Could it be because you simply do not want to see it? People hear and read what they want. Anyway, yes, the COVID 19 shots have been tested but the majority of the ones in use are still under an EUA and that's because they haven't been fully tested yet.