Vagabond_1.md 4.0 KB
Vagabond
Childre of any age will likely be vaccinated
Children though they can get infected with COVID-19, they are at much lower risj of getting severe disease compared to older adults THe risk level that they face from Covid-19 is statistically 0. To force an experimental investigation agent upon children when we do not have the long term effects there are so many unknowns, upon children, who are at risk effecively zero risk for fataility from this disease, is a ridiculous proposition, and yet they are moving forward, and we have to be particularly sensitive with children because they are not just small adults
It is not necessary that children must get the vaccine before they can go back to school
According to Dr. Fauci, they are going to start vaccinating the 12-15 year olds as soon as they come back in Fall
Wlk us through your thoughts about this vaccine for adolescents and school-aged children
To reiterate, I'm of the industry my whole career, but I'm pro vaccine safety, and these covid vaccines are not safe, youn ghpeople are not susceptible to covid-19, if they acquire the virus they usually have no symptoms and they shrug it off very easily. It's a crazy thing to vaccinate them with something that is 50 times more likely to kill them than the virus itself.
Hypothesis on Natural Immunity
Suneel Dahnd
Scientific hypothesis on natural immunity following COVID infection
At the end of the week the CDC published a tweet saying Among adults hospitalized with symptoms similar to COVID-19, unvaccinated people who had COVID-19 recently were 5 times more likely to test positive than people who ewre recently fully-vaccinated.
Now the study that they are referring to has some very obvious flaws in its design. A very oddly produced study. But rather than tell you what my thoughts are, I want to share with you some responses from the medical community.
Martin Kulldorff: This study has a major statistical flaw and the 5x conclusion is wrong. It implicitly assumes that hospitalized respiratory patients are repsentative of the population, which they are not. When you get in the weeds on this, you read the details and find out that this study is represented by a grand-total of 89 reinfected hospitalized patients from January-September 2021 over 187 hospitals. That's the basis in which they're making this claim.
Just the wording of this tweet and the imgae screams intentionally misleading. When the CDC intentionally misleads about natural immunity in this context, it's also disseminating vaccine misinformation at the same time. Does this infrmation about vaccines help vaccines.
Cali MD: As I read the CDC's latest study on natural immunity yesterday, I felt I was no longer reading a scientific paper, but a chapter out of Alice in Wonderland. The CDC just squandered its last shred of credibility.
Responses of physician colleagues:
CDC way to get more people vax, but this daya is waaay misleading. They are purposely just grabbing the headline to sway more vaccination. Don't use flawed data to use it as fact.
I am dumbfounded by how political CDC is and how far they go to distort science. Their study is completely bogus as they aren't comparing known covid illness to known covid illness. Completely contrary to the Israeli study.
Another colleague: Well-respected specialist physician in the UK who also has a PhD in research, we sometimes don't agree on diffeent matters and we go back and forth, he's a good friend.
How misleading are the CDC? Have you read the actual report? They categorize anyone with cold/flu symptoms irrespective of whether they test positive as a reinfection/breakthrough case.
You are supposd to represent some of the best minds in the nation, som eof the best doctors and scientists, nad if you're going to put forward policy proposals, at least back them up with studies that are strong and robust.
The end of teh publication -> conflicts of interest. Several of them have openly declared conflicts of interst, including those who have received financial support from Pfizer and Astrazeneca.