Moderna says an omicron variant vaccine could be ready in early 2022

I was thinking more of Covid-21 instead of Covid-19 when I said a new virus. English isn't my main language, so sometime I'm not too clear on what I'm expressing.

 

My point is that it could get way worst before it gets better. This was in reply to somebody who was saying that virus mutation always end up creating a less serious illness. I'm saying there's no garantee of that since mutations are unpredictable.

 

Sorry, but your notions are those of a lay person who reads stuff but doesn't have the global medical knowledge necessary to put things in context and perspective. Some of what you're saying is, again, sorry (because I like you as a poster) utterly ridiculous, such as this notion of "thick blood with antibodies." Then, you proceed with anecdotal cases, people you know, which is not how science proceeds. And if you're reading papers, I frankly doubt your capacity to understand them fully, given your mistaken notions. For example, the mRNA vaccines do stimulate cell memory. Antibodies fade, and breakthrough infections can occur, but the very reason why in breakthrough infections high initial viral loads fade rapidly among the vaccinated is that the secondary immune cascade based on cell memory kicks in, plasma cells are activated and flood the body with newly made antibodies, which is why the vast majority of breakthrough infections are mild. The fading of circulating antibodies but with strong cell memory is a feature of many other vaccines, not just the Covid-19 vaccines. This situation you seem to deplore is more the rule than the exception, if you think of all vaccines (with a few exceptions of 100% lifelong neutralizing immunity). Studies have shown that the risk of re-infection among the unvaccinated is bigger than the risk of breakthrough infections among the unvaccinated which is why it is recommended to vaccinate the people who had Covid-19 before (ONE study showed the opposite and the anti-vaxxers keep touting it, while many others showed what I just told you; and even that study had a 3rd arm with one dose of the vaccine given to previously infected patients, and that protection was even better, and the study ended concluding for recommending the vaccine, a fact the anti-vaxxers who quote that study try to ignore).

The impact of these vaccines on the heart are very common? If you think that 12 cases in 100,000 from age 12 to 39 (practically non-existing beyond that range) is very common, you need to calibrate your notions of statistics.

Why mandate vaccines to the young and healthy? I'm not for mandates, and I posted a thread in which I said vaccines for the 5-12 age group should be optional. But you are not fully understanding the risks for the young and healthy, of the virus itself. They don't die but they can come out of it with organ damage. Again, if your concern is myocarditis, a study of the impact of mild and asymptomatic Covid-19 in college athletes found them with 45.8% of cardiac lesions, almost 1 in two. If you can't understand that this is much worse than 12 in 100,000, I don't know what else to tell you.

You're worried about ADE. I was too, at the beginning. But there's been no documented ADE case. None. And the vaccines have had 7 billion doses delivered worldwide. At this point my concern about ADE has significantly decreased. We're seeing the opposite, that the more neutralizing antibody titers are achieved, the milder is the disease, so where is the ADE you're concerned about? It's a theoretical possibility but it doesn't seem to be happening. Long term safety? There is not a single documented case of a delayed side effect beyond two months of administration, for any vaccine known to men in the more than one century of vaccine existence. People keep freaking out about mRNA because it's a relatively new technology (most don't know that it started in 197, but the overall principle is not so different: a vaccine introduces an antigen so that T cells can recognize it and start the immune defense. Older platforms introduced the antigen pre-made. The mRNA vaccines get the muscle cells to make the antigen. The mRNA vaccines degrade and leave the body in a matter of days, and the spike proteins they make, in a matter of one month. The possibility of delayed side effects beyond 2 months is pretty much non-existing. Since the first sequencing and synthesis of the mRNA done by Moderna in February of 2020 there's been almost two years from the initial animal tests followed rapidly by phase I human trials. All these subjects continued to be followed. There's been no delayed side effects. Sorry, you're a smart poster and you read stuff but that doesn't give you the contextual knowledge of a person who went to 4 years of pre-med, 4 years of medical school, 4 years of residency training, 5 years of PhD, and overall 41 years of experience post med-school graduation.

 

But it is a fact that the more antibodies circulate in your blood, the thicker it is.

I don’t deny the fact that I’m using some anecdotal observations that I personally made. But you must realize that many concepts of quantum physics can be applied to psychology - each individual has their own version of reality based on their own observations of objects that surround them. While anecdotal evidence cannot be used in science, if a common person observes things that go against what they are being told then that person will start to rely more on their own observations as a guiding principle.

I believe I gave you a quote from CNN not long ago that shows that prior infection gives 90% protection for at least 9 months. None of our current vaccines can brag about similar results 9 months out.
It’s obvious that there is more to our immune defenses than just a spike protein - otherwise, how do you explain this finding?

I’m just going by what I learned since childhood. Vaccines should prevent infection and they should induce memory. Anti-covid vaccines seem to struggle in that department. Many point to flu shots, but it is beginning to look like flu mutates faster than covid which explains why you can get a flu shot and still get flu, as your shot could target one strain and you can get another. We haven’t seen covid going around like that.

Alright, here is the CNN article:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/24/health/covid-19-reinfection-is-rare-severe-disease-rarer/index.html

Please list the vaccines in alphabetical order that provide over 90% protection for 9+ months.

Also, according to this:
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2021/...gh-covid19-cases-cause-hassles-health-worries

I’m glad we agree.

It doesn’t mean ADE is not a risk. It becomes a risk after immunized individual encounters heavily mutated pathogen.

There is no study that shows long term impact. If I inject something that alters my immune system, I’d like it to be a bit aged. Call me old school, but a long term alteration is a long term thing, and I’d like to know how safe these vaccines are in long term.
The long term effect could be ADE, or an autoimmune disease because your immune system ended up attacking pathogens that were produced by your own body. While ive heard explanations that our bodies can produce any tissues and virus forces our bodies to produce more virus anyway, I do know that most people develop anti mouse immunity after taking certain antibodies; even though the antibodies don’t carry the DNA, our bodies still somehow recognize the fact that the monoclonal antibodies didn’t come from a human. If our bodies can distinguish the origin of the antibodies then I’d be hard pressed to make my body generate spike proteins from covid out of fear that at some time in the future my body starts mistakenly attacking my own cells by mistake, inducing an autoimmune disease.

Yeah, that the part that makes me feel least comfortable about these vaccines. I do not want to play dangerous games where my body produces something and then have my immune system Chase the product of those secretions and hope it won’t go haywire some time in the future when it encounters something that is similar yet different.

I do not claim the authority in anything. I am learning from you and make my own conclusions from our conversation. But just because I do not have your creds doesn’t mean I should just shut up and accept everything that comes from higher up on the skill level. This subject is of great interest to me and I’m thankful to you for your responses.

 

No, you just made a stupid claim and I showed why it was stupid and you have nothing more to add, so I guess we're done here.

 

George Bailey, said: "The longer they go on the more obvious the conspiracy becomes."

..or the longer Covid 19 continues the longer people afraid of Covid 19 need to create conspiracy theories to serve as a pacifier to make it seem less threatening.

 

Antibodies do not thicken blood and therein lies a problem. If you do not understand what it is you discuss, it leads you off on tangents based on false premises. I appreciate you are not a doctor but please, making false statements only reflects your misunderstandings of hematology.

I think you mean to refer to antibodies and their relation to blood clotting:

https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/11/17/can-autoimmune-antibodies-explain-blood-clots-in-covid-19/

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases...holipid-syndrome/symptoms-causes/syc-20355831

The actual medical reference to "thick" blood would be: hypercoagulability:

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319842

I can appreciate blood clots since they can be increased in likelihood by Covid 19 in certain people appear to you to cause thick blood since "thick" blood or hypercoagulability also causes blood clots.

Its not quite the same thing. You would need a hematologist to properly explain the difference. For you and me humble lay people all you need to know is the chance of your blood clotting from taking the vaccine is rare, easily detectable. and can be quickly treated.

If you have a pre-existing blood condition that could make taking Covid 19 vaccine problematic you would be screened out. This is why some people not all people with very high cholesterol levels or diabetes or certain other conditions like Lupus, might not be given the vaccine.

I defer please to the physicians on this site for further info. We lay people though must be careful in what we say. You and me. I am not criticizing you.

 

- mild symptoms
- no hospitalization

take your vaccine and shove it sideways.

 

Covid-19 is the name of the disease. The virus is called SARS-CoV-2.

 

Ah OK. Since I have a number of people on Ignore, I didn't see the statement you were responding too. Yes, the SARS-CoV-2 has mutated to be more aggressive, unlike the typical case. Viruses behave differently. While the rule for viral mutations is to make them less virulent (lethal) with time, it's not always the case. You are correct in that.

 

This is an example of what I said, that lay people (no offense intended; lay as in, not medical doctors) tend to read something and interpret it wildly or out of context or out of a sense of proportion. You seem to be mixing up things. What are you calling "thickening" one's blood? Your blood will be much "thicker" after you eat a lavish pork meal than after you get a vaccine that produces tiny microscopic antibodies. Your blood will be much "thicker" if you get dehydrated by playing beach volleyball by high heat. The Hematocrit marker will go up in this condition. Antibodies are microscopic molecules. And they aren't present in such massive numbers to "thicken" one's blood. Now, what can happen, is the formation of immune-complexes that can result in platelet aggregation. That would be indeed a "thickness" that could lead to thrombosis. But mind you, it's only happening for the adenovirus vector vaccines (and very rarely), not for the mRNA vaccines. And it happens much more, for the live virus itself.

Anecdotes are useless. Just try to allow studies with large number of subjects to guide your judgment rather than anecdotes.

That's again, an issue with you being a lay person, quoting a lay press article. Actually the study doesn't say what you think it does. There is no indication of duration of protection in this study (which actually CNN mentions, if you keep reading). Besides, this is a retrospective cohort study, done with Alpha and Beta variants, not with Delta. Alpha and Beta were not prone to re-infection like Delta and Gamma are. If you have a population that you study, infected with a virus that typically doesn't reinfect, no wonder that there weren't many reinfections in this group. Also, this is a homogeneous, rich population in one small country. They probably have advanced PPE and all sorts of precautions and assistance. Their lack of reinfection may not translate to other countries and other populations.

Of course there is more to the immune system than the spike protein. Who ever said the opposite? But again, OTHER subsequent studies have shown that the vaccines still give more protection than the natural disease-derived immunity. I used the spacecraft docking analogy to explain it to you, remember? And in science we don't go by one study. We look at several.

Which may not apply to a new virus and a new disease.

Not really. That's a lay press understanding. They focus too much on level of antibodies, forgetting that cellular immunity is also stimulated by the vaccines, and is responsible for breakthrough cases being generally mild and with rapid clearance of viral load, due to B cells being activated into fresh antibody-producing plasma cells. It's just that the press and even some studies don't seem to talk about it a lot, something that 557 and I have been saying here.

I don't like very much these flu shot analogies. Flu shots are made in three different platforms, using 3 or 4 different strains of a virus called influenza virus, which has seasonal mutations and has been endemic for millennia. As tempting as it is to use one to understand the issues, the coronavirus is a completely different family of viruses, behaves very differently from the influenza virus, the vaccines are made with a technology (platform) that although it exists for decades, only recently got approved for human use. So actually you're comparing apples to oranges, not apples to apples. They are both viruses, like apples and oranges are both fruits; they both infect the respiratory system first, like apples and oranges grow in trees... but then, they start being very different.

Yes, the influenza virus mutates faster than this coronavirus, but the latter's rate of mutation has been accelerating lately and the gap isn't as large any longer. Anyway, for example, loss of vaccine efficacy with repeated doses has been observed with the flu shots but hasn't been observed with the Covid-19 shots. So don't entirely base your observation of one, on the other one.

Like I said, you misunderstood the article. There is nothing in the scientific paper itself that says that natural infection provides over 90% protection for 9+ months. And again, that study was done at the time when alpha and beta were the variants in Qatar.

I don't even feel like clicking on another lay press article. They get it wrong most of the time.

Thanks.

Sure. Show me a case of ADE for the SARS-CoV-2. I'll worry more once it happens.

Your muscle cells, where you took the shot, don't keep continuously making spike proteins. They only make them while the mRNA strands are there to start and guide the process. The mRNA strands degrade in 12 to 24 hours. The spike proteins persist for a month or so. Once it's all gone, it's hard to think of a scenario where your doomsday prediction would be happening. Now, the thing is, the virus itself can trigger the same issues you're concerned about. There are many cases of viruses triggering auto-immune diseases. For example, the Epstein-Barr virus. So if you prefer to take your changes with the wild SARS-CoV-2 virus with all its 29 proteins in terms of antigens that could trigger an auto-immune response, instead of taking the vaccine that temporarily makes 1 protein (which is 1 that is part of those 29 so the natural infection will have it too), be my guest.

Thanks. Sometimes I sound a bit frustrated and I apologize for that. But like I said, you're a good poster.

 

Exactly. I'm always amazed at you, Death, being a lawyer and demonstrating such advanced understanding of medical issues. You sir, are extremely well informed and intelligent. Not only you're well-informed but you also understand well the medical sources you read. And before anybody can think it's sarcasm, no, I truly admire this poster and his very sharp and balanced understanding of medical issues. You're the "lay" person who knows best what medicine is about, among posters here. As usual, congrats.

 

I have to say, this is the most powerful argument for taking the vaccines that I've heard(of course, you've said similar things before) but I don't think it's ever been laid out like: "You can acquire the virus with all of its 29 proteins that could trigger an auto immune response, or take the vaccine that temporarily makes one protein."

Put it that way, it's a no brainer. Of course I'd rather take the vaccine.

 

Yes, not to forget, the virus brings in billions of copies of itself, in massive numbers that circulate all over and penetrate all organs. When dendritic cells break them down, there are all sorts of fragments that spread all over, becoming antigens. That's precisely why one of the big problems (which actually kills people) with the SARS-CoV-2, is the cytokine storm that it triggers, putting the immune system in overdrive. The vaccine on the other hand makes a few spike proteins...

People who fear the vaccine for this reason - an over-reaction of the immune system - have lost all sense of proportion (given that the virus' ability to trigger devastating immune reactions is one of the main mechanisms for it to kill the host). For me, someone who knows the virology and immunology facts, it frankly sounds far-fetched that people fear so much the vaccine (just because it's a new technology) that makes a tiny fragment of the virus, but seem to think that it's no big deal to get the full virus invading every nook and corner of their bodies.

 

I wonder if people truly lost sense of proportion or rather, that they never understood the sense of proportion to begin with. Like, the way you explained it with that sentence I quoted was like "damn, when he puts it that way." I know science is hard to put in layman's terms like that, but when you do, it hits harder.

 

OK, so, now, take the vaccine, AmericanNationalist! I'll consider my mission to be fulfilled if you do!

 

Thank you for sharing. I do not question your expertise in this practice. It probably also explains how you make an entrance and why it takes so long for you to sit down. Center Field is a physician maybe he could explain to you how to take the vaccine the recommended way. I appreciate he is not a proctologist so may have to refer you to one for further specific advise.

 

American Nationalist please do not listen to Tough Talk. Lol. Its just a quick jab. Nothing is shoved sideways. The advice he gave may be based on his own recreational practices.

The only person who should tell you to shove anything sideways is a tailor measuring you for a suit.


Hang in. Its a long winter.

 

I came to realize I did not word my argument well.
What I was meaning to say is that antibodies tend to have a relatively short expiration time, so to speak, and there must be a reason for that, but we ignore this natural tendency.
“Thickening of the blood” sounds very simplistic, but it is true that we do not have active antibodies against all pathogens our bodies encountered throughout our lifetimes floating in our bloodstream all the time. There’s got to be a reason why our bodies allow those antibodies to expire, and instead utilize memory.

 

Maybe you ignore this natural tendency. I don't, and my colleagues don't. That's precisely why we give boosters when we're in the middle of a dangerous pandemic. Circulating neutralizing antibodies fade after several months, for the coronavirus, thus the boosters. During a pandemic, it is beneficial for the population to have high titers of neutralizing antibodies in addition to cell memory, because the neutralizing antibodies can cut the infection in the bud and dramatically decrease the likelihood that the virus will replicate and be expelled to infect others.

Like I said, the vaccines also foster cell memory, which accounts for even the vaccinated people whose neutralizing antibodies are gone (therefore they catch breakthrough infections) faring better than the unvaccinated, because secondary immune response triggers new antibody production. That's the natural way for the immune system to work (antibodies fade, memory cells keep the information so that they can become plasma cells to make fresh antibodies in a subsequent encounter with the antigen), and introducing a vaccine-made antigen will work the same way. Do you realize that our body encounters trillions, quadrillions of antigens throughout a lifetime? Of course it's best to store memory cells than to have all the multiple antibodies circulating in permanence. The idea that ONE antigen (the spike protein) will result in a catastrophic number of antibodies that will "thicken" the blood, like I said, sorry, is far-fetched and ridiculous.

Yes, in VERY rare cases the adenovirus-vector vaccines can induce thrombotic events (so in that sense the rare unlucky people who get it, did have a "thickening" of their blood), rarer than birth control pills do, and rarer than simply riding an airplane does; and yes, this phenomenon might have an auto-immune component. But mind you, it hasn't happened with the mRNA vaccines. The hypothesis is that it's not the RNA or DNA strands by themselves that cause it but rather, the adenovirus itself (or some part of it), because the adenovirus vector technology which was used for gene therapy and for other experimental vaccines and even by itself (adenovirus vaccines used in the military in the 1950s) were already known to be causing coagulation issues in a small percentage of patients, decades before the SARS-CoV-2 and its vaccines emerged. In 1999 there was a well-publicized case of a man who died from this, when his high-dose (much higher than what is used in a vaccine) adenovirus-vector gene therapy resulted in a massive coagulation event that left him with multiple organ failures.

Now, let me tell you what actually does "thicken" the blood: a virus called SARS-CoV-2. It causes thrombotic events quite often (some studies say that if you look for them, you'll find them in two thirds of the patients, to various degrees), actually thousands of times more often than the adenovirus vector vaccines do (and infinite times more often than the mRNA vaccines since these don't do it), and it can trigger a real detrimental surge of the immune system called a cytokine storm, which can lead to disseminated intravascular coagulation (which is fatal, by causing multiple organ failure). So what you've been fearing does happen... with the natural infection. So, avoiding the vaccine for this reason makes no sense whatsoever.

Also, if you fear the introduction of a few copies of the spike protein made by the mRNA vaccines and you think that avoiding the vaccines for this reason is best, do realize that the virus itself, if it invades you, has billions of copies of spike proteins, billions of times more numerous than the ones you get from the vaccines, plus 28 other proteins (the SARS-CoV-2's spike protein is one of this virus' 29 proteins); when it's broken down by the mononuclear phagocyte system, all sorts of protein fragments will be thrown into your circulation and become antigens (which is what can trigger a cytokine storm).

Haha, this sounds funny, but I'm not following your discussion with this other poster, so he's likely a member of my (long) ignore list, therefore I don't know what he's talking about.

 

Please slow down. Your statement above is false and based on a conclusion you make that flows from your lack of understanding of what the vaccine is made up of, what it does, and how its changed if it is changed.

It is false to say someone who had Moderna's shots is "unvaxed".

Those shots of course help deal with Covid 19 and all its variant so to jump to the conclusion it does not work at all because there is a new variant of Covid 19 is absolutely false. The only issue is how effective the current vaccine is when dealing with the symptoms of different Covid 19 variants not whether it works to manage the symptoms. It does, how well it does is the question.

So the actual issue now being studied is how effective the current vaccine to different strains of Covid 19 is. No one knows for sure yet, let alone you.

If and when a new vaccine is made, it won't undo the last vaccine's abilities to assist the immune system, it will add to them.

The vaccines you mention like moderna do not pump mRNA. You can not pump mRNA into anything nor do they make your blood thick and remain in your body to slowly kill you.

Please either go and read or ask Centre Field.

 

You guess or you know...

 

What first time? Who are these millions of people? You created an assumption then project it out into the universe and assume its a truth.

That may be a possible symptom of mental illness, i.e., a paranoid delusion or maybe its something far simpler, i.e., you assuming your subjective assumptions and projections on others are accurate let alone reliable.

How about you limit yourself to discussing your own beliefs rather than suggesting you know what others think and believe.

 

Have you ever changed your mind about something? Did it make you unethical for changing your mind?

 

Those affected by mass hysteria are rarely aware of it.