FDA pulls authorization for AstraZeneca’s Covid antibody drug Evusheld

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

What you have posted in another thread.

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more

It shows how much you don't understand the safety standards involved for vaccines and drugs. A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw a vaccine. Examples the Swine Flu, Rotavirus.

Rotavirus kills single figure number of people a year in the UK.

Well done for giving a great example of why different risk profiles are acceptable.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Risk of deaths from covid vaccine is tiny compared to the benefit.

Note the benefits that the WHO and the CDC haven't retracted yet.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Would you say a vaccine product that kills thousands of people while offering no protection from transmission or infection should carry the label "safe and effective"?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

What you have posted in another thread.

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more

It shows how much you don't understand the safety standards involved for vaccines and drugs. A handful of deaths will be enough to withdraw a vaccine. Examples the Swine Flu, Rotavirus.

Rotavirus kills single figure number of people a year in the UK.

Well done for giving a great example of why different risk profiles are acceptable.

And? The safety standards are safety standards. You are not the one who sets them.

Everything else is just vaccine apologetics

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: ScepticScot

Would you say a vaccine product that kills thousands of people while offering no protection from transmission or infection should carry the label "safe and effective"?

Since that isn't the case for covid vaccinations seems a bit off topic.

As a hypothetical however it would depend on how well it protected against serious disease and death versus the danger from tje virus itself.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yes unequivocally that is what i am saying. Some deaths ate acceptable. That is the same with any form of vaccination or treatment.

The weird thing would be thinking otherwise.

there is an issue with stating how wonderful the vaccines are at saving lives or providing some benefit of being less sick than you would have, had you not gotten the vaccine. Everyone is different and may have underlying conditions that effect their ability to fight the infection. There really is no way of knowing how effective the vaccines are, other than some blanket look, which isn't how reality works.

There is no way to measure how sick you would have been with or without the vaccine, and death could be from any number of things up to and including the vaccine itself. Does that mean you should be afraid of all vaccines? no, but you also should use a bit of restraint when trying to convince everyone the vaccine that could kill you is uber safe and wonderful. You haven't a clue.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yes unequivocally that is what i am saying. Some deaths ate acceptable. That is the same with any form of vaccination or treatment.

The weird thing would be thinking otherwise.

there is an issue with stating how wonderful the vaccines are at saving lives or providing some benefit of being less sick than you would have, had you not gotten the vaccine. Everyone is different and may have underlying conditions that effect their ability to fight the infection. There really is no way of knowing how effective the vaccines are, other than some blanket look, which isn't how reality works.

There is no way to measure how sick you would have been with or without the vaccine, and death could be from any number of things up to and including the vaccine itself. Does that mean you should be afraid of all vaccines? no, but you also should use a bit of restraint when trying to convince everyone the vaccine that could kill you is uber safe and wonderful. You haven't a clue.

We don't know the individual risk v benefits for any medical treatment. Maybe genetic testing one day we will.

What we do know tend to know is the risk and benefit to your demographic group which is how decisions about vaccinations and treatments are made.

People need to understand that under the Authorization act all the jabs for covid in the market and those been pushed as we speak are nothing but test jabs and the testing subjects is the public.

Is become out of control, thanks to the Authorization act loophole.

a reply to: ScepticScot
I just watched Bill Gates saying that the current vaccines are not infection blocking.

Is he wrong?

a reply to: ScepticScot

You seem again and again not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'

Monoclonal antibodies by AZ were pulled by the FDA

The AZ vaccine seems to have been withdrawn from most markets


Your admission above shows that you are motivated ideologically and politically given that by your own admission you have no training in any scientific and medical fields.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: ScepticScot

Would you say a vaccine product that kills thousands of people while offering no protection from transmission or infection should carry the label "safe and effective"?

Since that isn't the case for covid vaccinations seems a bit off topic.

As a hypothetical however it would depend on how well it protected against serious disease and death versus the danger from tje virus itself.

Are you trying to disregard a very valid point and deflect for once more?!

The vaccines don't prevent transmission or infection and they have harmed and killed many people. It is clear to me and to many others here why they should have been withdrawn long time ago.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot
I just watched Bill Gates saying that the current vaccines are not infection blocking.

Is he wrong?

As in completely stopping infection, no but they do reduce infection.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: ScepticScot

Would you say a vaccine product that kills thousands of people while offering no protection from transmission or infection should carry the label "safe and effective"?

Since that isn't the case for covid vaccinations seems a bit off topic.

As a hypothetical however it would depend on how well it protected against serious disease and death versus the danger from tje virus itself.

Are you trying to disregard a very valid point and deflect for once more?!

The vaccines don't prevent transmission or infection and they have harmed and killed many people. It is clear to me and to many others here why they should have been withdrawn long time ago.

They reduce infection and transmission.

Also more importantly reduces severe cases and death.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot
I just watched Bill Gates saying that the current vaccines are not infection blocking.

Is he wrong?

As in completely stopping infection, no but they do reduce infection.

By how much? Everyone is getting infected or has been infected. How much reduction do you see in absolute numbers.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

You seem again and again not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'

Monoclonal antibodies by AZ were pulled by the FDA

The AZ vaccine seems to have been withdrawn from most markets


Your admission above shows that you are motivated ideologically and politically given that by your own admission you have no training in any scientific and medical fields.

Actually i never said that and what is your qualification again?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: ScepticScot

Would you say a vaccine product that kills thousands of people while offering no protection from transmission or infection should carry the label "safe and effective"?

Since that isn't the case for covid vaccinations seems a bit off topic.

As a hypothetical however it would depend on how well it protected against serious disease and death versus the danger from tje virus itself.

Are you trying to disregard a very valid point and deflect for once more?!

The vaccines don't prevent transmission or infection and they have harmed and killed many people. It is clear to me and to many others here why they should have been withdrawn long time ago.

They reduce infection and transmission.

Also more importantly reduces severe cases and death.

By how much in absolute numbers.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot

You seem again and again not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'

Monoclonal antibodies by AZ were pulled by the FDA

The AZ vaccine seems to have been withdrawn from most markets


Your admission above shows that you are motivated ideologically and politically given that by your own admission you have no training in any scientific and medical fields.

Actually i never said that and what is your qualification again?

I am not a vaccine apologist nor I try to defend the pharmaceuticals or deny the reality. On the other hand:

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'

a reply to: ScepticScot

I didn't hear him say that they reduce infection.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot
I just watched Bill Gates saying that the current vaccines are not infection blocking.

Is he wrong?

As in completely stopping infection, no but they do reduce infection.

By how much? Everyone is getting infected or has been infected. How much reduction do you see in absolute numbers.

Also clear previous infection doesn't stop reinvention either.

One of the key anti vaccinations arguments.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot

I didn't hear him say that they reduce infection.

Sorry I can't really provide more detail since its you relaying a single part of what you heard from an unlinked source.

A link may help.