Bombshell Swedish study finds covid jabs provide no lasting protection.

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: ScepticScot

It absolutely has to be relevant. If you don't know how many were protected pre-vaccine you can't truly determine it's effectiveness.

Vaccine effectivness is calculated by looking at cases between comparable populations of vaccinated and unvaccinated.

Asking about natural imunity is irrelevant to if the vaccine is effective or not.

a reply to: TheLead

I understood it as such. In my area, the people who would not wear masks the entire time are the same ones who are going unvaccinated.

I'm not worried about spreading it to them

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: tamusan

I think he was saying it as a slight jab, not truly for his fear's sake.

The stated purpose of the mandates was to protect others. There was a crowd of people claiming others wanted to kill their grandma or that they may be a biological terrorist for not complying. These same people who could be potential transmitters no longer take precautions because they feel safe for having taken the jab.

You would almost believe they are under some kind of mind control.

a reply to: Smigg

I don't care if people are not getting vaccinated at this point.

a reply to: tamusan


As long as your intention was always to protect yourself and you weren't virtue signalling about others decisions I see nothing wrong with that. If you believed it was others duty protect you and you don't feel the need to protect them then you're a selfish liar.

You can't know for a fact what you claim about the people around you, and there are people with conditions preventing them from taking certain precautions.

I believe it is wrong to drink and drive, if for no other reason, because of the danger to others. If I lambast someone I know for choosing to risk other's lives it doesn't resolve me of my position or potential guilt if I happen to take that chance with their life and the unspeakable happens.

a reply to: ScepticScot

That may be how it is calculated, but you can't tell me that natural immunity isn't bound to skew the statistics one way or another. Especially with an airborne respiratory virus that has been in circulation for close to 2 years. There are also a myriad of other variables both biological and enviromental that are relevant to susceptability. The comparability is based off of what exactly? Age, sex?

a reply to: TheLead

I don't think I've ever entered into any mask debate on here and my facebook posts were limited to studies on what kinds of masks were found effective. I have been occasionally popping into the vaccine threads. I will present what I see as facts, but my political views more or less say that people should make their own decisions.

a reply to: tamusan

I take no issue with someone voicing their opinion I take exception to those who would implore the government to involve themselves in a situation they have obviously shown little consideration or that they don't truly believe in.

Not for the sake of the hyprocrisy shown, but the shear fact they are a clear and present danger to a free society. They reside in all camps.

I've taken up too much space. I was just trying to explain why I thought rickymouse said "the worst part" and got caught up explainging myself enough so you see that my offense is not towards you, you, but a specific type, because you haven't been unpleasant.

originally posted by: Smigg
New research out of Sweden has found that post-vaccination “immunity” – if you can even call it that – from Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) injections is temporary at best, and completely gone within months.

Old research says the same thing. We know from day one of the vaccination programme that it only granted temporary immmunity. That's what the booster shots are for.

I think what they found was IgA only last about 6 weeks after the fully vaccinated day. There was a study about this before.

Human IgG and IgA responses to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines

This is precisely why vaxxed and unvaxxed carry and spread the virus about the same after 6 weeks of second dose.

Here is an interesting article on the research of the vaccine.

www.bmj.com...

Of course we cannot believe in stuff like this that comes out of Europe, we have to only listen to the FDA and CDC here.

Was this kind of stuff happening in other research labs? Evidently Pfizer liked their work because it backed their agenda and used this company for follow up research on kids and pregnant women and boosters. That part is close to the footnote section at the end of the article. Yeah ,sure, science was used to evaluate the vaccine.

originally posted by: rickymouse
Here is an interesting article on the research of the vaccine.

www.bmj.com...

Of course we cannot believe in stuff like this that comes out of Europe, we have to only listen to the FDA and CDC here.

Was this kind of stuff happening in other research labs? Evidently Pfizer liked their work because it backed their agenda and used this company for follow up research on kids and pregnant women and boosters. That part is close to the footnote section at the end of the article. Yeah ,sure, science was used to evaluate the vaccine.

Dr. Dhand covered this same report, earlier. For those that don't have time to read the report.

True a word is rarely spoken.

a reply to: marg6043

My husband had a bad case of covid. he still has antibodies over a year later. I had a mild case and had no antibodies. So maybe natural immunity is the way to go.a reply to: Smigg

a reply to: HODOSKE
I agree, our natural immunity is enough.

Third link says effectiveness can't be detected after 211 days for Phizer, 181 days for Moderna, Astra zeneca is whooping 121 days which is the lowest.

Apparently second dosage does not wane in efectiveness after 121 days and remains the same % while first dosage goes into negative %

All this study shows is that one dose is bad because it does not protect. 2 doses protect on the medium an 3 doses are unknown.

I rather wait for a study on 3 dose protection %

originally posted by: tamusan
a reply to: Smigg

I don't care if people are not getting vaccinated at this point.

There's no point to taking the jab, you can catch, spread and die from covid and the protection the jab doesn't give only last a short time.
I just hope that the people who have taken the jab aren't now dependant and need to be jabbed for the rest of their lives.

originally posted by: Whodathunkdatcheese

originally posted by: Smigg
New research out of Sweden has found that post-vaccination “immunity” – if you can even call it that – from Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) injections is temporary at best, and completely gone within months.

Old research says the same thing. We know from day one of the vaccination programme that it only granted temporary immmunity. That's what the booster shots are for.

Can you post a link to this old research ?
I won't hold my breath.

a reply to: Smigg

Do you have any sources that are traditionally neutral on vaccines. These sources pin their colors to the mast pretty clearly.

originally posted by: Smigg
a reply to: HODOSKE
I agree, our natural immunity is enough.

The problem is that you need to have had covid first, and that's just not an option for a lot of people.

Not everyone can afford to be quarantined at home for 10 days. That's a lot of missed shifts.