LaxPower Back-Up Stick

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 4:41 pm Obviously... you realize I was referring to the fact that many people are adverse to "needles".

Dude. This is classic tech.....and you're just unwilling to ever admit that sometimes, YOU are the source of the miscommunication.

-if I read into something, you get mad, and tell me I'm putting words in your mouth
-if I take you literally, as I just did, you get mad, and tell me that I'm supposed to read your mind, and I better read your mind correctly.

Dude. How about you just say "hey, I was unclear in that last post, and that's on me". Is that too much to ask?

There's NO WAY a reasonable person is going to take your sentence: "I would think that there is less risk taking the Merck pill (since it's development dates back to 2003) than the vaccines and it's "a pill"."

....and pull the understanding "oh, he's talking about people who are afraid of needles" out of thin air.

Man there's some dumb stuff getting posted.

so, when people said, hang on, summer/early fall 2020, let's let the FDA and the independent review board actually do their work with large scale blind studies before acclaiming the new Covid vaccines to be efficacious and safe, we were told we were nay-sayers, partisans who didn't want the "Trump vaccine" to succeed...and when the FDA insisted on going through their processes carefully, Trump himself squealed that they were delaying to keep him from winning an election.

But as soon as Trump lost the election and the vaccines were actually approved, and folks actually stood in line to get them, and Biden began pushing hard for faster ramp up in supply and distribution, announcing goals for shots in arms, suddenly those same complainers about it not going faster before became naysayers about its safety and efficacy...same people. And started claiming that various other drugs, not approved, not tested in blind studies, were suddenly safe and efficacious for Covid, in stark contrast to the vaccines which actually were...which became more and more clear through usage to be highly effective and safe. Blows a rational person's mind, but Joe Rogan knows better? "Do your own research"???

But hey, here come some additional therapies...fantastic...but how about actually doing large scale blind studies before approving as safe and effective? You know, follow a process so they can be trusted? Ahhh, we're back to Joe Rogan and any knucklehead with a Twitter or Youtube account being the expert...

Seriously, if the new drugs work well and are safe, it'll be a god send...but if they have serious problems for certain predictable groups, then we sure would like to know that before popping them like candy, right?

But if they are, and the Biden Admin starts pushing rapid testing and quick access to the pills, and folks like us embrace them thankfully, what's Rogan, Weinstein, et al complain about next?

And the ultimate projection: tech37 calling a fan a troll...hoo boy...
Guess it could have been Petey...

a fan wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 5:02 pm

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 4:41 pm Obviously... you realize I was referring to the fact that many people are adverse to "needles".

Dude. This is classic tech.....and you're just unwilling to ever admit that sometimes, YOU are the source of the miscommunication.

-if I read into something, you get mad, and tell me I'm putting words in your mouth
-if I take you literally, as I just did, you get mad, and tell me that I'm supposed to read your mind, and I better read your mind correctly.

Dude. How about you just say "hey, I was unclear in that last post, and that's on me". Is that too much to ask?

There's NO WAY a reasonable person is going to take your sentence: "I would think that there is less risk taking the Merck pill (since it's development dates back to 2003) than the vaccines and it's "a pill"."

....and pull the understanding "oh, he's talking about people who are afraid of needles" out of thin air.

"classic tech" ... thanks , I like that. "classic" in a truthful sense of course.

"to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true" – Aristotle

dude...

Really confused how techs original post turned in to a knotted up pretzel.

It seemed nothing more than wishful thinking that a pill could save lives or even a stay in a hospital, and questioning if there is a political Or financial leaning in to why.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 7:21 pm Really confused how techs original post turned in to a knotted up pretzel.

It seemed nothing more than wishful thinking that a pill could save lives or even a stay in a hospital, and questioning if there is a political Or financial leaning in to why.

Thumbs up youth. Thought I was being reasonable...

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:19 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:20 am Who Slowed Merck’s Covid Remedy?

Paywall for text but video is good.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-reme ... 1633897174

My take?... more bureaucratic BS and politics is killing people.

By now, and sans mandates, people who aren't vaccinated aren't going to be. If the idea is saving lives, either Merck's or Pfizer's pill should have been/should be available.

Craziness ensues with all things CV19.

This was the post along with the provocative title of the piece.

The implication being that it’s some sort of scandal that the pill hasn’t been released prior to the completion of the careful process to see if it’s both effective and safe.

No, that’s not “reasonable “ from someone who thinks the vaccines, with hugely more study, is somehow more risky than a new pill that alters a gene… and hasn’t been thoroughly reviewed yet.

Hopefully, hopefully this pill be a great help. But it’s crazy to want it released prior to completion.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:10 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:19 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:20 am Who Slowed Merck’s Covid Remedy?

Paywall for text but video is good.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-reme ... 1633897174

My take?... more bureaucratic BS and politics is killing people.

By now, and sans mandates, people who aren't vaccinated aren't going to be. If the idea is saving lives, either Merck's or Pfizer's pill should have been/should be available.

Craziness ensues with all things CV19.

This was the post along with the provocative title of the piece.

The implication being that it’s some sort of scandal that the pill hasn’t been released prior to the completion of the careful process to see if it’s both effective and safe.

No, that’s not “reasonable “ from someone who thinks the vaccines, with hugely more study, is somehow more risky than a new pill that alters a gene… and hasn’t been thoroughly reviewed yet.

Hopefully, hopefully this pill be a great help. But it’s crazy to want it released prior to completion.

And wondering why we are dragging our feet since the U.K authorized a limited use back on Nov. 4 and we hope to have it in December….

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:23 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:10 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:19 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:20 am Who Slowed Merck’s Covid Remedy?

Paywall for text but video is good.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-reme ... 1633897174

My take?... more bureaucratic BS and politics is killing people.

By now, and sans mandates, people who aren't vaccinated aren't going to be. If the idea is saving lives, either Merck's or Pfizer's pill should have been/should be available.

Craziness ensues with all things CV19.

This was the post along with the provocative title of the piece.

The implication being that it’s some sort of scandal that the pill hasn’t been released prior to the completion of the careful process to see if it’s both effective and safe.

No, that’s not “reasonable “ from someone who thinks the vaccines, with hugely more study, is somehow more risky than a new pill that alters a gene… and hasn’t been thoroughly reviewed yet.

Hopefully, hopefully this pill be a great help. But it’s crazy to want it released prior to completion.

And wondering why we are dragging our feet since the U.K authorized a limited use back on Nov. 4 and we hope to have it in December….

The Freedumb Refuseniks won’t take it.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:10 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:19 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:20 am Who Slowed Merck’s Covid Remedy?

Paywall for text but video is good.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-reme ... 1633897174

My take?... more bureaucratic BS and politics is killing people.

By now, and sans mandates, people who aren't vaccinated aren't going to be. If the idea is saving lives, either Merck's or Pfizer's pill should have been/should be available.

Craziness ensues with all things CV19.

This was the post along with the provocative title of the piece.

The implication being that it’s some sort of scandal that the pill hasn’t been released prior to the completion of the careful process to see if it’s both effective and safe.

No, that’s not “reasonable “ from someone who thinks the vaccines, with hugely more study, is somehow more risky than a new pill that alters a gene… and hasn’t been thoroughly reviewed yet.

Hopefully, hopefully this pill be a great help. But it’s crazy to want it released prior to completion.

Molnupiravir is a ribonucleotide analogue. It inserts itself into the RNA molecules as they are grown for replication so there are many, many mutations to the point that replication is useless. It does not alter a single gene but disrupts the process by which all the RNA is replicated. IT is an insertion of "fake" building blocks of the RNA genome as they grow. There is a small chance that these analogues will cause mutations in DNA and hence the slower roll out of the pill perhaps. Here is an article that looks at this: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33961695/

Edit: Here is a response to the ncbi article above: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8344688/

While the risk of this, imo, mutagenesis of the pill is extremely small there has been no risk shown of this happening with the mRNA vaccines. Something people who are "unsure" about the mRNA vaccines have been touting for months. People will need to follow the risk associated with molnupiravir for the next 10 or so years to see exactly what that risk is.

The Pfizer drug lets the virus replicate as it would. When the large proteins are needed to be cleaved (by a protease) to be functional it blocks this cleavage so the virus ceases to replicate further. This approach is very similar to that used to treat HIV. The big, if there is one, upside of this approach is that the protease inhibitor developed is supposedly unique to COVID.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:53 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:39 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:31 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:26 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:58 pm Latest research on 1.2 million pregnant women shows still birth is almost twice as likely among COVID infected women as uninfected women.

This part below is frustrating......how do they have all this other data and not a known on whether vaccines or not. Hell, when I donate blood they ask if I was vaccinated and which one. This almost seems like a CYA story.

There’s no information on how many had received COVID-19 shots, although the authors noted that the U.S. vaccination rate among pregnant people after delta emerged this past summer was 30%.

Roll your eyes all you want....this is why the story states only 30% of pregnant woman were vaccinated post Delta. Stupid mouth breathing women.

Do you have a hypothesis as to why knowing how many of the pregnant women had been vaccinated would impact the correlation found between having Covid and still births?

Pregnant women with COVID-19 face increased chances for stillbirths compared with uninfected women, and that risk spiked to four times higher after the delta variant emerged, new government data show.

Note that still births are rare, whether infected or not. Just significantly worse if infected, 4X with Delta.

Are you supposing, for instance, that being vaccinated reduced the chances of a still birth because the woman either didn't contract or had less negative response to the infection? So, more likely to be in the far more people who didn't have a still birth than in the much smaller # who did?

Or are you suggesting that maybe, somehow, maybe, being vaccinated AND getting infected might have a worse still birth effect...???

I mean, that's theoretically, maybe, maybe, possible, but really?

Unlike you, I think the reason the authors mention the 30% is that this is a very low % given that the risk of a problem in pregnancy is much higher if you get infected with COVID. Doesn't make them mouth breathers, simply very sensitive to potential risks...and there was a lot of noise telling them to stay away from being vaccinated...in a general sense, women try to do as little as possible in taking something during pregnancy that's not part of their required routine. As a general policy, that's probably a good thing, but it's made them particularly susceptible to misinformation.

... thanks, you understood my eye roll. I haven't had any time since I posted that, to respond to YA.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:30 am Goodness gracious: https://fox17.com/news/nation-world/fda ... ccine-data

FDA says it needs 55 years to release Pfizer vaccine data

... you might want to consider this is a Faux News story, with an interest it making it look as bad as they can.

Also to be considered are the special requirements to protect industry proprietary information imposed on the FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. Industry owners of the information will be given a chance to review anything the government believes is appropriate for release. This request is also competing for attention of the same staff with more manageable requests. I would guess the government gave a response based on average processing time per page, including historical delays in communication between agency and industry.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 7:18 pm So Michigan has the highest ever weekly Covid case rate since the beginning of Covid, more than Florida’s august surge, and the governor is kicking it on holiday in Arizona.

One of every ten infected in America are from the state of Michigan. And just like Colorado and every other Democratic disaster state, they won’t advertise life-saving monoclonal therapy and instead are rationing hospital beds. Evil.

Hmmmm…I’m trying to imagine the response to Desantis had this been his decision, go off on holiday while his state is in despair.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/health ... 688930002/

https://www.detroitnews.com/restricted/ ... 3848002%2F


I probably missed this, but have the usual suspect Fanlax libs ripped Governor Whitmer for her gross mismanagement of everything Covid, and her seeming indifference to her voters? I’m sure someone posted somewhere how disappointed they are about the esteemed democratic governor of Michigan.

Bueller? Anyone? Hello?

... You really are a dumbass. Did anyone start a Whitmer for president thread, INVITING abuse, like some dumbass did with DeathSantis?

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 8:21 am

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 7:18 pm So Michigan has the highest ever weekly Covid case rate since the beginning of Covid, more than Florida’s august surge, and the governor is kicking it on holiday in Arizona.

One of every ten infected in America are from the state of Michigan. And just like Colorado and every other Democratic disaster state, they won’t advertise life-saving monoclonal therapy and instead are rationing hospital beds. Evil.

Hmmmm…I’m trying to imagine the response to Desantis had this been his decision, go off on holiday while his state is in despair.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/health ... 688930002/

https://www.detroitnews.com/restricted/ ... 3848002%2F


I probably missed this, but have the usual suspect Fanlax libs ripped Governor Whitmer for her gross mismanagement of everything Covid, and her seeming indifference to her voters? I’m sure someone posted somewhere how disappointed they are about the esteemed democratic governor of Michigan.

Bueller? Anyone? Hello?

... You really are a dumbass. Did anyone start a Whitmer for president thread, INVITING abuse, like some dumbass did with DeathSantis?

Your kween disappointed you. Very sad.

Michigan meanwhile is rationing hospital beds.…you’ll only know that if I let you know, so I’m letting you know.

PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:45 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:23 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:10 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:19 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:20 am Who Slowed Merck’s Covid Remedy?

Paywall for text but video is good.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-reme ... 1633897174

My take?... more bureaucratic BS and politics is killing people.

By now, and sans mandates, people who aren't vaccinated aren't going to be. If the idea is saving lives, either Merck's or Pfizer's pill should have been/should be available.

Craziness ensues with all things CV19.

This was the post along with the provocative title of the piece.

The implication being that it’s some sort of scandal that the pill hasn’t been released prior to the completion of the careful process to see if it’s both effective and safe.

No, that’s not “reasonable “ from someone who thinks the vaccines, with hugely more study, is somehow more risky than a new pill that alters a gene… and hasn’t been thoroughly reviewed yet.

Hopefully, hopefully this pill be a great help. But it’s crazy to want it released prior to completion.

And wondering why we are dragging our feet since the U.K authorized a limited use back on Nov. 4 and we hope to have it in December….

The Freedumb Refuseniks won’t take it.

So telling, how you all are so patient about this pill, yet blamed Trump for not moving fast enough on the vaccine. If not for double standards, you'd all not have any. :

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 8:16 am

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:30 am Goodness gracious: https://fox17.com/news/nation-world/fda ... ccine-data

FDA says it needs 55 years to release Pfizer vaccine data

... you might want to consider this is a Faux News story, with an interest it making it look as bad as they can.

Also to be considered are the special requirements to protect industry proprietary information imposed on the FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. Industry owners of the information will be given a chance to review anything the government believes is appropriate for release. This request is also competing for attention of the same staff with more manageable requests. I would guess the government gave a response based on average processing time per page, including historical delays in communication between agency and industry.

Feel free to point out any falsehoods in the FOX News story. What is "faux"? Faux is having to re-define vaccines. Dismiss the attached article, but why are we not asking if vaccinating during a pandemic is leading to dangerous mutations and prolonging the pandemic?

https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... rking.html

youthathletics wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 8:53 am

PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:45 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:23 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:10 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:19 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:20 am Who Slowed Merck’s Covid Remedy?

Paywall for text but video is good.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-reme ... 1633897174

My take?... more bureaucratic BS and politics is killing people.

By now, and sans mandates, people who aren't vaccinated aren't going to be. If the idea is saving lives, either Merck's or Pfizer's pill should have been/should be available.

Craziness ensues with all things CV19.

This was the post along with the provocative title of the piece.

The implication being that it’s some sort of scandal that the pill hasn’t been released prior to the completion of the careful process to see if it’s both effective and safe.

No, that’s not “reasonable “ from someone who thinks the vaccines, with hugely more study, is somehow more risky than a new pill that alters a gene… and hasn’t been thoroughly reviewed yet.

Hopefully, hopefully this pill be a great help. But it’s crazy to want it released prior to completion.

And wondering why we are dragging our feet since the U.K authorized a limited use back on Nov. 4 and we hope to have it in December….

The Freedumb Refuseniks won’t take it.

So telling, how you all are so patient about this pill, yet blamed Trump for not moving fast enough on the vaccine. If not for double standards, you'd all not have any. :

Whoa!

Wait a second, who exactly wanted the FDA to go faster in approving the vaccine???
Certainly not those on here who are excited about the pill, but are patient and want the FDA to follow their process, right?

It was Trump and his supporters who wanted the vaccine announced early, before the process was completed. I'm not sure he cared as much about actually getting shots in arms, but he sure wanted an announcement, regardless of whether the data was complete.

Trump took flak for not doing more to organize production and especially distribution of the vaccine once approved, but no critique for the speed of development. Quite the opposite, it was a terrific success. But people didn't want any remedy touted before proven safe and effective, through independent, large scale blind studies.

For better or worse, the US process is the gold standard for the world. The rest of the world piggybacks our process.

and then many of those same Trump supporters turned around and cast doubt on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines as soon as the Biden Admin was doing the distribution...the hypocrisy and stupidity knows no bounds.

get it to x wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:01 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 8:16 am

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:30 am Goodness gracious: https://fox17.com/news/nation-world/fda ... ccine-data

FDA says it needs 55 years to release Pfizer vaccine data

... you might want to consider this is a Faux News story, with an interest it making it look as bad as they can.

Also to be considered are the special requirements to protect industry proprietary information imposed on the FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. Industry owners of the information will be given a chance to review anything the government believes is appropriate for release. This request is also competing for attention of the same staff with more manageable requests. I would guess the government gave a response based on average processing time per page, including historical delays in communication between agency and industry.

Feel free to point out any falsehoods in the FOX News story. What is "faux"? Faux is having to re-define vaccines. Dismiss the attached article, but why are we not asking if vaccinating during a pandemic is leading to dangerous mutations and prolonging the pandemic?

https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... rking.html

The author is correct to say upfront that he's neither an infectious disease expert nor an expert in vaccines. It's obvious he's not. He has a bunch of speculations based on his not being such. There's no basis to suggest that vaccinations "are leading to dangerous mutations and prolonging the pandemic". In fact, that's a colossally dumb assertion, without such basis. Not that there's never, ever, a possibility of a negative impact of vaccinations, but it would have to be the very first infectious disease to ever react that way to vaccinations...and without some really strong hypothesis why that would be the case, this is just more harmful disinformation.

Now, would I want actual scientists to be studying and watching? You betcha.
But spreading speculative, disinformation without any evidence? Awful.

The author repeats the dumb example of Gibraltar...why is the vaccine "not working"?
Obviously because efficacy wanes after 6 months...they tell us exactly why that is. Indeed, they had long ago warned that the efficacy might well wane with time and that we'd need boosters.

That doesn't mean the vaccine hasn't been working, nor in any way indicative that not having vaccines would have somehow been better.

Obviously.

Really is amazing how dumb this stuff gets.

get it to x wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:01 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 8:16 am

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:30 am Goodness gracious: https://fox17.com/news/nation-world/fda ... ccine-data

FDA says it needs 55 years to release Pfizer vaccine data

... you might want to consider this is a Faux News story, with an interest it making it look as bad as they can.

Also to be considered are the special requirements to protect industry proprietary information imposed on the FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. Industry owners of the information will be given a chance to review anything the government believes is appropriate for release. This request is also competing for attention of the same staff with more manageable requests. I would guess the government gave a response based on average processing time per page, including historical delays in communication between agency and industry.

Feel free to point out any falsehoods in the FOX News story. What is "faux"? Faux is having to re-define vaccines. Dismiss the attached article, but why are we not asking if vaccinating during a pandemic is leading to dangerous mutations and prolonging the pandemic?

https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... rking.html

What drives mutations is not vaccination but the opportunity to replicate. Could some of these replications confer an epitope that will evade vaccination? Certainly. Could these replications confer an epitope that will be more dangerous? Yes. But in order to any mutation you must need replication.....it is a simple numbers game. The presence of vaccination does not lead to either increased likely hood of adverse dangerous mutations or not. What does is the unfettered proliferation of the virus.

As to the good Dr.s idea that the vaccine is not working. It is not sterilizing vaccination, that is certainly correct and was, imo, bad messaging regarding the original idea of the vaccine. Some vaccines are sterilizing but many are not. It appears however that the vaccination status is working in regards to keeping people from dying.

Bart wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:23 am

get it to x wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:01 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 8:16 am

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:30 am Goodness gracious: https://fox17.com/news/nation-world/fda ... ccine-data

FDA says it needs 55 years to release Pfizer vaccine data

... you might want to consider this is a Faux News story, with an interest it making it look as bad as they can.

Also to be considered are the special requirements to protect industry proprietary information imposed on the FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. Industry owners of the information will be given a chance to review anything the government believes is appropriate for release. This request is also competing for attention of the same staff with more manageable requests. I would guess the government gave a response based on average processing time per page, including historical delays in communication between agency and industry.

Feel free to point out any falsehoods in the FOX News story. What is "faux"? Faux is having to re-define vaccines. Dismiss the attached article, but why are we not asking if vaccinating during a pandemic is leading to dangerous mutations and prolonging the pandemic?

https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... rking.html

What drives mutations is not vaccination but the opportunity to replicate. Could some of these replications confer an epitope that will evade vaccination? Certainly. Could these replications confer an epitope that will be more dangerous? Yes. But in order to any mutation you must need replication.....it is a simple numbers game. The presence of vaccination does not lead to either increased likely hood of adverse dangerous mutations or not. What does is the unfettered proliferation of the virus.

As to the good Dr.s idea that the vaccine is not working. It is not sterilizing vaccination, that is certainly correct and was, imo, bad messaging regarding the original idea of the vaccine. Some vaccines are sterilizing but many are not. It appears however that the vaccination status is working in regards to keeping people from dying.

Thanks for your reasoned response, as opposed to some who just make gratuitously personal comments without doing research. Many even write off acquired immunity. I had Covid in October 2020, and in spite of having the most heavily corelated co-morbidities I was sick for two days with mild to moderate symptoms. I didn't take Hydroxycloroquine, Ivermectin or any other therapeutic. I have been taking C, D and Zinc every day for the last ten years. I also rarely get sick. I feel I have been blessed with a robust immune system, but I am not naive enough to think I am invincible. This vaccine was rushed into emergency use and it seems to me those that have benefited the most, whether it is the accrual of money or power, are the most reluctant to admit it isn't the Holy Grail of cures.

Certitude can be dangerous, as a very cocksure Dr. Fauci has had to change his story more than a few times regarding masks and vaccines. Also, the total lack of respect for people who are hesitant to vaccinate is troubling. My understanding is that viruses are constantly mutating and have a history of weakening in order to survive. What is the objection to nature taking it's course and protecting the vulnerable? This isn't smallpox or ebola, just a nasty respiratory virus, especially for certain, well defined segments of the population.

get it to x wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:01 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 8:16 am

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 9:30 am Goodness gracious: https://fox17.com/news/nation-world/fda ... ccine-data

FDA says it needs 55 years to release Pfizer vaccine data

... you might want to consider this is a Faux News story, with an interest it making it look as bad as they can.

Also to be considered are the special requirements to protect industry proprietary information imposed on the FDA, NIH, CDC, etc. Industry owners of the information will be given a chance to review anything the government believes is appropriate for release. This request is also competing for attention of the same staff with more manageable requests. I would guess the government gave a response based on average processing time per page, including historical delays in communication between agency and industry.

Feel free to point out any falsehoods in the FOX News story. What is "faux"? Faux is having to re-define vaccines. Dismiss the attached article, but why are we not asking if vaccinating during a pandemic is leading to dangerous mutations and prolonging the pandemic?

https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... rking.html

... Faux News made no effort to understand (and explain) why the number was what it was. The story immediately spun the "unreasonable" angle and spun the "government has something to hide" angle. Faux News want's YOU to believe the government is hiding something -- and of course YOU do!

As for the americanthinker article, others have explained the problems with it.