What did Fauci say in 2004 on CSPAN about vaccine potency? Hmm....

What Fauci said in 2004 on C-SPAN:

Fauci’s 2004 comments on immunity came on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal after a caller suffering from the flu talked about her bad experiences with the influenza vaccine. The relevant portion of the interview begins at the 28-minute mark.

Host Peter Slen asked Fauci: “She’s had the flu for 14 days. Should she get a flu shot?”

Fauci: “Well, no, if she got the flu for 14 days, she’s as protected as anybody can be, because the best vaccination is to get infected yourself.

Fauci: “Well, no, if she got the flu for 14 days, she’s as protected as anybody can be, because the best vaccination is to get infected yourself.

Fauci: “Well, no, if she got the flu for 14 days, she’s as protected as anybody can be, because the best vaccination is to get infected yourself.

~snip~

Fauci: “She doesn’t need it, because the most potent vaccination is getting infected yourself.”

Fauci: “She doesn’t need it, because the most potent vaccination is getting infected yourself.”

Fauci: “She doesn’t need it, because the most potent vaccination is getting infected yourself.”

https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/dr-anthony-fauci-natural-immunity-2004-cspan/

Wow, here we go again!

Hi there we are the guv we are here to help!

Did we get duped?

 

So he was talking about THAT flu.

So what.

The common cold is in the family of corona viruses, like Covid, which is not "the flu" and you can catch the same cold year after year. One would think you might have a little self pride and self respect and stop posting this crackpot nonsense. You know many people have had Covid two or three times now, right?

Why do you constantly push this insane BS?

 

That's a rather cavalier way of looking at the flu virus. It has killed millions of people and continues to do so. Which is why it's highly suggested that those with underlining health issues get a flu vaccine, just as in covid. But for those not compromised the flu, like covid, can present mild symptoms like a cold. The reason why both sets of virus are mild for so many people is because their bodies have enough antibodies to fight the virus. That's the science.

 

Quit talking childish gibberish.

 

The first phase of the Pfizer mRNA flu vaccine clinical trial aims to test the vaccine on people ages 65 to 85 since older adults are at the greatest risk if they get sick with the flu (along with newborns).Aug 3, 2022

New mRNA flu vaccine testing launching now - UCHealth Today
https://www.uchealth.org › today › new-mrna-flu-vacci...

 

Which makes sense. Healthier (younger) people can fight off the virus much easier. People seem to ignore the fact that a great percentage of people are asymptomatic. That doesn't mean they aren't infected.

 

what, every 6 months get your toddler jabbed? Seriously?

what about all those young people now suffering from cardiac issues, and SADS?

 

I got both shots and a booster because I'm in the compromised category. However I have no plans on getting jabbed every six months. I'm not sure I'll do it annually either.

 

Im old as dirt and I got zero and plan to stay that way! Ive had flus when I was a kid that were far worse than covid!

 

Trump thought that COVID would kill off most of the demographic collecting Social Security and save him from having to raise taxes on the very wealthy in his 2nd term. He, therefore, adopted the policy of "**** 'em, they're old" at first to deal with it. As the callousness of killing off several million became too much for even Trumpers he backtracked on this but it became a Republican talking point and remains so to this day.

 

I've had pneumonia and not only nearly died but wished I had for a while. Jabs for everything forever? No problem.

 

It noted that during the 2004-2005 flu season, when the video was filmed, a shortage of influenza vaccines prompted the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to prioritize at-risk populations to receive the shot first.

Fauci's 2004 advice was specific to the caller, who had already been sick, and in general, the doctor supports current CDC guidance that everyone six months of age or older should get a flu shot every year, even those who already caught the illness that season, NIAID said.

Concerning natural protection from Covid-19, it said: "While immunity from prior infection appears to have some protective benefits, the level and durability of protection afforded by prior infection remain unclear. Vaccination is a safe and effective way to protect against severe Covid-19."

Computational epidemiologist Maimuna Majumder of Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, dismissed the equation of the flu and Covid-19.

"False parallels between flu and Covid-19 are dangerous," she said. "Though both diseases are respiratory in nature, Covid-19 is undeniably deadlier than flu. I think it's important to keep this in mind, especially when attempting to dispel misinformation that treats these two diseases as comparable."

Majumder also explained that vaccination is a far safer alternative to taking your chances with infection

https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.32934KM

 

It certainly seems that you have been, since you've managed to selectively quote an article that completely contradicts your position. Did you actually read the entire article you linked or did you just blindly copy the talking points you'd read somewhere else?

Lots of viral infections will give you some level of immunity from the same virus (or at least the same strain) for some time afterwards. Exactly how effective that immunity is will vary massively between different infections though, and so advice in relation to one (such as the 2004 flu strain) doesn't automatically apply to any other (such as the various COVID virus strains).

You also need to consider the risks of infection. Obviously after someone has been infected that becomes largely moot but if you're asking whether you should take a vaccine or wait until you (or actively seek to) get infected becomes a very different question. In general, the idea of getting infected by a virus to protect yourself from getting infected by a virus makes no sense and clearly the risks of many infections and much, much higher than the risks of it's vaccine. For example, would you recommend someone doesn't bother with the new malaria vaccine but just tries to catch malaria instead?

 

Everyone has to base their decisions on their personal history. Mine made sense because of mine and my wife’s.

 

I was hospitalized with a bad case of chemical pneumonia, so I know how bad it can be. Still, it wasn't until recently that I got a flu shot even though I've had the flu in the past. I decided it and the covid shot was practical given my situation, but then I don't push it on everyone else. Everyone else doesn't have my issues.

 

Where did you pick up that conspiracy theory?

 

It's my own, you like it? He DID say he wanted to let the pandemic "run its course" and "burn itself out" but backed off when his advisors were turning pale.
" **** 'em they're old" is probably the oldest Republican talking point about the pandemic, and was almost the entirety of Trumpist policy for the first 6 mos.

 

It appears that the CDC is now agreeing with Trump's approach.

As conspiracy theories go, yours was a whopper.

 

How is the CDC doing that?

It's involved but very Trumpian, underhanded, nearly inhuman in its callousness and delighting in throwing close supporters (old people) under the bus.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/review-finds-cdc-mishandled-pandemic-response/ar-AA10M36q

Not exactly the same wording, but clearly an admission that they should have backed off.

 

It's clearly an admission that they should have done many things differently. It is clearly NOT an admission that they should have "backed off "and done nothing, thus letting millions die

Trump had been warned that a pandemic like this was coming and told what should have been done about it, his response was to disband the org that told him.
He had the example of several other countries that successfully dealt with the pandemic, he ignored them utterly
He is on record as saying that the pandemic should have been let to kill as many people as it could

My theory as to WHY he killed millions of us when he could have easily saved those same people stands

 

I don't define the term " backing off" as doing "nothing". Where did you come up with that?

 

Given the context how would you define it?

 

Wow you found that secret video?

Is this supposed to be some huge gotcha revelation?

 

A reduction in measures required to address a problem. Trump didn't ignore the virus, for if he did he never would have implemented Operation Warpspeed. But he did recognize that common sense would go a long way in dealing with the virus whereas the CDC was going for extreme measures which basically didn't stop the spread of the virus.