Boosters

candlegrease

• delete

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837565#Comment_117837565

The waning of efficacy is for getting a case of covid.

Oh wow let's have Covid infection parties for 60 year olds, 70 year olds, 80 year olds etc.

Madness.

is_that_so

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837557#Comment_117837557

That is one of the applications that BioNTech were looking at before they shelved it all for Sars-COV-2. They are also working on an MS solution and I believe they have done some initial trials.

ohnohedidnt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837557#Comment_117837557

Don't think I asked for you to figure it out. I just suggested there may be a limit to how many doses could be administered, I obviously wasnt asking anybody on here to do the research.

If we have two doses for the vaccine, then boosters, then if Lamda or Mu needs another vaccine, at some point the scientists may have to say, that's enough mRNA.

Saying 0.3ml means nothing to me, some drugs are fatal in that dosage, small doesn't necessarily mean safe.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837638#Comment_117837638

yes mRNA has many potential applications in medicine - it's one of the biggest advances in decades for the field.

my point is that that the experts will figure out any risks for any potential toxicity of carrier fluids, not boards posters.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837647#Comment_117837647

you said it's now lipid carrier fluids and now it's "enough mRNA" - which is it?

by the way the actual amount of of mRNA itself in the vaccine is 0.00003 of one gram, 30 millionths of one gram, 30 thousandths of 1 milligram

unless mRNA is as toxic as the single most toxic toxin known to man (Botulinum) it's not going to do anything at that level

and it's not botulinum obviously and nothing else in the world comes remotely close to botulinum in terms of toxicity

so I don't think that it's even worth fear-mongering on this aspect tbh

ohnohedidnt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837677#Comment_117837677

How is it fear mongering? It's just a question about how many mRNA doses can be administered, it's a fact there is a limit at least over a short period due to toxicity, a lot of drugs have dosage limits, its not controversial.

You can't transport mRNA to the cells without the lipid nanoparticles, they are the toxic part. When I say there is a limit to how much mRNA you can takes, it's just because you can't have one without the other.

Toxic may not even be the right word, it may have been that they can cross the blood brain barrier and effect the neurons, I can't remember the exact details, the point is there is a limit to how much lipid nanoparticles can be safely administered. And I'm curious how many doses of vaccines and boosters starts to approach that limit, It could well be 1000's.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837748#Comment_117837748

well given that the LD50 (lethal dose) for lipid nanoparticles in animal tests was 5g per kilo of bodyweight or say 400 grams for an 80kg / 12.5 Stone human it's going to be a pretty high number (they didn't conduct human lethal tests obviously).

And that was a single dose

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22098626/

Phibsboro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837748#Comment_117837748

Reading around, this was an issue for the initial lipids used for the early cancer vaccine attempts. The issue was the lipids weren't breaking down quickly enough in the liver and so the repeated infusions needed for chemo were accumulating lipids in the liver. This doesn't seem to be relevant to the current vaccines for a number of reasons. Firstly, this issue is going back to around 2005/2006 initially. There has been at least a decade's worth of work since then gone into the lipids we use today. Secondly, the vaccine is delivered intra muscular and is targeting immune cells, whereas the cancer vaccines were delivered intravenously and so were very deliberately going to end up in the liver. Thirdly, the repeat level of cancer doses that was causing the issue is, as far as I can figure out, far beyond anything that would be needed for repeat vaccines. The cancer ones were being delivered like standard chemo, in infusions of say 90 minutes, every week or two weeks. The vaccine regime wouldn't be in the halfpenny place in comparison.

candlegrease

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837580#Comment_117837580

What is your point?

(You have none.)

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117838628#Comment_117838628

I took your post as if you are advocating getting Covid

if that's not the case then I picked it up wrong.

you've now deleted / edited your original post I see?

The waning of efficacy is for getting a case of covid.

New study published in the Lancet points to Vaccines reducing the risk of getting Long Covid by half

Breakthrough infections were almost twice as likely to be asymptomatic in the fully vaccinated, the researchers found, and these patients were half as likely to develop long Covid, the debilitating, lingering illness that can persist for months or years after infection.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/09/01/vaccines-slash-risks-of-serious-illness-hospitalization-and-long-covid-for-breakthrough-coronavirus-infections-study-confirms/?sh=2affd7286a20

Well that's another big positive in the vaccines column imo

Any idea how long it will take them to investigate whether the Pfizer jab can cause MIS-C in kids? I think the signal was picked up this week?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117838849#Comment_117838849

I suppose when they have enough data feedback and if it's an actual issue and then to work out an incidence rate

It has been shown to occur in children who became infected with Covid itself, that much is certain.

There have been 4,404 cases of Covid MIS-C in the U.S., including 37 deaths.

https://www.al.com/news/2021/09/108-cases-of-covid-mis-c-in-alabama-children-what-to-know-about-multisystem-inflammatory-syndrome.html

candlegrease

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117838642#Comment_117838642

You misinterpreted it. I am not advocating getting covid, I'm advocating that the vaccines still protect against severe illness and are doing a good job. I edited my post and made a mess and deleted it - it was as you quoted.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117838903#Comment_117838903

ok then I picked it up wrong

sorry about that.

there was someone in here already advocating getting Covid instead of getting a booster so that's my only excuse on misreading that as the same again

Risteard81

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117836732#Comment_117836732

Wise move.

godzilla1989

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117838628#Comment_117838628

His point is you become dependant on the vaccine's, can't live without them

If you have to keep giving boosters to people to prevent Covid and keep up antibodies, your dependant on them, fine if your 80 as they are dependant on alot of drugs already. but not a great health regime if your 20 years old and take no medication. Which is the reason they are not pushing boosters on all adults here yet imo

Being dependant on a medication to live is scary.

Israel considers anyone who hasn't had the full 3 doses as unvaccinated, even if they have had 2 doses.

You can see all 3 categories in the latest chart posted by Israeli health ministry, This started 29/7/21.

1. Unvaxed = 0 shots
2. Partial Vaxed = 1-2 shots
3. Fully Vaxed = 3 shots

brickster69

Yes, you could end up looking like this in a few more years.

a 0.3ml vaccine once or maybe twice a year versus lockdowns and no eating out, pubs, social life

I'll take the tiny jab

no brainer

what is the alternative that the anti-vax muppets are proposing?!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117841442#Comment_117841442

that wasn't my point.

I misread his post

thought he was advocating getting Covid over a vaccine

my point then was that that would be suicidal for quite a few 80, 70, 60 year olds.

ohnohedidnt

Why get so personal? Why are you so emotionally invested in a drug?

Most people you call anti-vaxxers have loads of vaccines, have vaccinated their kids, and will continue to get vaccines, they're not anti-vaccine at all, but because they won't take this vaccine, you feel the need to label them, it's not just you, this is a general theme in society now, anybody who doesn't toe a specific line needs to be labelled, homophobic, transphobic, climate change denier, bigot, racist.

Calling people who disagree with you on one specific topic Muppets says a lot about you I think, you obviously have a strong reaction to anybody forming an opinion which runs counter to yours. In this case its particularly weird, because if your right about the vaccine you win by default, the almighty vaccine will save you, and the all powerful Covid will teach the muppets a lesson.

The alternative I'm suggesting is you do you, get your jabs twice a years forever. When the next pandemic comes do the same, you can take as many injections as you see fit.

And I'll do me. I'll take a virus with a 0.3% mortality rate, 40% of which were in nursing homes, 78% of hospital admissions are obese and almost all deaths have multiple other co-morbidities I'll get it once, take the risk and have far superior immunity than any of the vaccine takers, then its no longer a novel virus to me. I've survived a lot more dangerous things in my day, so I'm very comfortable with that level of risk. When the next pandemic comes, if it has a MERS type mortality rate, I'll see you in the vaccine queue.

I'm not saying there's a right way or a wrong way, I'm just going to it my way, and you do it yours.

FileNotFound

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117837748#Comment_117837748

As the body is expected to break down the RNA and protein formed in 2 weeks I assume that would mean an unlimited number in theory. Have to say I have not looked into the lipid coating but this will have toxicology done on it.

Lots of drugs have dosage limits based on toxicology indeed. A protein isn't toxic, lipid toxicology reports will exist, so if there was any risk to extra doses the EMA would inform us accordingly.

Panadol now - there is a deadly dangerous toxic thing that would never be approved nowadays. And you can still take 4 a day for extended periods.

FileNotFound

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117841671#Comment_117841671

I assume its a waiting game until they just let everyone in (might be post xmas but will happen i am sure).

Being as over 90% in most groups are vaccinated, a large proportion of the rest will get Covid, there will be few around with no immunity at all.

Nothing wrong with the Jab, I'm sure plenty who question it have shoved dirty class A drugs made by some uneducated lad in shed up their nose or in their mouth plenty of times. Funny mindsets some have..

is_that_so

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117841671#Comment_117841671

It's a pretty poor and wasteful ongoing public health approach, especially if done as Israel have done it. We only typically jab 700K for flu' each year, those who may most need it.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117841777#Comment_117841777

You are correctly being labelled as either selfish or ignorant. Based on this post, it seems like selfish is the most suitable label for you. As long as you aware that you are selfish and have no plans on changing your attitude, then yes, you may go on and continue to live your life in your selfish manner.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117841777#Comment_117841777

you can indeed.

I assume that you don't know anyone that has had their quality of life ruined by Long Covid? as I know (two and they were not old or sick people before that) - you're not dead but it's looking increasingly likely that you have a chronic condition for life

New 1 million person study from the UK shows that vaccines cut Long Covid risk by half if you get Covid

and not getting a vaccine or boosters is not a realistic option for people over 60, (younger if you're overweight or have something like diabetes)

Breakthrough infections were almost twice as likely to be asymptomatic in the fully vaccinated, the researchers found, and these patients were half as likely to develop long Covid, the debilitating, lingering illness that can persist for months or years after infection. 

 https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/09/01/vaccines-slash-risks-of-serious-illness-hospitalization-and-long-covid-for-breakthrough-coronavirus-infections-study-confirms/?sh=2affd7286a20

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117841821#Comment_117841821

but it's not the flu (don't we know this by now....)

aside from higher mortality rate (and more infectious) you can't get Long Covid chronic conditions from the flu

and giving out vaccines is not a massive expensive when rolled out though more conventional methods like doctors and pharmacies especially compared to continuing PUP payments, lockdowns, increased demand on health system for more serious cases, loss of workdays for cases and close contacts etc.

ohnohedidnt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117841843#Comment_117841843

I only know 1 person who has had covid at all, he said it was no worse than a cold. I know two people who got bells palsy from the vaccine, one of them was hospitalized with other problems, I think temporary paralysys. I know another who has had memory issues staring immediately after the vaccine, MRI showed very little but she was told under no circumstances can she take a booster.

I'm making my decision based on my experience and my interpretation of the statistics, your experience has obviously been different, which may influence your interpretation of those same statistics, and that's how opinions are formed, and we're both free to express and act on those opinions in a free society.

The vaccine can cause long covid too. I think the spike protein is the cause, and obviously they are generated by the vaccine, it may well be at a lower rathe than the virus.

is_that_so

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117841888#Comment_117841888

I see you sidestepped the public health question here with an asinine jibe. The point about flu jabs is that they are aimed at people who think they need one. Sticking people with an annual jab whether they need them or not is the height of madness and a waste of money that could be better spent on the HSE