Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese  Click to Translate to Myanmar (Burmese)

PANDEMIC ALERT LEVEL
123456
Forum Home Forum Home > Main Forums > General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Gestalt#32 – SARS-2 Pandemic
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Online Discussion: Tracking new emerging diseases and the next pandemic since 2005; Coronavirus COVID-19 Pandemic Discussion Forum.

Gestalt#32 – SARS-2 Pandemic

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Tabitha111 View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group
Avatar

Joined: January 11 2020
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 10735
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tabitha111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Gestalt#32 – SARS-2 Pandemic
    Posted: November 29 2020 at 10:33am

by: monotreme1000 | November 29, 2020


Unarmed combatants


I read military blogs and news sites that describe the acquisition of new equipment for warfighters. Although we can argue whether defense contractors are overcharging the US government in some of the contracts, no one serious argues that our soldiers should not have the best possible equipment to protect themselves.


Health care workers (HCW) are currently in a war against SARS2.


Many of them are already casualties of this war because they were poorly equipped. This is a disgrace.

Every single HCW should have the equipment necessary for them to survive encounters with the SARS2 enemy. And that means powered & supplied air respiratory protection (PAPR) - with a face shield. This type of protection is better than disposable N95s because it is easier to wear for long periods of time. It is also expensive. But the cost is peanuts compared to what we spend for warfighters who we expect to risk their lives for our sake. Most of us want health care when we are sick. If we treat HCWs as if their lives are disposable, there may come a time when we don't get it.


Vaccine considerations


Now that SARS-2 vaccines are becoming available, many people are wondering whether or not they should get it. For me, this decision comes down to a risk/benefit analysis. What are the risks of the vaccine vs. the risk of getting infected with SARS2?


All three vaccines which have been described in detail involve new technology. They are based on introducing viral mRNA into the cells of the person being vaccinated where the mRNA is translated into protein.

Since this is a new approach, there may be some risk, although at this time, I cannot think what that would be. mRNA technology is the only way we could have vaccines so quickly. I have called for vaccines to be made in this way for many years. So, I am personally glad that this technology is being used for the SARS-2 pandemic.


Two of the vaccines, from Pfizer and Moderna, use lipid nanoparticles to deliver the viral mRNA to the person being vaccinated's cells. This is a new approach.

I am unaware of any data indicating that there is any serious side effects to it.


The Astra-Zeneca vaccine uses a modified adenovirus to deliver the SARS-2 to the person being vaccinated. Adenovirus has been used to successfully deliver gene therapy to patients in the past. However, there have been reported cases of severe side effects, including death, with this approach. Astra-Zeneca claims that their version of the adenovirus is safe. Some scientists have suggested that Astra-Zeneca has not been entirely forthright in releasing all of their data. Given what I know now, I would not choose to take the Astra-Zeneca vaccine. My opinion may change based on further information.


The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are likely to be prioritized for health care workers in the US and other advanced countries.

If I was a HCW treating Covid-19 patients, I would want to take the Pfizer vaccine as soon as I could get it. In my opinion, the risk of taking this vaccine is likely to be lower than getting infected with SARS-2, especially given the inadequate PPE available to HCWs. Since I am not a HCW, it is likely that millions of other people will have been vaccinated before I need to make a decision for myself. I will be watching closely for any signs of serious side effects or obfuscation of data.


More suspicious behaviour from Xi's lackey scientists


Xi's subservient, CCP-funded scientists are now claiming that SARS-2 didn't come from China. This, of course, is ridiculous. The question is: why are they making this patently false claim now, November 2020? What's the motive?







'A man who does not think and plan long ahead will find trouble right at his door.'
--Confucius

Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 52567
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 29 2020 at 12:58pm

[url]https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/11/the-vaccine-competition-will-be-ruthless.html[/url] or https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/11/the-vaccine-competition-will-be-ruthless.html ;

The AstraZeneka vaccine was developed by Oxford University. It will be a no-profit vaccine as its development was financed by public money. The cost per dose will be below $3-4.

Both of the mRNA vaccines developed by Moderna and Pfizer are for-profit vaccines. They seem to be quite good (and no, they do not modify your DNA) but they will cost between $25 and $35 per shot. They also require an elaborate and expensive distribution chain as they can only be stored at very low temperatures. The adenovirus based vaccines can be stored in a normal refrigerator.

The mRNA vaccines hyped in the U.S. media are simply too expensive to be used around the world. If we want to limit the global effects of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic we will have to use the cheaper vector based vaccines.

That the AstraZeneka vaccine was immediately attacked in U.S. media by an unqualified writer quoting an investment bank and the U.S. pharma promoting (Remdesivir!) Antony Fauci is quite suspicious. Pfizer and Moderna expect to make billions of dollars with their vaccines. They will use all possible ways and means to defeat any potential competition.

None of the results of the ongoing trials under discussion have so far been published in a peer reviewed format. We will have to wait until the end of the trials and the reviewed publication of the results to judge about their real efficacy and potential side effects.

Until then we should be careful not to fall for misinformation from big pharma interests. Nor should we fall for the nonsense from the anti-vaccine crowd.

So far all of the vaccines under discussion seem to be safe and efficient enough to defeat the pandemic. I for one see no reason to reject any of them.

DJ-Of course HCWers should get the best safety possible. Competition between expensive US for profit vaccines and vaccines not from the US and often at cost is not welcome. We may need ALL the vaccines-evaluation should learn wich vaccine is best for wich group. 

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Tabitha111 View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group
Avatar

Joined: January 11 2020
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 10735
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Tabitha111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 30 2020 at 6:08am

Just because a vaccine is cheaper and not for profit, does not in itself render that it is the safest one to take. I will go with the science to decide.

'A man who does not think and plan long ahead will find trouble right at his door.'
--Confucius

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down