Crisis - Norway Funeral Homes Overwhelmed With The Dead

a reply to: Xtrozero

I have no idea what your source is for that and it still doesn't change the fact that adverse event reporting mandates existed long before COVID, so your claim that it only increased after COVID vaccines were rolled out is completely false. That didn't suddenly change for COVID. There is no regulatory monitoring for compliance so it's still a passive system and COVID vaccines show dramatically higher adverse events than all other approved vaccines combined.

Your claim that there is no evidence of people dying is refuted by excess non-COVID mortality across the highly vaccinated countries. Morticians and actuaries are sounding the alarm.

Your asinine claim that I'm not doing research while posting unsourced and uncredited irrelevant quotes is just deflection. The links I gave you showed that the adverse reporting was mandatory and was part a law passed nearly 40 years ago. That it's underreported irrespective of mandates was also linked in GAO testimony.

That you failed to read all the other information I've posted in this thread isn't my problem.

If you haven't noticed the only COVID vaccine cheerleaders that actually have some knowledge of the science have resorted to ignoring my posts and pretending they don't exist, but I'm sure the guy that "doesn't care" and clearly also doesn't know is going to disprove it all with the crap he is told by people that have been proven to be lying to suit their agenda for two years.

"You can best reward a liar by believing nothing of what he says." Aristippus.

The recent study showing Class switch towards non-inflammatory, spike-specific IgG4 antibodies after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination is going to blow a hole in all of it and is likely the reason why symptoms seem less severe in the highly vaccinated. The mRNA has is likely causing immune tolerance to spike proteins and allowing them to continue circulating so they cause tissue damage without robust immune response. The highly vaccinated will either have to get boosted every few months and compound their risk of short term adverse events, as has been said by "conspiracy theorists" since the first vaccine was deployed, or they will be vulnerable to increased mortality from the less severe variants that will be mostly harmless to the unvaccinated.

Keep believing the pharma apologists though, they've got a great track record so far. That 95% immunity and prevention of transmission really panned out. I'm sure they're not still lying to protect their own interests.

Enjoy your festival of denial and ignorance. I'm sure the people that lied about demographic mortality, masks, lasting vaccine effectiveness (x5), natural immunity, transmission, and tried to force medical experimentation using those lies, are telling the complete truth now. I'm sure they are being totally transparent and will be offering explanations on the IgG4 discovery any day now. I'm sure the vaccine promoters refusing to answer questions and turning off their comments is a really positive sign.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Imagine if the Aspirin has 10+ deaths per 100,000 what really happens with these Covid 'vaccines'.

It does to men over 50 that use it for blood thinner...

Aspirin 10.4 deaths per 100,000 men

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

I have no idea what your source is for that...

The actual first page of the VAERS site, have you been there?

and it still doesn't change the fact that adverse event reporting mandates existed long before COVID, so your claim that it only increased after COVID vaccines were rolled out is completely false. That didn't suddenly change for COVID. There is no regulatory monitoring for compliance so it's still a passive system and COVID vaccines show dramatically higher adverse events than all other approved vaccines combined.

What I listed was very focused on the vaccine and was not an ask but a demand as to what the medical community will do, very explicit wording that came about as I suggested. Not sure why you want to fight this point, its right there as I suggested and you asked.

Your claim that there is no evidence of people dying is refuted by excess non-COVID mortality across the highly vaccinated countries. Morticians and actuaries are sounding the alarm.

Just a couple... Our own ATS 40 year Mortician says otherwise as does like 99% of the others. We should see massive increase in deaths for 2022 right? lets look... kind of hard to hide deaths, or are they doing that too?

2022 9 per 1000
2021 8.97 per 1000
2020 8.88 per 1000
2019 8.78 per 1000
2018 8.68 per 1000
2017 8.58 per 1000
2016 8.47 per 1000
2015 8.37 per 1000

originally posted by: murphy22

Yeah. I know.
It has come down to anyone that wants to be my "leader". I have to ask, "who's paying you?"

I can pretty much govern/lead myself, without help.

Agree, and we live with our choices while not labeling others for theirs, good or bad. I don't need anyone telling me what I must do. I can provide my opinion, but in the end it should be the individual's choice.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

So no, I wouldn't give it to males on this group. And definitely I wouldn't vaccinate children.
In addition I would vaccinate ANYONE below the age of 50 with these potentially hazardous products.

I'm not sure what 84% represents here. I'm always warry of percentages with nothing to show what they mean. We could say there is 100% increase because it was 1 and now 2, as example.

It did say this in the study..

Risk for both all-cause and
cardiac-related deaths was substantially higher 28 days following COVID-19 infection. The risk associated
with mRNA vaccination should be weighed against the risk associated with COVID-19 infection.

So I guess pick your poison.

Why do you try so hard to prove the unprovable? I don't think you could be further from spilling the beans on the truth than you have been. Keep on digging and you will be into the Nickel Iron core of our planet.

You cannot prove that the vax is safe or even remotely the right idea in a million years because it isn't safe and will not prove to ever be when eternity ends.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Norway: 7 per cent more deaths than expected this year – due to Covid

Does Norway have a very high percentage of double jabbed or tripled jabbed people? The 7% increase is a massive number in comparison to the last year. I don't know you be honest how they did in comparison to the five year average. But do they suppose to have much less deaths due to Covid-19?

Yes, but epidemic diseases grow arithmetically, so it could be expected that cases would increase while ever the disease is not reducing in numbers of infected.

In Norway, 74.61 % of the population are fully vaccinated at present. This still falls short of the 90% initially suggested that would be required for herd immunity to begin to reduce the number of new infections.

a reply to: Justoneman

Humans hate to be wrong. They take the knowledge they know and make decisions. If they are wrong, most times they will double down on the bad choice. I see this all the time in the stock market with traders.

The most agregious form of this is wrestling. Everyone knows it's fake but people still take sides. Some even disagree that it's all fake!

When you take a step back and look at it, it's quite comical.

a reply to: litterbaux

True. There are so few capable of stepping back to look at it from a different perspective. As if they were dumbed down.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

So no, I wouldn't give it to males on this group. And definitely I wouldn't vaccinate children.
In addition I would vaccinate ANYONE below the age of 50 with these potentially hazardous products.

I'm not sure what 84% represents here. I'm always warry of percentages with nothing to show what they mean. We could say there is 100% increase because it was 1 and now 2, as example.

It did say this in the study..

Risk for both all-cause and
cardiac-related deaths was substantially higher 28 days following COVID-19 infection. The risk associated
with mRNA vaccination should be weighed against the risk associated with COVID-19 infection.

So I guess pick your poison.

You can read the link I have posted again. It's directly from the Department of Health in Florida.

The main point is that in Florida now the mRNA vaccines are not recommended for the 18-39 age group of males. Which is another blow to the 'safe and effective' narrative presented about these vaccines.

Couple this with the other pieces of research and the results which show that young boys 12-17 are at more risk from vaccine-induced myocarditis rather than getting hospitalised with Covid.

Have in mind the JCVI committee in the UK that didn't recommend vaccinations for the 5-11 age group and you have created a clear picture where in
a large part of the population the risks outweigh the benefits of vaccination

So not to go around in circles. Those under the age of 50 with no comorbidities are in no need of these products. I think this is clear. Especially if they have had Covid already.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

No, those who, in the light of all the deaths from this disease, continue to suggest that the disease itself is benign, advise people to avoid the vaccines (several different ones), advise others to not wear masks (and to ridicule the mere concept of doing so), to advise against social distancing, or any move that has been tried to reduce the spread of the pandemic. Those people probably should be held liable for the outcomes we are seeing.

But hanging people from lamp posts is purely evil and criminal, and is an indicator of the immorality and innate evil of these types of people.

From what I’ve seen on this site, people are not saying the “disease is benign”, they are saying the vaxx is more dangerous and doesn’t stop transmission.

There are serious adverse reactions to the vaccines but they are very rare

Former Australian Medical Association president Dr Phelps.

“Considering that the majority of Australian adults have now had at least one booster, this suggests that the incidence of serious adverse reactions per vaccinated person could be more than 1-in-1000. PEI admits that under-reporting is a problem, and observers suggest that an order of magnitude of under-reporting is not unreasonable to consider (most estimates put underreporting at much worse than this).”

The mortality for COVID is below 1% and is below .1% in unvaccinated children.

The current case mortality, with 61.9% of the world population vaccinated against COVID, is around 1%. It was about 2.4% prior to vaccinations. And the estimate by Dr Phelps that the serious adverse reactions (not just mortality) are at 1 in 1000, means that even with that over the top view, it is the same as the mortality of COVID in unvaccinated children.

it was about It's not difficult to see the vaccine is more harmful in people at low risk of COVID mortality.

Re read the numbers you have just quoted - from them, COVID is more harmful in people at low risk of COVID mortality.

And, in regard to transmission, the vaccines promote an immune response to the pathogen. They can only stop transmission by reducing the number of viable hosts and the duration of infection. Which takes time and high numbers of those with immune response.

Time which will never be adequate since the vaccine not effective at all after 3 months

So you boost and re-formulate the vaccines. Exactly like what has already happened.

, is for mostly irrelevant strains when it comes out, and doesn't prevent illness. Again, vaccines are now shown to increase risk of infection for every shot taken.

This paper does not show that.

It does show a 30% reduction in transmissibility, from the first shot, in people highly exposed to COVID.

Read the paper, not the headline! (The paper also was not a measurement of the efficacy of the vaccines, because it did not measure viral loads and reduction in durations.)

This means that you are increasing the number of people transmitting the disease from vaccination, not decreasing it. I'll post it again so you can again ignore it. You seem to only like discussing things you have a pre-programmed response for.

The graph shows that there were increasing numbers of COVID infections. It doesn't show that this was because of the vaccines. It's an epidemic of infectious disease, this is what happens when a disease keeps spreading. You get more cases.

The graph does not show that the vaccines promoted the spread of the disease, and the paper showed a clear 30% reduction in transmission.

You are wrong and have been wrong. You're all out of runway and your fake fact-checking and debunking is totally discredited by data. There is no longer a single talking point you've gobbled up over two years that hasn't been shown incorrect. You said there were very rare adverse events. They are not.

Serious adverse reactions to the vaccines are very rare.

The only numbers that are verified and verifiable show that serious adverse reactions to the vaccines are very rare.

Dr Phelps and others are pulling numbers out of the air with no basis.

The actual databases of possible adverse reactions compared to the number of doses administered, show that serious adverse reactions to the vaccines are very rare!

You said masks work, but there well over 100 studies that show masks are not effective for the general public.

So, what mitigation against the disease do you propose? - Nothing - not a single thing - just everyone stand in the way of the oncoming danger, fully unprotected. Great plan. You should promote it everywhere, loudly and repeatedly.

You keep pretending lockdowns were going to stop the disease from becoming endemic.

It was only meant to ease the burden on hospitals temporarily, the same hospitals that are now running on reduced staff due to vax mandates. Everybody is going to be exposed and the vaccinated are going to become ill more often because they have outdated immunity locked in. You're also making a vague reference to herd immunity without actually saying herd immunity, which is a fantasy that The Science even gave up on long ago.

You trusted The Science as dictated by fake journalists reading scripts, social media influencers paid to do it, and power hungry officials, who all lied to you. This has gone from embrassing to shameful very quickly. You are now choosing ignorance.

In New Zealand, before there were any vaccines or therapeutics, there were two separate outbreaks of COVID in the community.

Both times, with only quick reaction, masks, sanitizer, quarantine, and lock-downs, we totally stopped the outbreak. Totally. No more cases at all.

So, it could be done, provably and repeatably, and with only the very things you say are ineffective.

How can that be if they are ineffective?

Ultimately, the NZ situation was that there were sources of infection externally from places where the response was delayed, and/or lackluster, and/or where there were disruptive elements that tried to sabotage any response in their communities. This is why the pandemic became endemic.

They stopped SARS and they stopped MERS, too. But that was under a different administration. Hmmm, maybe there's something in that? Maybe taking medical and safety precautions isn't an issue of personal liberty, but just something that is a wise thing to do. For a time.

Clearly, the disease is here. It is real. It is killing people. And we had and still have opportunity and method to do something against it.

And you are trying to tell everyone to do nothing.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I am interested in finding out exactly why people are dying because I know China is reporting most deaths of people with Covid-19 as being caused by their comorbidity and not from the virus, even though the virus exacerbated their comorbidities to the point of them dying from it, and I believe the cormorbidity plays a big role in deaths when people contract this virus. It would seem my theory holds water.

When patients with and without comorbidities were compared, the severity of COVID-19 was significantly higher in patients burdened with comorbidity...

www.sciencedirect.com...

a reply to: chr0naut

The infection fatality rate of Covid-19 has been estimated long time ago before the vaccines were rolled out to be around 0.15%.

Using case fatality rates is both misleading and not the best representation of how a disease performs. It's not a good number in a few words.


pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Conclusions: All systematic evaluations of seroprevalence data converge that SARS-CoV-2 infection is widely spread globally. Acknowledging residual uncertainties, the available evidence suggests average global IFR of ~0.15% and ~1.5-2.0 billion infections by February 2021 with substantial differences in IFR and in infection spread across continents, countries and locations

I note that you haven't used a single link for some of the numbers you used.

The ideas that lockdowns and vaccines will stop the virus and we will somehow achieve herd immunity are debunked long time ago. There is no herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 as the vaccines cannot prevent or significantly reduce transmission and infection. Everybody will get infected.

By February 2021 around 1.5 to 2 BILLION people were estimated to be infected (see link above). By now almost everyone has been infected. The vaccines did very little or nothing to prevent transmission and infection.

Here is my thread on the subject

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Someone else is still claiming that herd immunity can be achieved and that in his country it was achieved by the end of 2021.

It's just a fantasy.


Those who haven't been exposed to the virus need to get exposed. This is how populations get either herd immunity (when it is possible) or very good protection i.e cellular immunity through natural infection or vaccination. These vaccines are crippled so natural immunity is the only possible way for the vast majority of us who are still here and have survived primary infection.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: chr0naut

The infection fatality rate of Covid-19 has been estimated long time ago before the vaccines were rolled out to be around 0.15%.

Using case fatality rates is both misleading and not the best representation of how a disease performs. It's not a good number in a few words.


pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Conclusions: All systematic evaluations of seroprevalence data converge that SARS-CoV-2 infection is widely spread globally. Acknowledging residual uncertainties, the available evidence suggests average global IFR of ~0.15% and ~1.5-2.0 billion infections by February 2021 with substantial differences in IFR and in infection spread across continents, countries and locations

I note that you haven't used a single link for some of the numbers you used.

The ideas that lockdowns and vaccines will stop the virus and we will somehow achieve herd immunity are debunked long time ago. There is no herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 as the vaccines cannot prevent or significantly reduce transmission and infection. Everybody will get infected.

By February 2021 around 1.5 to 2 BILLION people were estimated to be infected (see link above). By now almost everyone has been infected. The vaccines did very little or nothing to prevent transmission and infection.

Here is my thread on the subject

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Someone else is still claiming that herd immunity can be achieved and that in his country it was achieved by the end of 2021.

It's just a fantasy.


Those who haven't been exposed to the virus need to get exposed. This is how populations get either herd immunity (when it is possible) or very good protection i.e cellular immunity through natural infection or vaccination. These vaccines are crippled so natural immunity is the only possible way for the vast majority of us who are still here and have survived primary infection.

You can only provide the evidence so many times before it's willful ignorance.

a reply to: chr0naut

You said serious adverse reactions to the vaccines are very rare. This is the official narrative that you are continuously parroting.

The Astrazeneca vaccine for example was pulled out of the market. It was too 'safe and effective' and had 'rare' serious adverse reactions. A miracle as it was branded that saved many many lives.

But the reality is different. It has been withdrawn from the market in the UK which is the country that has made it and the roll out has been stopped everywhere else it was used.

It's time now for the mRNA vaccines to be pulled out of the market. They are also 'safe and effective' and have 'rare' serious adverse reactions.


As for the excess number of non Covid deaths that seem to be quite a lot in many different countries you should reflect on how good lockdowns were together with all other restrictions and how safe and effective are these 'vaccines'.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: NorthOfStuff
a reply to: chr0naut

The variants were engineered by the vaccines.

The vaccines are inanimate and not conscious. They cannot engineer anything.

And, what of all the strains and sub-strains that appeared before there were any vaccines? Go back and have a look at the Nextstrain link I posted.

Perhaps the spread of the disease is engineered by pure stupidity?

Used to be they said they you’re not supposed to vaccinate in a pandemic.

The speed of science is dazzling.

Do you have to wait for the horse to have bolted before closing the gate?

When they had such large numbers of polio victims in the US, should they have waited until the cases were less before starting the vaccination campaign that has wiped out polio in the US?

The speed of science has nothing to compare with the wall of stupid.

Vaccination with leaky vaccines allows for the selection of new variants extending the pandemic much longer than if everyone developed sterilizing immunity naturally.

No vaccine has ever been perfectly sterilizing. There are always breakthrough cases.

Not only that, but people are getting COVID more than once, which shows that natural immunity itself is 'leaky'. The pandemic of the disease would not exist at all if 'natural' immune response was perfectly sterilizing.

In clinical testing, the mRNA vaccines all showed stronger immune response than antibody levels acquired by direct exposure to the virus: Safety and Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-1273 Vaccine in Older Adults

Bill Gates funded PRO vaccine GAVI virologist Doctor Vanden Bossche predicted this over a year ago and he was correct.

This has been repeated over and over again but for some reason you think you can pretend that this was never discussed and settled.

But Bosshe is wrong, his letter contains several falsehoods, and he offers no evidential support for his assertions.

The mRNA vaccines use the whole sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, so that the immune response generated would work against all spike proteins with similarities. This is why the original vaccines are still quite effective against all current strains (reducing viral loads and duration). Not only that, but there have already been reformulations of the mRNA vaccines that boost efficacy in dealing with the new variant strains.

SARS-CoV-2 evolution and vaccines: cause for concern? - The Lancet

Addressing Geert Vanden Bossche’s Claims

If natural immunity is 'leaky' as you said then what about vaccine immunity. In a few words if one is 'leaky' then the other must be 'super-leaky'.

Both the virus and the vaccines promote an immune response. The same immune system responds in both cases.

In studies, the vaccines promoted a stronger immune response than the virus did.

A 'natural' immune response is usually less than a vaccinated one, for most vaccines (not just COVID vaccines).

How do you know the original vaccines are quite effective against most strains of SARS-CoV-2?? They don't prevent transmission, neither infection, nor symptomatic disease.

The Cleveland Clinic Study showed a reduction in transmission of 30% for vaccinated health workers with repeated exposure to the virus:

Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Bivalent Vaccine

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Norway: 7 per cent more deaths than expected this year – due to Covid

Does Norway have a very high percentage of double jabbed or tripled jabbed people? The 7% increase is a massive number in comparison to the last year. I don't know you be honest how they did in comparison to the five year average. But do they suppose to have much less deaths due to Covid-19?

Yes, but epidemic diseases grow arithmetically, so it could be expected that cases would increase while ever the disease is not reducing in numbers of infected.

In Norway, 74.61 % of the population are fully vaccinated at present. This still falls short of the 90% initially suggested that would be required for herd immunity to begin to reduce the number of new infections.

I think one must be in a state of denial to argue that vaccines can prevent transmission or infection.

No one was arguing that the vaccines totally prevented transmission. No vaccine does.

But the COVID vaccines do reduce transmission, even before herd immunity is established.

Even if everyone gets vaccinated with these products the number of infections would be very high and the virus will be easily transmitted from person to person.

That may be the case as long as the pool of new infectors remains high and vaccine coverage (or naturally aquired immunity) remains low.

Herd immunity is a fantasy and an unrealistic target. I think we have discussed this several times during the past but you don't seem to have read any of the available literature on the subject.

Can you have herd immunity when the vaccines don't prevent transmission and infection?
The answer is simple: No

Yes, you can have reductions in transmission. It happens frequently.

Even without herd immunity, and before the vaccines, transmissibility has fluctuated. Take a look at any graph of the up and down case numbers of COVID. What do you think that shows?

COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU)

Altogether in the world there are currently fewer active cases of COVID-19 than existed in the peak in late December 2020, before the vaccines were available. It shows that things can be done - it isn't a hopeless case.

originally posted by: igloo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Norway: 7 per cent more deaths than expected this year – due to Covid

So the government of Norway says its due to Covid and the mortality rate is lower than it really is? Color me surprised.

How do you know that the mortality rate the Norwegian government tells you is lower than it really is?

And you do realize that the Norwegian government isn't the US government that you distrust? It's, like, a whole other country...

Also, is "surprised" a color now?

Governments the world over are in on this. We shouldn't trust any of them.

They talk with their mouths, too. We shouldn't trust mouths.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: Xtrozero

I have no idea what your source is for that and it still doesn't change the fact that adverse event reporting mandates existed long before COVID, so your claim that it only increased after COVID vaccines were rolled out is completely false. That didn't suddenly change for COVID. There is no regulatory monitoring for compliance so it's still a passive system and COVID vaccines show dramatically higher adverse events than all other approved vaccines combined.

Excellent response, I'd only add that your last above isn't exactly correct. It should read:

"... COVID vaccines show dramatically higher adverse events than all other approved vaccines combined over the last 30 years.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: NorthOfStuff
a reply to: chr0naut

The variants were engineered by the vaccines.

The vaccines are inanimate and not conscious. They cannot engineer anything.

And, what of all the strains and sub-strains that appeared before there were any vaccines? Go back and have a look at the Nextstrain link I posted.

Perhaps the spread of the disease is engineered by pure stupidity?

Used to be they said they you’re not supposed to vaccinate in a pandemic.

The speed of science is dazzling.

Do you have to wait for the horse to have bolted before closing the gate?

When they had such large numbers of polio victims in the US, should they have waited until the cases were less before starting the vaccination campaign that has wiped out polio in the US?

The speed of science has nothing to compare with the wall of stupid.

Vaccination with leaky vaccines allows for the selection of new variants extending the pandemic much longer than if everyone developed sterilizing immunity naturally.

No vaccine has ever been perfectly sterilizing. There are always breakthrough cases.

Not only that, but people are getting COVID more than once, which shows that natural immunity itself is 'leaky'. The pandemic of the disease would not exist at all if 'natural' immune response was perfectly sterilizing.

In clinical testing, the mRNA vaccines all showed stronger immune response than antibody levels acquired by direct exposure to the virus: Safety and Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-1273 Vaccine in Older Adults

Bill Gates funded PRO vaccine GAVI virologist Doctor Vanden Bossche predicted this over a year ago and he was correct.

This has been repeated over and over again but for some reason you think you can pretend that this was never discussed and settled.

But Bosshe is wrong, his letter contains several falsehoods, and he offers no evidential support for his assertions.

The mRNA vaccines use the whole sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, so that the immune response generated would work against all spike proteins with similarities. This is why the original vaccines are still quite effective against all current strains (reducing viral loads and duration). Not only that, but there have already been reformulations of the mRNA vaccines that boost efficacy in dealing with the new variant strains.

SARS-CoV-2 evolution and vaccines: cause for concern? - The Lancet

Addressing Geert Vanden Bossche’s Claims

If natural immunity is 'leaky' as you said then what about vaccine immunity. In a few words if one is 'leaky' then the other must be 'super-leaky'.

Both the virus and the vaccines promote an immune response. The same immune system responds in both cases.

In studies, the vaccines promoted a stronger immune response than the virus did.

A 'natural' immune response is usually less than a vaccinated one, for most vaccines (not just COVID vaccines).

How do you know the original vaccines are quite effective against most strains of SARS-CoV-2?? They don't prevent transmission, neither infection, nor symptomatic disease.

The Cleveland Clinic Study showed a reduction in transmission of 30% for vaccinated health workers with repeated exposure to the virus:

Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Bivalent Vaccine

I don't think you understand what you are talking about when you present the view that the vaccines promote a stronger immune response than the virus. This isn't true.

Natural Immunity is superior to vaccine-induced immunity. The largest studies in the world have shown this to be true i.e the studies in Israel, California and New York.



I don't know where you are getting these ideas or beliefs let's say. But let's look at Natural Immunity.



www.science.org...

Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine

The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

The newly released data show people who once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection were much less likely than never-infected, vaccinated people to get Delta, develop symptoms from it, or become hospitalized with serious COVID-19.

It’s a textbook example of how natural immunity is really better than vaccination,” says Charlotte Thålin, a physician and immunology researcher at Danderyd Hospital and the Karolinska Institute who studies the immune responses to SARS-CoV-2. “To my knowledge, it’s the first time [this] has really been shown in the context of COVID-19.”

There is no comparison between natural immunity and vaccine induced immunity. Immunization by the virus is superior as you can see from the above which is the largest study together with the studies in California and New York.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Norway: 7 per cent more deaths than expected this year – due to Covid

Does Norway have a very high percentage of double jabbed or tripled jabbed people? The 7% increase is a massive number in comparison to the last year. I don't know you be honest how they did in comparison to the five year average. But do they suppose to have much less deaths due to Covid-19?

Yes, but epidemic diseases grow arithmetically, so it could be expected that cases would increase while ever the disease is not reducing in numbers of infected.

In Norway, 74.61 % of the population are fully vaccinated at present. This still falls short of the 90% initially suggested that would be required for herd immunity to begin to reduce the number of new infections.

I think one must be in a state of denial to argue that vaccines can prevent transmission or infection.

No one was arguing that the vaccines totally prevented transmission. No vaccine does.

But the COVID vaccines do reduce transmission, even before herd immunity is established.

Even if everyone gets vaccinated with these products the number of infections would be very high and the virus will be easily transmitted from person to person.

That may be the case as long as the pool of new infectors remains high and vaccine coverage (or naturally aquired immunity) remains low.

Herd immunity is a fantasy and an unrealistic target. I think we have discussed this several times during the past but you don't seem to have read any of the available literature on the subject.

Can you have herd immunity when the vaccines don't prevent transmission and infection?
The answer is simple: No

Yes, you can have reductions in transmission. It happens frequently.

Even without herd immunity, and before the vaccines, transmissibility has fluctuated. Take a look at any graph of the up and down case numbers of COVID. What do you think that shows?

COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU)

Altogether in the world there are currently fewer active cases of COVID-19 than existed in the peak in late December 2020, before the vaccines were available. It shows that things can be done - it isn't a hopeless case.

Again you seem to be in a complete turmoil when talk about the Covid vaccines and herd immunity.

I think you know that vaccines don't prevent transmission or infection. Couple this with the frequently emerging variants that are easily transmissible and highly infectious and there is no herd immunity.

The vaccines don't prevent transmission or infection. The vaccines don't significantly reduce transmission and infection. Everyone is getting infected and there would be no herd immunity.


www.infectioncontroltoday.com...

Those Who Believe in Herd Immunity Cannot Do the Math.

COVID-19 mutations are evading our immunity and at the same time our immunity is waning. Herd immunity to disease and the eradication of SARS-CoV-2 is no longer possible.

www.businessinsider.com...

The developer of the AstraZeneca shot says the Delta variant has made herd immunity impossible because vaccinated people can still transmit the virus

www.theguardian.com...

Herd immunity now seems impossible. Welcome to the age of Covid reinfection

The virus is now embedded in our world. But there are steps we can take to keep it at bay while we continue to live our lives