Coronavirus

[BIllyD]

2 minutes ago, Andicis said:

There is literally no basis to hold this opinion.

But there is no surprise that you still find someone that does. Same as you get the same repetitive poster who continually asks for "evidence" whilst in the following post spouts complete fabrication based upon their understanding ?

[sage]

5 minutes ago, Andicis said:

So it's basically a pointless statement? We have no data on long term impacts, there could be loads, there could be none, you can just spin that however which way you choose.

Not really.

We have evidence of ongoing harm from covid. People still feeling ill months later.

Its something to take into account when people talk about the possible long term effects of a vaccine.

There is the known and there is the unknown. Inbetween lay the doors of Wetherspoons.

 

 

[Andicis]

18 minutes ago, sage said:

Not really.

We have evidence of ongoing harm from covid. People still feeling ill months later.

Its something to take into account when people talk about the possible long term effects of a vaccine.

There is the known and there is the unknown. Inbetween lay the doors of Wetherspoons.

 

 

That is the case with all viruses. It's post viral fatigue and it's pretty normal. 

[sage]

20 minutes ago, Andicis said:

That is that case with all viruses. It's post viral fatigue and it's pretty normal. 

Many of those who had less serious symptoms have a longer than usual viral fatigue.

People who had more serious symptoms that required hospital damage are at risk from lung and (more rarely) heart damage. 

Therefore evidence of long term harm.

 

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, BIllyD said:

But there is no surprise that you still find someone that does. Same as you get the same repetitive poster who continually asks for "evidence" whilst in the following post spouts complete fabrication based upon their understanding ?

At least have the balls to name the poster if you are going to snipe.

Maybe their understanding was based on what the CEO of the company that produced the vaccine said?

https://www.businesstoday.in/latest/trends/not-certain-pfizer-ceo-on-if-their-covid-vaccine-stops-transmission/story/424015.html

 

[Sith Happens]

Great News

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55218679

[BIllyD]

8 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

At least have the balls to name the poster if you are going to snipe.

Maybe their understanding was based on what the CEO of the company that produced the vaccine said?

https://www.businesstoday.in/latest/trends/not-certain-pfizer-ceo-on-if-their-covid-vaccine-stops-transmission/story/424015.html

 

?? have you just plucked an article out the internet to try and provide a point. Where in this article did you get your "understanding" from, where are the "facts" that you refer to so often....

I didn't mention you as you get a feel of what certain posters are like and how they react, however as I have been on here long there is a remote possibility I may be wrong, so I apologise for not mentioning you by name.

 

[Sith Happens]

The second person to receive the vaccine was William Shakespeare from Warwickshire.

I know it seems like its been around forever but thats ridiculous ?

 

[Albert]

11 hours ago, Andicis said:

There is literally no basis to hold this opinion.

There is actually. It has already been shown that the disease can cause organ damage, but there exists no evidence of this vaccine doing such. Equally, vaccines rarely, if ever, have long term impacts. You know, except immunity from the targeted disease. 

[BIllyD]

11 hours ago, sage said:

Many of those who had less serious symptoms have a longer than usual viral fatigue.

People who had more serious symptoms that required hospital damage are at risk from lung and (more rarely) heart damage. 

Therefore evidence of long term harm.

 

I have to apologise for my comment, I only read part of your quote and therefore completely misinterpreted it.

[G STAR RAM]

12 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

?? have you just plucked an article out the internet to try and provide a point. Where in this article did you get your "understanding" from, where are the "facts" that you refer to so often....

Plucked an article out the internet to try and provide a point? No, I've linked you to an article that backs up the point which you referred to as complete fabrication, I assume you will now be big enough to retract that statement. 

I also said my understanding as it is not a fact, but the fact that it is the CEO of Pfizer making the statement would indicate there may be some weight behind the point.

[BIllyD]

16 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Plucked an article out the internet to try and provide a point? No, I've linked you to an article that backs up the point which you referred to as complete fabrication, I assume you will now be big enough to retract that statement. 

I also said my understanding as it is not a fact, but the fact that it is the CEO of Pfizer making the statement would indicate there may be some weight behind the point.

?? Go on, extract the information in that article that backs ups your view point that the vaccine does not stop the transmission of the virus. 
 

Oh I put "understanding" before it so that makes it ok, didn't see that one coming ???

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

?? Go on, extract the information in that article that backs ups your view point that the vaccine does not stop the transmission of the virus. 
 

Oh I put "understanding" before it so that makes it ok, didn't see that one coming ???

Nonetheless, as Pfizer and BioNTech stand by their "efficacy" claims, its inability to stop transmission could pose hurdles in its global production plans.

[sage]

30 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

I have to apologise for my comment, I only read part of your quote and therefore completely misinterpreted it.

No problem chap. I could perhaps have worded it a little better. 

[Albert]

3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Nonetheless, as Pfizer and BioNTech stand by their "efficacy" claims, its inability to stop transmission could pose hurdles in its global production plans.

Ah yes, quote mining, the last bastion of the desperate. 

The point they were making in the article was that it's not something they have evidence for either way, and you can hypothetically have a vaccine which only drastically reduces the severity of disease, but doesn't stop you spreading it. The thing is, even in such cases, it reduces viral loads hence transmission, and to my understanding there exists no such cases, this is just a CEO being cautious. The quote you've mined is just the author of this article musing. 

[Sith Happens]

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54949799I

In an interview on BBC One's Andrew Marr Show, Prof Sahin said he expected further analysis to show the vaccine would reduce transmission between people as well as stop symptoms developing in someone who has had the vaccine.

"I'm very confident that transmission between people will be reduced by such a highly effective vaccine - maybe not 90% but maybe 50% - but we should not forget that even that could result in a dramatic reduction of the pandemic spread," he said.

I think the thing is right now no one knows for sure hence the hesitancy in the responses. The Oxford Vaccine has, by all accounts, showed that it does potentially protect against the spread of the virus.

 

[BIllyD]

5 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Nonetheless, as Pfizer and BioNTech stand by their "efficacy" claims, its inability to stop transmission could pose hurdles in its global production plans.

Your being serious are you ? That's the closing sentence in an article around a big unknown, as a closing sentence by the writer.
 

I would take my hat off to you for reaching your understanding from that one comment that the vaccine doesn't stop transmission, if it was right of course which we both know it's not. 

[Stive Pesley]

Of course, for the vaccine sceptics, the idea of the vaccine only stopping symptoms and not transmission is troublesome

Because it means that only those who have had the vaccine have nothing to fear from the virus spreading.

And once all the masks/face/space measures have gone away, it will continue to spread amongst the unvaccinated... 

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, Albert said:

Ah yes, quote mining, the last bastion of the desperate. 

The point they were making in the article was that it's not something they have evidence for either way, and you can hypothetically have a vaccine which only drastically reduces the severity of disease, but doesn't stop you spreading it. The thing is, even in such cases, it reduces viral loads hence transmission, and to my understanding there exists no such cases, this is just a CEO being cautious. The quote you've mined is just the author of this article musing. 

I wws asked to extract the information in the article that backed up the point that the vaccine does not atop the transmission. 

Whether it is correct or not I don't know, but that is where I gained my understanding from.

If its wrong by all means prove it wrong. I certainly wouldnt say that I have fabricated this point of view though, which was @BIllyD original point.

[G STAR RAM]

7 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

Your being serious are you ? That's the closing sentence in an article around a big unknown, as a closing sentence by the writer.
 

I would take my hat off to you for reaching your understanding from that one comment that the vaccine doesn't stop transmission, if it was right of course which we both know it's not. 

Here you go, looks like you could do with a little help...