FDA pulls authorization for AstraZeneca’s Covid antibody drug Evusheld

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot
It's on YouTube on The Hill channel posted 22 hours ago..... it's right at the beginning of the video that he says it.

He is saying there's 3 problems with the current vaccines.......but he is also promoting an inhaled treatment that he says will be better.

Just watched the few seconds there. I don't think he Says anthing that is controversial at all.

I never said he said anything controversial.

I said that he said the current vaccines do not block infection.

Did he or did he not?

Yes, and?

They are crippled when the don't block infection and transmission and they don't even significantly reduce them. Or when they harm and kill people. Are they vaccines?? Or they had to change the definition so to qualify as vaccines?!

a reply to: paraphi
a reply to: ScepticScot

You seem guys to be getting very concerned and frustrated while the official narratives have collapsed and your arguments are in a turmoil. Vaccine apology, denialism, and defending of the pharmaceuticals.

You see furious.

AZ vaccine was withdrawn
AZ monoclonal antibodies pulled out of the market.

It doesn't seem to me to be safe and effective products.

I know it goes against your ideologies and beliefs but that's how life is.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

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.

Is not an antivaccination argument. Being infected you develop robust and superior natural immunity. No need for booster after booster. Once you have been infected and survived primary Infection i.e the vast majority of us, you don't need to get vaccinated.

Previous infection also doesn't stop reinfection.

It does however have a much higher risk than vaccination.

Is not an antivaccination argument. Being infected you develop robust and superior natural immunity. No need for booster after booster. Once you have been infected and survived primary Infection i.e the vast majority of us, you don't need to get vaccinated

Are you sure that for all age groups the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks?? Where did you learn this? In the chronicles of left wing activism or the Pfizer Manuals?

In UK different age groups were reviewed severally and different advice given. Exactly how it should work

Love how you aren't been political about this...

That's not true.

The products were untested and experimental. You didn't know short, medium and long term effects and neither the benefit to risk ratio in every age groups.

We are just starting to see the short term effects and they are very unpleasant. And many.

It is true, different age groups got different advice.

That is a matter of record and disputing it just makes you look even less informed.

The products were untested and experimental. You didn't know short, medium and long term effects and neither the benefit to risk ratio in every age groups.

We are just starting to see the short term effects and they are very unpleasant. And many.

What advise? Entire populations were terrorised as if Covid-19 was the Spanish Flu.

Yet here we are with only you comparing it to the Spanish flu.

In fact I belive you even confirmed you couldn't find any source comparing it to the Spanish flu.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

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.

Is not an antivaccination argument. Being infected you develop robust and superior natural immunity. No need for booster after booster. Once you have been infected and survived primary Infection i.e the vast majority of us, you don't need to get vaccinated.

Previous infection also doesn't stop reinfection.

It does however have a much higher risk than vaccination.

Is not an antivaccination argument. Being infected you develop robust and superior natural immunity. No need for booster after booster. Once you have been infected and survived primary Infection i.e the vast majority of us, you don't need to get vaccinated

Are you sure that for all age groups the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks?? Where did you learn this? In the chronicles of left wing activism or the Pfizer Manuals?

In UK different age groups were reviewed severally and different advice given. Exactly how it should work

Love how you aren't been political about this...

That's not true.

The products were untested and experimental. You didn't know short, medium and long term effects and neither the benefit to risk ratio in every age groups.

We are just starting to see the short term effects and they are very unpleasant. And many.

It is true, different age groups got different advice.

That is a matter of record and disputing it just makes you look even less informed.

The products were untested and experimental. You didn't know short, medium and long term effects and neither the benefit to risk ratio in every age groups.

We are just starting to see the short term effects and they are very unpleasant. And many.

What advise? Entire populations were terrorised as if Covid-19 was the Spanish Flu.

Yet here we are with only you comparing it to the Spanish flu.

In fact I belive you even confirmed you couldn't find any source comparing it to the Spanish flu.

Comparisons with the Spanish Flu or any other diseases are important to understand how deadly Covid is. Nowhere near what it was portrayed in the beginning when the system was terrorising unsuspected citizens.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: paraphi
a reply to: ScepticScot

You seem guys to be getting very concerned and frustrated while the official narratives have collapsed and your arguments are in a turmoil. Vaccine apology, denialism, and defending of the pharmaceuticals.

You see furious.

AZ vaccine was withdrawn
AZ monoclonal antibodies pulled out of the market.

It doesn't seem to me to be safe and effective products.

I know it goes against your ideologies and beliefs but that's how life is.

You seen confused between furious and mocking.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
Stop the vaccine apologetics please

I don't know what you mean by this. Are you not capable of accepting a different view point? If you want an echo chamber, then you should not be on ATS.

My point remains, in that you cannot extrapolate up the AZ vaccine record of 70 deaths with 50 million shots, across the entire global population to arrive at a figure of total deaths. It's statistical nonsense.

What we know, from the official record, is that 70 people died from blood clots attributed to the AZ vaccine. I am sure data is published for other Western vaccines e.g. Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer and Moderna. Why not do the digging and find out what they have published and add them all up against the number of shots. That would give half a picture.

The other half is the vaccines from Russia and China, for which there is likely unreliable data.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

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.

Is not an antivaccination argument. Being infected you develop robust and superior natural immunity. No need for booster after booster. Once you have been infected and survived primary Infection i.e the vast majority of us, you don't need to get vaccinated.

Previous infection also doesn't stop reinfection.

It does however have a much higher risk than vaccination.

Is not an antivaccination argument. Being infected you develop robust and superior natural immunity. No need for booster after booster. Once you have been infected and survived primary Infection i.e the vast majority of us, you don't need to get vaccinated

Are you sure that for all age groups the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks?? Where did you learn this? In the chronicles of left wing activism or the Pfizer Manuals?

In UK different age groups were reviewed severally and different advice given. Exactly how it should work

Love how you aren't been political about this...

That's not true.

The products were untested and experimental. You didn't know short, medium and long term effects and neither the benefit to risk ratio in every age groups.

We are just starting to see the short term effects and they are very unpleasant. And many.

It is true, different age groups got different advice.

That is a matter of record and disputing it just makes you look even less informed.

Do you have a link that says different age groups got different advice?
Because I remember it different.....

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
Stop the vaccine apologetics please

I don't know what you mean by this. Are you not capable of accepting a different view point? If you want an echo chamber, then you should not be on ATS.

My point remains, in that you cannot extrapolate up the AZ vaccine record of 70 deaths with 50 million shots, across the entire global population to arrive at a figure of total deaths. It's statistical nonsense.

What we know, from the official record, is that 70 people died from blood clots attributed to the AZ vaccine. I am sure data is published for other Western vaccines e.g. Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer and Moderna. Why not do the digging and find out what they have published and add them all up against the number of shots. That would give half a picture.

The other half is the vaccines from Russia and China, for which there is likely unreliable data.

50 million vaccinees. Not shots.

Of course I can make some brief calculations. It doesn't suit those who don't want to hear about deaths and server adverse reactions but that the reality I am afraid.

In comparison to the mRNA products the AZ was benign.

If anything my estimation is very conservative.

Do you really think only 70 people died in the UK as a result of the vaccines?! This is the official figure. It could change with time adding up the Pfizer and Moderna's victims but still there are many more suspected cases where the cause of death is 'uknown' or 'mysterious'

The number of deaths is obviously higher than 70.
I cannot tell you at the moment how much.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

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.

Is not an antivaccination argument. Being infected you develop robust and superior natural immunity. No need for booster after booster. Once you have been infected and survived primary Infection i.e the vast majority of us, you don't need to get vaccinated.

Previous infection also doesn't stop reinfection.

It does however have a much higher risk than vaccination.

Is not an antivaccination argument. Being infected you develop robust and superior natural immunity. No need for booster after booster. Once you have been infected and survived primary Infection i.e the vast majority of us, you don't need to get vaccinated

Are you sure that for all age groups the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks?? Where did you learn this? In the chronicles of left wing activism or the Pfizer Manuals?

In UK different age groups were reviewed severally and different advice given. Exactly how it should work

Love how you aren't been political about this...

That's not true.

The products were untested and experimental. You didn't know short, medium and long term effects and neither the benefit to risk ratio in every age groups.

We are just starting to see the short term effects and they are very unpleasant. And many.

It is true, different age groups got different advice.

That is a matter of record and disputing it just makes you look even less informed.

Do you have a link that says different age groups got different advice?
Because I remember it different.....

This is the current one.

www.nhs.uk...


Even the specific vaccine recomded could vary based on age group.

a reply to: paraphi


I repeat that I can certainly make an extrapolation as none of them proven to be safe and effective and if anything the mRNA 'vaccines' cause many more problems.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Have overall deaths and hospitalisations increased or decreased since the vaccine rollout?

a reply to: ScepticScot
But everyone was advised to have it...

Even if the first shot caused a reaction.....you would be advised to have the second.....even Eric Clapton.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Penicillin kills hundreds of people in the US every year.

Does it?
Can I read a link about that please?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot
But everyone was advised to have it...

Even if the first shot caused a reaction.....you would be advised to have the second.

UK never advised youg kids to have it unless at specific risk.

It was assessed for different age groups independently. Here is for under 40s

www.gov.uk...

You will note specific advice about what vaccine.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
If the official sources say 70 deaths then you can expect more.

Why? All medicines have the potential for adverse side effects. People die from aspirin, and other common drugs. In the case of vaccinations for Covid, and AZ specifically, it's no longer being administered, so people won't get blood clots because of it. Unless you are saying they will. If AZ has a health impact after the event, then where's the evidence for that. Where's the impartial research? Please not a Youtube vid.

I am genuinely trying to flush out the concern here.

Wow I'm truly witnessing Cognitive Dissonance . Like you are so convoluted and confused you don't know which way to look do you ?

People die from asprin? Are you joking ? Yeah people die from aspirin but ummm people were not forced to take Aspirin or else lose there Job ? People were not pressured to take Aspirin by the Media or there peers , Mate you are lost in the fog it's sad.

So now people wont get blood clots because of the AZ vaccine so everything is okay ? All the other Blood Clots , Strokes and Heart Attacks don't count because now they admit the AZ is bad ?

Christ on a cracker we are doomed .

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot

Penicillin kills hundreds of people in the US every year.

Does it?
Can I read a link about that please?

Here is one.

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

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: ScepticScot

Have overall deaths and hospitalisations increased or decreased since the vaccine rollout?

Excess and covid deaths are down.

a reply to: ScepticScot
That's from 1992 and it's about preventing those amount of deaths.
A properly performed skin test will detect patients at risk of serious anaphylaxis.

Are you sure Penicillin kills hundreds of people in the US every year?

Do you have a more recent link that says how many die nowadays?

a reply to: paraphi

They both cause clots.

Difference is :
-AstraZeneca is a British-Swedish firm with no connections
-while Pfizer is an American firm with political and financial connections to the FDA and the White House.

Gross corruption at the expense of safety

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot
That's from 1992 and it's about preventing those amount of deaths.
A properly performed skin test will detect patients at risk of serious anaphylaxis.

Are you sure Penicillin kills hundreds of people in the US every year?

Do you have a more recent link that says how many die nowadays?

May well have came down with better identification in US (although if that uis available in developing countries is another question)

Exact number in US is pretty irrelevant to the point particularly as penicillin has been in use since the 1940s.

Virtually all medications have a risk attached. By assiduous logic pencilling should never have been used as too many people die, ignoring the millions of lives it saved