Vaccines Save Estimated 279,000 Lives in USA

originally posted by: Bugman82
www.commonwealthfund.org...

A new study shows that approximately 279,000 lives have been saved so far by the vaccines in the USA. Overall death rates have also plummeted compared to last year since the vaccine rollout. I'm confused as to why people are still buying into vaccine fear narratives when they are clearly working so well.

I'm Joe Biden and I approved this OP.

a reply to: nonspecific

What will you do if that new doctor says the same thing, leave and find another? If this happened how many would you go through before you concluded maybe they were right and you were wrong? Hypothetical question.

I'm not out to prove I'm right and the doctor was wrong, but when I presented him with facts, even pulling up a website on my phone to defend my position, he laughed. Then he got angry. Visibly upset.
Two of my friends have doctors who told them the choice to get the vax was up to them. No pressure. One of them even acknowledged that there can be bad side effects, though extremely rare. That's the type of doctor I want.
My (former) doctor just blathered on about how "totally safe", how "completely safe" the vax is. He's a jerk. There are a million other doctors out there. I'll find a good one.

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Bugman82
www.commonwealthfund.org...

A new study shows that approximately 279,000 lives have been saved so far by the vaccines in the USA. Overall death rates have also plummeted compared to last year since the vaccine rollout. I'm confused as to why people are still buying into vaccine fear narratives when they are clearly working so well.

I'm Joe Biden and I approved this OP.

You're not and he didn't.

I'm guessing things are different in the states as opposed to here in the UK as we don't tend to pick and choose our GP in that manner.

It's also not the GP that told me to take or not take the jabs it's all handled by the NHS, you get a letter when your eligible and then if you want the jab you go get it. If your concerned then you'd speak to your GP about the individual implications based on your personal medical situation.

I know it's not enough to make an assumption on given the numbers involved but I only know maybe 3 or 4 people that chose not to be vacinated so far and of everyone that's had either one or now both jabs no one has had any side effect other than a bit of a sore arm and some mild grogginess for a day or so.

I honestly don't buy into the whole vaccene is evil thing not because I'm a sheeple bit because I've not come across anyone that can give me any reason that seems plausible for it to be anything but what it's portrayed as.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
a reply to: nonspecific

What will you do if that new doctor says the same thing, leave and find another? If this happened how many would you go through before you concluded maybe they were right and you were wrong? Hypothetical question.

I'm not out to prove I'm right and the doctor was wrong, but when I presented him with facts, even pulling up a website on my phone to prove it, he laughed. Then he got angry. Visibly upset.
Two of my friends have doctors who told them the choice to get the vax was up to them. No pressure. One of them even acknowledged that there can be bad side effects, though extremely rare. That's the type of doctor I want.
My (former) doctor just blathered on about how "totally safe", how "completely safe" the vax is. He's a jerk. There are a million other doctors out there. I'll find a good one.

A lot of pro vaccine shill stuff on ATS today lordy...

a reply to: dug88

Is it not allowed?

Anti Vax only policy I missed maybe?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

What matters it seems, does not matter that much.

Are we reducing hospitalizations? Or was it infections? Or was it ICU admissions? No wait, it was to get back to normal. But, then we are told that we need to keep masked and distanced because even vaccinated we can contract and spread the bug. Never mind the fact that a majority of cases were asymptomatic so there are a LOT of people (estimates between 40-70%) who had it but didn't know already have immunity.

I'd have had a slight bit more confidence if they would have used an anti-body test to verify the need for a vaccination in the first place. I'd also have a bit more faith had they acknowledged that previous infection confers immunity like with every other bug out there. They chose to ignore that and instead insisted on a vaccination.

The SARS1 survivors still have immunity after 17yrs. Other studies have shown Spanish Flu survivors have immunity after as much as six decades.

Typically you don't ignore things like this unless there is something to hide.

originally posted by: discordantone
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

What matters it seems, does not matter that much.

Are we reducing hospitalizations? Or was it infections? Or was it ICU admissions? No wait, it was to get back to normal. But, then we are told that we need to keep masked and distanced because even vaccinated we can contract and spread the bug. Never mind the fact that a majority of cases were asymptomatic so there are a LOT of people (estimates between 40-70%) who had it but didn't know already have immunity.

I'd have had a slight bit more confidence if they would have used an anti-body test to verify the need for a vaccination in the first place. I'd also have a bit more faith had they acknowledged that previous infection confers immunity like with every other bug out there. They chose to ignore that and instead insisted on a vaccination.

The SARS1 survivors still have immunity after 17yrs. Other studies have shown Spanish Flu survivors have immunity after as much as six decades.

Typically you don't ignore things like this unless there is something to hide.

These studies of yours about Spanish flu survivors six decades ago. Do you have a source for that?

a reply to: nonspecific

I honestly don't buy into the whole vaccene is evil thing not because I'm a sheeple bit because I've not come across anyone that can give me any reason that seems plausible for it to be anything but what it's portrayed as.

I hope you're right, but we won't know for some time. The average person believes that if side effects aren't immediate, that means the vax is safe. The truth is that vaccines can have serious long-term side effects. There are geneticists and virologists saying that there is NO WAY of telling what long term effects these Covid vaxxes could have, despite all the preaching about how safe they are.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

New research has discovered that infection and natural exposure to the 1918 influenza virus made survivors immune to the disease for the remaining of their lives. Antibodies produced by cells isolated from these survivors served as an effective therapy to protect mice from the highly lethal 1918 infection. The study entitled "Neutralizing antibodies derived from the B cells of 1918 influenza pandemic survivors," was released for advanced online publication by the journal Nature.

www.eurekalert.org...

Here in the UK you can have the antibody test before you decide to have the vaccene or not, I know a few people that did it as they hate needles.

Don't you have them where you live?

originally posted by: discordantone
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

What matters it seems, does not matter that much.

Are we reducing hospitalizations? Or was it infections? Or was it ICU admissions? No wait, it was to get back to normal. But, then we are told that we need to keep masked and distanced because even vaccinated we can contract and spread the bug. Never mind the fact that a majority of cases were asymptomatic so there are a LOT of people (estimates between 40-70%) who had it but didn't know already have immunity.

I'd have had a slight bit more confidence if they would have used an anti-body test to verify the need for a vaccination in the first place. I'd also have a bit more faith had they acknowledged that previous infection confers immunity like with every other bug out there. They chose to ignore that and instead insisted on a vaccination.

The SARS1 survivors still have immunity after 17yrs. Other studies have shown Spanish Flu survivors have immunity after as much as six decades.

Typically you don't ignore things like this unless there is something to hide.

a reply to: neutronflux

Some people got saline shots instead of COVID vaccine at a North Carolina Walgreens www.charlotteobserver.com...

I'd prefer that over the mystery juice that is the vaccine.

I think I don't buy into it because it seems mainly based on the "evil big pharma" plot.

It looks like yearly covid shots could become a thing on a global scale from what they are saying right?

That's a lot of money for big pharma. A really big cash cow on the horizon. Big pharma is in the business of making big money first and foremost they just want profit. The only way they get massive profit is with a product that people will take and no one's going to want to take something that makes them unwell so it makes financial sense for them to do everything possible to make sure it's safe.

They may be evil and they may have done bad things in the past but they ain't stupid.

That's my thoughts at any rate.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
a reply to: nonspecific

I honestly don't buy into the whole vaccene is evil thing not because I'm a sheeple bit because I've not come across anyone that can give me any reason that seems plausible for it to be anything but what it's portrayed as.

I hope you're right, but we won't know for some time. The average person believes that if side effects aren't immediate, that means the vax is safe. The truth is that vaccines can have serious long-term side effects. There are geneticists and virologists saying that there is NO WAY of telling what long term effects these Covid vaxxes could have, despite all the preaching about how safe they are.

originally posted by: discordantone
I am just waiting to see how they explain a rise in cases come the autumn and flu season.

I mean, all the vaccinations should make that virtually impossible, shouldn't it? Or will they stop/reduce testing again

Oh no, they'll say you need a booster shot or three.

a reply to: nonspecific

We had millions of the antibody tests stocked up but the provinces refused to use them until a few months ago. If someone wanted a test they got the PCR test.

So was that a national refusal or a local one?

Were they free or paid for? What was the reason for witholding them?

originally posted by: discordantone
a reply to: nonspecific

We had millions of the antibody tests stocked up but the provinces refused to use them until a few months ago. If someone wanted a test they got the PCR test.

a reply to: Bugman82

Is that anything like the smoking ads that used to run in medical journals?

Cigarette Advertising in Medical Journals
The Unfiltered Truth About Smoking and Health
By the 1930s, cigarette advertisements were appearing regularly in medical journals, including the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and The New England Journal of Medicine in the U.S. and The Lancet and the British Medical Journal in the United Kingdom. Until 1953, JAMA accepted cigarette advertisements that encouraged physicians to recommend certain brands to their patients and that touted health benefits for filtered cigarettes and for brands with less nicotine. [The Center for the Study of Tobacco and Society has over 50 complete issues of the Journal of the American Medical Association with cigarette advertisements from the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, as well as complete issues of The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, the Medical Journal of Australia, and other journals with cigarette ads.]

csts.ua.edu...

Seems like the medical community has a history of being lobbied…. When there are profits.

Pfizer Reaps Hundreds of Millions in Profits From Covid Vaccine

The company said its vaccine generated $3.5 billion in revenue in the first three months of this year.

www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: nonspecific

It looks like yearly covid shots could become a thing on a global scale from what they are saying right?

Well, looks like this my be your answer.
www.yahoo.com...

Pfizer is about to seek U.S. authorization for a third dose of its COVID-19 vaccine, saying Thursday that another shot within 12 months could dramatically boost immunity and maybe help ward off the latest worrisome coronavirus mutant.

They have already pretty much said it's happening here in the UK a while back.

Combined flu/covid jabs but they haven't said if it's going to be like the existing flu jab were it's just the elderly and vunerable that will be offered it.

originally posted by: Chance321
a reply to: nonspecific

It looks like yearly covid shots could become a thing on a global scale from what they are saying right?

Well, looks like this my be your answer.
www.yahoo.com...

Pfizer is about to seek U.S. authorization for a third dose of its COVID-19 vaccine, saying Thursday that another shot within 12 months could dramatically boost immunity and maybe help ward off the latest worrisome coronavirus mutant.

a reply to: nonspecific
Oh, they'll keep the fear stoked up to make sure everyone gets it.