Why do we have a vaccine against a virus?

[Stryker Ryker 188]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Well I asked you a question that someone with a medical degree should be able to answer.

I'll explain it to you.  No vaccine provides 100% immunity, which is why it was updated.  Vaccines have previously, and today, create an "immune response" within the provide, to provide some level of immunity.  So nothing really changed, but anti-vaxers won't let it go.

I’m just gonna not comment anymore  

[Baker Boy 1,688]

2 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

Well you're using lies to make that decision, which is wrong, but in the end, I really don't care.  Tardcore didn't like that I called you anti-vax, but he gets it now.  So in the end I have no problem what you do with your ow body, I just don't you don't spread your lies to others and negatively influence them.

What lies? You are the one spreading lies.

[Baker Boy 1,688]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Well I asked you a question that someone with a medical degree should be able to answer.

I'll explain it to you.  No vaccine provides 100% immunity, which is why it was updated.  Vaccines have previously, and today, create an "immune response" within the provide, to provide some level of immunity.  So nothing really changed, but anti-vaxers won't let it go.

They changed the definition because the jab provided no immunity for anyone anywhere. Real Vaccines provide immunity for upwards of 95% of the population. 

[TimHauck 2,619]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Can't we all agree that the "vaccine" is pretty worthless to those who are in good health?  Those who are in poor health should take it and distance themselves from others.  Seems like common sense to me.

Those in poor health and anyone over about 50 would be more accurate.

Also about half the country could be considered “in poor health.”

[BuckSwope 654]

52 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Doctors were fired for having opposing opinions to the stab.

Which is stupid, what's your point? 

[TimHauck 2,619]

1 hour ago, Stryker Ryker said:

As the only one here with an actual medical degree I’ll give my 2 cents: they changed the definition to a different meaning. The keyword is “immunity” which means you’re resistant to the disease if you have this vaccination. Example: Polio

Now, they’ve changed it to “immune response” meaning it just activates your bodies immune system to start producing antibodies. Doesn’t mean that you’re immune which is what it used to be when you got vaccines. The wording they now have turned to is cause the covid “vaccine” does t provide you immunity. Quite frankly, after the first couple of months after taking the covid vaccine it’s effectiveness drops severely (and this has all been proven through multiple studies for both left & right so you can’t claim it’s misinfo). 

The effectiveness against infection drops, but it doesn’t drop much for severe disease and death especially in the non-elderly.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 hour ago, Stryker Ryker said:

I’m just gonna not comment anymore  

Smart.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 hour ago, Baker Boy said:

What lies? You are the one spreading lies.

We can start with the lie that it's not a vaccine.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 hour ago, Baker Boy said:

They changed the definition because the jab provided no immunity for anyone anywhere. Real Vaccines provide immunity for upwards of 95% of the population. 

Not true.  There is no such thing as a real vaccine and a fake vaccine.  All vaccines have different efficacy.

[Baker Boy 1,688]

5 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Not true.  There is no such thing as a real vaccine and a fake vaccine.  All vaccines have different efficacy.

I never said it was a fake vaccine. What I said is it is not a vaccine it is a shot. Are you saying it is not a shot?
 

now, what lies are you talking about?

[Gepetto 1,288]

I think the mRNA given to protect against Covid being called a vaccine is incorrect. It doesn't create immunity, so it's not a vaccine. It is a failure though. So we can call the shots the Pfizer and Moderna Covid protection shot failures, but that's kind of long. So I'll just go with failure for short when in this thread.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

This all started when some dumbass president asked what the definition of the word is is

[GutterBoy 2,898]

48 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

I never said it was a fake vaccine. What I said is it is not a vaccine it is a shot. Are you saying it is not a shot?
 

now, what lies are you talking about?

Of course it's a shot, it' also a vaccine.  You're lying when you say it's not a vaccine.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,934]

12 minutes ago, JustinCharge said:

This all started when some dumbass president asked what the definition of the word is is

It’s funny you brought that up. I was just thinking the other day about his “I didn’t inhale” claim. He really ushered in an era where politicians can just say the dumbest shite and get away with it as long as the media carries their water. It’s how we have ended up with “I’m not a biologist”. 

[Horseman 2,365]

3 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

No vaccine provides 100% immunity, which is why it was updated.  

Not true.  The smallpox vaccine provided 100% immunity for 3 or more years.  That's what allowed it to be fully eradicated.  Gone.  Poof.

If you compare that with the immunity the covid vaccines provided, we all knew it was very poor when 9 vaccinated players contracted covid on the same baseball team despite what they kept saying.  It's really not much of a comparison.  

That's why some people don't want to put it in the vaccine bucket.  HTH.  

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 hour ago, Horseman said:

Not true.  The smallpox vaccine provided 100% immunity for 3 or more years.  That's what allowed it to be fully eradicated.  Gone.  Poof.

If you compare that with the immunity the covid vaccines provided, we all knew it was very poor when 9 vaccinated players contracted covid on the same baseball team despite what they kept saying.  It's really not much of a comparison.  

That's why some people don't want to put it in the vaccine bucket.  HTH.  

Nope.

Quote

Historically, the vaccine has been effective in preventing smallpox infection in 95% of those vaccinated.

https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/vaccine-basics/index.html

And I don't care what anyone wants to call it, a vaccine is a vaccine.

[Horseman 2,365]

11 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Nope.

https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/vaccine-basics/index.html

And I don't care what anyone wants to call it, a vaccine is a vaccine.

It's your reading issues.  Try again.   

Quote

Smallpox vaccination provides full immunity for 3 to 5 years and decreasing immunity thereafter. If a person is vaccinated again later, immunity lasts even longer. Historically, the vaccine has been effective in preventing smallpox infection in 95% of those vaccinated.

You can call it a vaccine if you want. So can the other 5 booster Dembots. 

Just thought you might understand why some people dont when comparing 100% for 3 years and 95% overall to 0% after 5 boosters.  Guess not. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

7 minutes ago, Horseman said:

It's your reading issues.  Try again.   

You can call it a vaccine if you want. So can the other 5 booster Dembots. 

Just thought you might understand why some people dont when comparing 100% for 3 years and 95% overall to 0% after 5 boosters.  Guess not. 

My reading issues, as you ignore the sentence that says 95% effective.

[Horseman 2,365]

Gutterboy wont understand any of this, but, for those that wonder about a smallpox outbreak from bioterrorism: 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2610468/

Quote

Thus, vaccinated subjects remain immune to vaccinia indefinitely and do not require booster vaccinations even if they are many decades removed from primary vaccination.

That's a vaccine.  

[Horseman 2,365]

17 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

My reading issues, as you ignore the sentence that says 95% effective.

I changed my mind, I'm with you on this one. If a woman can have a pennis why should we expect a vaccine to provide any immunity.  

[KSB2424 3,148]

How about this….The Covid shots are technically vaccines.  They are just really, really shiity vaccines that provide little protection for a short period of time.  Worse than the flu shot.  Whatever, semantics.  

[Ultra Max Power 214]

Its such a good vaccine, Biden just asked Congress to fund research for a better one "That works". 

[KSB2424 3,148]

If you lined up all the current vaccines in America and chose teams for school yard basketball; Covid would be picked dead last. Worst vaccine ever made.  No wonder Gutterboy has such a soft spot for it, he can relate.  

[gas 137]

I strongly support MAGAts not getting vaccinated.   

[nobody 2,564]

14 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

Of course, because the general public is largely dumb when it comes to this.   So instead of having some base knowledge of vaccines and how they work during a pandemic, or God forbid - ask a doctor, people largely got their info from talking heads and SM.   The flu was the closest thing we had for a comparison, so I don't know where people thought they would be immune, especially because of the rate of mutation.   

Apparently the CDC didn't know what a vaccine was either.

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

Seems weird that the flu “vaccine” was invented in 1942 yet we still have the flu. 

[nobody 2,564]

9 hours ago, KSB2424 said:

How about this….The Covid shots are technically vaccines.  They are just really, really shiity vaccines that provide little protection for a short period of time.  Worse than the flu shot.  Whatever, semantics.  

Preach. 

The widely accepted premise and the one espoused by the administration when they were forcing people to take the shot so they could justify making Pfizer billions was that if you took this shot you wouldn't get covid and you wouldn't spread covid.  And if you didn't take this shot, you would suffer a winter of severe illness and death and kill grandmas.

When all that was proven to be complete BS, they tried to just change the language to make themselves correct in some way.

5 years ago all these Pfizer shills would've said that in general, a vaccine would confer immunity.  The CDC obviously would've said that, but instead of just saying they overreached they reached for technicalities to claim they were right the whole time.  Then an army of shills argued it on their behalf.  

So now instead of just acknowledging that they were wrong with what they forcefed the public, and holding them accountable, we'll all be distracted by the shills arguing semantics on their behalf and keep shoveling tax dollars into pfizer's balance sheet.

[BuckSwope 654]

4 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

Seems weird that the flu “vaccine” was invented in 1942 yet we still have the flu. 

Wow, some of you are ignorant.  

[nobody 2,564]

I remember when they first started forcing the shot on people, I told people it wasn't doing what they claimed.  I kept saying it doesn't make sense that so many people would be popping positive still if the shot worked as advertised. 

Remember R0?  It should've went way down.

The answer at that time was that I was wrong and it was all the "anti-vaxers" still killing grandmas.  It was only after it was blatantly obvious that the shots didn't do what they said, that the narrative switched to "vaccines don't confer immunity.  Gosh what dummy would think that?"

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

2 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Wow, some of you are ignorant.  

By ignorant you mean not needing something that has an effective range of prevention between 2% and 40%? 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

3 minutes ago, nobody said:

I remember when we they first started forcing the shot on people, I told people it wasn't doing what they claimed.  I kept saying it doesn't make sense that so many people would be popping positive still if the shot worked as advertised.

The answer at that time was that I was wrong and it was all the "anti-vaxers" still killing grandmas.  It was only after it was blatantly obvious that the shots didn't do what they said, that the narrative switched to "vaccines don't confer immunity.  Gosh what dummy would think that?"

Buck says your ignorant 

[RLLD 4,143]

The pharmaceutical industry being so trustworthy and what not. I mean, its not like they would create something that would harm us and then reap profit on the backs of our misery, right?

[Hardcore troubadour 14,934]

Two years to flatten the curve. 

[MDC 7,129]

10 hours ago, KSB2424 said:

How about this….The Covid shots are technically vaccines.  They are just really, really shiity vaccines that provide little protection for a short period of time.  Worse than the flu shot.  Whatever, semantics.  

Why don’t they have better vaccines for a fast mutating novel virus???

 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

10 minutes ago, RLLD said:

The pharmaceutical industry being so trustworthy and what not. I mean, its not like they would create something that would harm us and then reap profit on the backs of our misery, right?

The FDA has only recalled 14,000 drugs in the past 10 years no biggie.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 hour ago, nobody said:

Preach. 

The widely accepted premise and the one espoused by the administration when they were forcing people to take the shot so they could justify making Pfizer billions was that if you took this shot you wouldn't get covid and you wouldn't spread covid.  And if you didn't take this shot, you would suffer a winter of severe illness and death and kill grandmas.

When all that was proven to be complete BS, they tried to just change the language to make themselves correct in some way.

5 years ago all these Pfizer shills would've said that in general, a vaccine would confer immunity.  The CDC obviously would've said that, but instead of just saying they overreached they reached for technicalities to claim they were right the whole time.  Then an army of shills argued it on their behalf.  

So now instead of just acknowledging that they were wrong with what they forcefed the public, and holding them accountable, we'll all be distracted by the shills arguing semantics on their behalf and keep shoveling tax dollars into pfizer's balance sheet.

The truth is that the original vaccine clinical trials showed it to be 95% effective against symptomatic covid.  Unless you are gonna say that the clinical trials were cooked, then we have to accept this as fact.  What happened after this is that the virus mutated and the vaccine proved less effective against the new strains, and the real world protection waned pretty quickly.  But the health officials didn't communicate this effectively, due to a mix of incompetency and also acknowledging that the public is largely stupid and couldn't understand it anyway, so the policy was to just get your vaccine and hope that it helps.  Well it did, Yay for all of us.

But still, we had way too many people with way too much time on their hands that all became epidemiologists on line, and spread wild theories and the gullible smooth brains like yourself became indoctrinated.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 hour ago, nobody said:

The answer at that time was that I was wrong and it was all the "anti-vaxers" still killing grandmas.  It was only after it was blatantly obvious that the shots didn't do what they said, that the narrative switched to "vaccines don't confer immunity.  Gosh what dummy would think that?"

This is patently false and easily proven so, because we had several vaccines for years prior that behaved in the same manner, like influenza, Rotavirus, pneumonia, etc. 

[nobody 2,564]

10 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

This is patently false and easily proven so, because we had several vaccines for years prior that behaved in the same manner, like influenza, Rotavirus, pneumonia, etc. 

Bullshìt.  I posted that I wasn't getting a shot because the shots were obviously not preventing people from getting covid, and people like you said that was dumb because trials.  

It only took a couple of months or so though for the truth to become self-evident.  Then like a good little pharma corporate drone, you swallowed that new narrative and pretended no one ever said people wouldn't get covid even though it was all on record.

[nobody 2,564]

By the way, folks.  People like to throw out that term gaslighting, but this is gaslighting.

The administration and CDC and Pfizer all said you wouldn't get covid.  

Everyone still got covid.

Now gutter wants to point to vaccines that have 97% effectivity and say, guys no vaccine is perfect, and no one said you wouldn't get covid. 

If there was a bonus in it for him, he'd tell you cyanide is good for you.  He's no different than the tobacco companies.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 minute ago, nobody said:

Bullshìt.  I posted that I wasn't getting a shot because the shots were obviously not preventing people from getting covid, and people like you said that was dumb because trials.  

It only took a couple of months or so though for the truth to become self-evident.  Then like a good little pharma corporate drone, you swallowed that new narrative and pretended no one ever said people wouldn't get covid even though it was all on record.

No it's not bullshit, you can go research the efficacy of those vaccines I listed, plus others, and how they don't provide "immunity" the way you people think they should.  You just never questioned it because we never had a pandemic.

You can't argue with the trails, unless you have the balls to say they were cooked, but I'm sure you won't go that far or else you look like a total psycho instead of just a misled pawn.

And yes people said that if you got the vaccine then you won't get covid, that was wrong then, it should have never been communicated that way.  I also don't understand why you people still cry about it.