All things CoronaVirus

[runrussellrun]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/28/health/c ... index.html

There is a vaccine that protects against bacterial meningitis. It is recommended for children ages 11 to 12, and because protection wanes, a booster is usually given at age 16. It’s also recommended for people with certain medical conditions that compromise immune function, like HIV. The CDC says people in vulnerable groups should get boosters of this vaccine every 3 to 5 years.


If suck was running the marketing campaign, wouldn't ever burying the sales pitch at the END of an "infotainment" link.

but, yeah......thanks for sales pitch.

The guy that invoked the PREP act......ya know....TRUMPS sect. of Health and Human.......blah blah......he came to that cabinet position with a background in theater production, and a well respected "lighting " specialist. Alex Zorga ? One of Trumps guys.

.....and because protection wanes.......

not all bourbon is good.......just like not all drugs are.......

[runrussellrun]

Salesman, salesman, why don't you sell me something.

..... Stan Ridgeway

CDC is scary as all get out. Why is the Federal govt. "marketing" a fake drug?


https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/d ... port19.pdf

COVID-19 State of Vaccine
Confidence Insights Report
Report 19 | December 14, 2021 | Date Range: October 26, 2021 – November 08, 2021
Summary
Findings. This report identifies several vaccine confidence themes during this reporting period. First, despite positive vaccine
uptake trends, high-profile personalities continued to express negative vaccine sentiments which elevated these conversations.
Second, consumers continue to worry about side effects of available COVID-19 vaccines. Third, there is continued frustration
about CDC revising the definition of “vaccine” and “vaccination”. Fourth, consumers continue to show their support and
opposition to the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5 – 11 years
old. Fifth, states and localities continue to take legislative action against implementing vaccine requirements. Sixth, social
media users expressed their support for the suspension of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) COVID-19
vaccine requirement. Finally, consumers continue to debate the role of infection-acquired immunity in preventing the spread of
COVID-19.
Ways to take action. Federal, state, and local partners should continue to work together to explain the rationale for updated
guidance, respond to gaps in information, and confront misinformation with evidence-based messaging. The goals of these
efforts are to increase confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, generate demand, and expand vaccine uptake more broadly. Partner
with professional sporting associations and teams to generate vaccine demand and promote uptake by disseminating
messages from current and former players about why they got vaccinated, whether they had concerns about the vaccine, and
what helped them overcome their concerns. Work with trusted messengers to disseminate messages that educate people on
the importance of understanding scientific study limitations and how to interpret the results of peer-reviewed and preprint
studies especially when the results appear to run counter to well-established scientific evidence.

and

Consumers continue to worry about side effects and adverse events of available
COVID-19 vaccines.
Since the EUA of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in December 2020,
previous COVID-19 State of Vaccine Confidence Insights Reports found
that individuals expressing hesitation towards the COVID-19 vaccine, or
wanting to ‘wait and see’ before getting vaccinated, have often cited the
possibility of adverse events and serious long-term side effects as their
motivation behind delaying vaccination.b
In the period from November 6 to November 8, 2021,
searches including the terms “efficacy” and “safety”
increased rapidly.c Consumers continue to worry about cardiac-related side
effects.d,25,26,27 Many continue to turn to public health officials to clarify,
explain, and confirm the benefits of vaccination despite recorded
adverse events.c
Some social media users are concerned and convinced that COVID-19
vaccines do not prevent transmission between either unvaccinated or
vaccinated individuals.28,29,30 Therefore, consumers are questioning the
need for vaccination if it will not stop the spread of COVID-19 in the United
States. Questions regarding the possibility and probability of transmission
despite vaccination remain common. Public inquiries to CDC-INFO reflect
questions about whether vaccinated individuals have the potential to
spread fewer viral particles than unvaccinated individuals and if the
vaccines prevent infection or stop transmission.
Additionally, through CDC-INFO, some people were requesting sources, statistics, and studies from the CDC and other
government agencies that discuss transmission after receiving the vaccine.d In response to these content gaps, misinterpreted
or misrepresented journal manuscripts and circulating misinformation are guiding consumer opinion, potentially further sowing
doubt and confusion regarding COVID-19 transmission.31,32,33 It is important to address this gap in information and put forward
additional, trustworthy, and clear messaging about the risk of transmission after vaccination. You can find examples of resources
and graphics at this CDC website.
In response to a perceived rise in breakthrough infections, some social media users are using this to strengthen their opposition
to COVID-19 vaccines.34,35,36 On social media, vocal vaccine deniers are stating that if vaccines decrease in effectiveness over
time, then vaccination is useless and unnecessary.37,38,39 Moreover, social media users are using breakthrough infections resulting
from the Delta variant to spread the broader claim that vaccines are ineffective.40,41,42 Some are making this claim following a
widely circulating study that concludes people with breakthrough infections are just as likely as unvaccinated individuals to
spread COVID-19 to household contacts.43,44,45
Ways to act:
ƒ Work with healthcare providers, community groups promoting vaccination, and pharmacists to clarify the number of
breakthrough infections, hospitalizations, and deaths among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Additionally, create
and publish easy-to-understand graphics and figures showing these numbers.
ƒ Create and publish easy-to-understand content and graphics reflecting the risk of transmission after vaccination to counter
misinformation on this topic. You can find examples of resources and graphics at this CDC website.
ƒ Enlist trusted messengers to communicate scientific findings of side effects and adverse events to vaccine hesitant individuals
with a focus on uncommon dissemination channels and innovative messaging.
ƒ Work with trusted messengers to disseminate messages that educate people on the importance of understanding scientific
study limitations and how to interpret the results of peer-reviewed and preprint studies especially when the results appear to
run counter to well-established scientific evidence.
b
COVID-19 State of Vaccine Confidence Insights Reports
c
Google Trends
d
CDC-INFO
Page: 5
COVID-19 State of Vaccine Confidence Insights Report

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/p ... shows.html

Nothing to see here.

[runrussellrun]

tRumps fake jab/drug, didn't prevent one from GETTING covid........like they lied about in the FDA applications......95% efficasy

but........NOW........even disinformation spreaders like the New England Journal of Medicine......are claiming paxlovid,

gee, what a shocker, don't do jack straw from witchita Shitte either.


apparently is no different than if the human just took nothing. Beside the hefting price tag of phizers paxlovid. Are any publically funded pharma corps part of the "booming" stock market.

CONCLUSIONS
The time to sustained alleviation of all signs and symptoms of Covid-19 did not differ significantly between participants who received nirmatrelvir–ritonavir and those who received placebo. (Supported by Pfizer; EPIC-SR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05011513.)

from this link:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2309003

or, these robot like infotainment mouth pieces, if one perfers this type of viewing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM27ulOyG9Q

Yeah....tRumps corrupt.......just NOT this covid stuff......

unreal

[runrussellrun]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compani ... r-BB1lbe7W

Pfizer accused of ‘bringing discredit’ on pharmaceutical industry after Covid social media posts

fizer has been accused by the UK’s pharmaceutical watchdog of “bringing discredit” on the industry after senior executives used social media to promote an “unlicensed” Covid vaccine.

The company has been found to have breached the regulatory code five times, which also includes making misleading claims, failing to maintain high standards and promoting unlicensed medicines.


A ruling by the pharmaceutical watchdog, the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA), relates to a complaint about a message posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, in November 2020 by senior Pfizer employees.

The complaint raised concern about Pfizer’s “misuse of social media to misleadingly and illegally promote their Covid vaccine”, according to the ruling.

They claimed that such “misbehaviour” on social media was “even more widespread” than they had thought and “extended right to the top of their UK operation”.

‘Unlicensed medicine proactively disseminated’
The complaint centred on a social media post on X by Dr Berkeley Phillips, the medical director of Pfizer UK. He shared a post from an employee of Pfizer in the US which said: “Our vaccine candidate is 95 per cent effective in preventing Covid-19, and 94 per cent effective in people over 65 years old. We will file all of our data with health authorities within days. Thank you to every volunteer in our trial, and to all who are tirelessly fighting this pandemic.”


Four other Pfizer employees, including one “senior” colleague, published the same message

The PMCPA ruling noted that this message contained “limited” information about the vaccine’s efficacy, no safety information and no reference to adverse events.
It went on to say that the social media post resulted in an “unlicensed medicine being proactively disseminated on Twitter to health professions and members of the public in the UK”.

A Pfizer UK spokesman said that the company “fully recognises and accepts the issues highlighted by this PMCPA ruling”, adding that it is “deeply sorry”.

They said: “Pfizer UK has a comprehensive policy on personal use of social media in relation to Pfizer’s business which prohibits colleagues from interacting with any social media related to Pfizer’s medicines and vaccines – backed by staff briefings and training.

“The personal use of social media by UK pharmaceutical industry employees in relation to company business is a challenging area for pharmaceutical companies, in which we continue to take all of the appropriate steps that are reasonably expected of a pharmaceutical company.”

New Retirement Villages Near New Paltz (Take A Look At The Prices)
Qsearch
New Retirement Villages Near New Paltz (Take A Look At The Prices)
Ad
As part of their response to the ruling, Pfizer said it had launched a review into its employees’ use of social media platforms to ensure compliance with their own rules as well as the regulatory code.

‘Accidental and unintentional’
It is the sixth time Pfizer has been reprimanded by the regulator over its promotion of the Covid-19 vaccine.

One ruling by the watchdog, from November 2022, found that Pfizer’s chief executive made “misleading” statements about children’s vaccines.

Following a complaint from the campaign group UsForThem, the PMCPA found that Pfizer had misled the public, made unsubstantiated claims and failed to present information in a balanced way.

Three of the other Pfizer cases related to LinkedIn posts, one related one was about claims made in a press release and one was about posts on X.

For the most recent series of breaches, Pfizer was charged administrative costs of £34,800.

Ben Kingsley, the head of legal affairs at UsForThem, said: “It’s astonishing how many times Pfizer’s senior executives have been found guilty of serious regulatory offences – in this case including the most serious offence of all under the UK Code of Practice.

“Yet the consequences for Pfizer and the individuals concerned continue to be derisory. This hopeless system of regulation for a multi-billion dollar life and death industry has become a sham, in dire need of reform.”

Dr Phillips, the UK country medical director for Pfizer, said the social media post was “accidental and unintentional” adding: “That said, we immediately accepted the case ruling and do everything we can to ensure that our employees adhere to our strict social media policy and the industry Code of Practice when using their personal social media.”

David Watson of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) said that the code of practice, which is overseen by the PMCPA, sets “high standards for companies that reflect and go beyond UK law”.

He added that cases that are found to have brought discredit on the industry are advertised in the medical, pharmaceutical, and nursing press.