NBA protocols/Covid/Vaccine - Discussion thread

[ZB9]

okay but are they different product, different formulations? Are you suggesting FDA approved an identical product to protect Pfizer?

It sounds like you need to research this.

When you discover that im right and that Pfizer and much of the media has been misleading people about what was FDA approved, will you still shill for them?

Right out of the playbook. Make an outrageous (and obviously false) claim and, when asked for sources, tell you to research it yourself. It gets tiresome.

It seems that you are fine with BEING the research. That is ok.

[michaelm]

The one available to the public has not been FDA approved.

The main difference is that the one that was FDA approved will not have a liability shield.

okay but are they different product, different formulations? Are you suggesting FDA approved an identical product to protect Pfizer?

It sounds like you need to research this.

When you discover that im right and that Pfizer and much of the media has been misleading people about what was FDA approved, will you still shill for them?

And of course the Pfizer vaccine is the only one and no other countries have scientists or regulatory bodies competent to assess therapies or vaccines. It is even vaguely possible vaccination was not invented in the USA.

[ZB9]

okay but are they different product, different formulations? Are you suggesting FDA approved an identical product to protect Pfizer?

It sounds like you need to research this.

When you discover that im right and that Pfizer and much of the media has been misleading people about what was FDA approved, will you still shill for them?

And of course the Pfizer vaccine is the only one and no other countries have scientists or regulatory bodies competent to assess therapies or vaccines. It is even vaguely possible vaccination was not invented in the USA.

I didnt say that.

I am in the US where our drug companies are very corrupt. In the US we only have access to those vaccines.

[xdrta+]

It sounds like you need to research this.

When you discover that im right and that Pfizer and much of the media has been misleading people about what was FDA approved, will you still shill for them?

Right out of the playbook. Make an outrageous (and obviously false) claim and, when asked for sources, tell you to research it yourself. It gets tiresome.

It seems that you are fine with BEING the research. That is ok.

Well, I have researched your claim. The two vaccine theory seems to be your own, but it's related to a theory popular on certain sites in August and September that the FDA didn't really give full apporoval to the Covid-19 vaccine because....well, reasons. It surfaced on a Candace Owens page, gained traction on 4chan, was promoted on a Steve Bannon talk show, but has pretty much fizzled since. It's been debunked over and over, of course.

Perhaps your confusion stems from the fact that what was known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is being marketed under the name of Comirnaty, and you assumed that was a different vaccine. It's not. Hope that helps.

[ZB9]

Right out of the playbook. Make an outrageous (and obviously false) claim and, when asked for sources, tell you to research it yourself. It gets tiresome.

It seems that you are fine with BEING the research. That is ok.

Well, I have researched your claim. The two vaccine theory seems to be your own, but it's related to a theory popular on certain sites in August and September that the FDA didn't really give full apporoval to the Covid-19 vaccine because....well, reasons. It surfaced on a Candace Owens page, gained traction on 4chan, was promoted on a Steve Bannon talk show, but has pretty much fizzled since. It's been debunked over and over, of course.

Perhaps your confusion stems from the fact that what was known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is being marketed under the name of Comirnaty, and you assumed that was a different vaccine. It's not. Hope that helps.

The Comirnaty vax is different than the BioNTech vax and the Comirnaty vax is not available in the US.

The Comirnaty vax is the one that was FDA approved. There are no FDA approved covid vaccines available in the US.

[nikster]

You asked this on page 52 and i answered you with the definition of vaccines.

ah, so you seem to think immunity means it needs to be 100% effective

nope

So how doesnt the covid vaccine meet the definition? It does provide immunity

[xdrta+]

It seems that you are fine with BEING the research. That is ok.

Well, I have researched your claim. The two vaccine theory seems to be your own, but it's related to a theory popular on certain sites in August and September that the FDA didn't really give full apporoval to the Covid-19 vaccine because....well, reasons. It surfaced on a Candace Owens page, gained traction on 4chan, was promoted on a Steve Bannon talk show, but has pretty much fizzled since. It's been debunked over and over, of course.

Perhaps your confusion stems from the fact that what was known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is being marketed under the name of Comirnaty, and you assumed that was a different vaccine. It's not. Hope that helps.

The Comirnaty vax is different than the BioNTech vax and the Comirnaty vax is not available in the US.

The Comirnaty vax is the one that was FDA approved. There are no FDA approved covid vaccines available in the US.

So that is your confusion. Wow. What don't you get about Pfizer marketing the same vaccine under a name? From the FDA.gov site:

"The vaccine has been known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and will now be marketed as Comirnaty, for the prevention of COVID-19 disease in individuals 16 years of age and older."

Pfizer, the FDA, and everyone else involved say the same thing. The same vaccine has been given a more marketable name. Why is that so hard to understand?

[nikster]

It seems that you are fine with BEING the research. That is ok.

Well, I have researched your claim. The two vaccine theory seems to be your own, but it's related to a theory popular on certain sites in August and September that the FDA didn't really give full apporoval to the Covid-19 vaccine because....well, reasons. It surfaced on a Candace Owens page, gained traction on 4chan, was promoted on a Steve Bannon talk show, but has pretty much fizzled since. It's been debunked over and over, of course.

Perhaps your confusion stems from the fact that what was known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is being marketed under the name of Comirnaty, and you assumed that was a different vaccine. It's not. Hope that helps.

The Comirnaty vax is different than the BioNTech vax and the Comirnaty vax is not available in the US.

The Comirnaty vax is the one that was FDA approved. There are no FDA approved covid vaccines available in the US.

So whats the difference between Comirnaty and the BioNTech? And if it was different it would actually require a whole new set of clinical trials, so where are the trials it was approved on?

[Cartuse]

Well, I have researched your claim. The two vaccine theory seems to be your own, but it's related to a theory popular on certain sites in August and September that the FDA didn't really give full apporoval to the Covid-19 vaccine because....well, reasons. It surfaced on a Candace Owens page, gained traction on 4chan, was promoted on a Steve Bannon talk show, but has pretty much fizzled since. It's been debunked over and over, of course.

Perhaps your confusion stems from the fact that what was known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is being marketed under the name of Comirnaty, and you assumed that was a different vaccine. It's not. Hope that helps.

The Comirnaty vax is different than the BioNTech vax and the Comirnaty vax is not available in the US.

The Comirnaty vax is the one that was FDA approved. There are no FDA approved covid vaccines available in the US.

So that is your confusion. Wow. What don't you get about Pfizer marketing the same vaccine under a name? From the FDA.gov site:

"The vaccine has been known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and will now be marketed as Comirnaty, for the prevention of COVID-19 disease in individuals 16 years of age and older."

Pfizer, the FDA, and everyone else involved say the same thing. The same vaccine has been given a more marketable name. Why is that so hard to understand?

https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/qa-comirnaty-covid-19-vaccine-mrna

How is Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) related to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine?

The FDA-approved Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA), made by Pfizer for BioNTech and the FDA-authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under EUA have the same formulation and can be used interchangeably to provide the COVID-19 vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. For purposes of administration, doses distributed under the EUA are interchangeable with the licensed doses. The Vaccine Information Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers provides additional information about both the approved and authorized vaccines.

I'm not interested in getting into that debate, but I though I should point that out to help with the confusion. Maybe having the same formulation means it's the exact same thing, or maybe it's a wording loophole. I'm not qualified to assess that.

Also it says one is authorized and the other approved. Again, wording which I'm not qualified to interpret.

[ZB9]

ah, so you seem to think immunity means it needs to be 100% effective

nope

So how doesnt the covid vaccine meet the definition? It does provide immunity

Lol it does?

Ok then take off your 5 masks and stop worrying about being infected.

[michaelm]

It sounds like you need to research this.

When you discover that im right and that Pfizer and much of the media has been misleading people about what was FDA approved, will you still shill for them?

And of course the Pfizer vaccine is the only one and no other countries have scientists or regulatory bodies competent to assess therapies or vaccines. It is even vaguely possible vaccination was not invented in the USA.

I didnt say that.

I am in the US where our drug companies are very corrupt. In the US we only have access to those vaccines.

The Pfizer vaccine was approved by European and Australian regulatory bodies. The Australian regulatory body far from rubber stamps therapies approved by the FDA, it is a source of frustration to the drug companies and sometimes to doctors that they insist on their own standards and we don’t have some drugs etc which are available in the USA. I will agree about Pfizer to the extent that what they have probably mainly done is win the publicity war, their vaccine doesn’t seem to even be the best mRNA vaccine. The Astra Zeneca vaccine has been not for profit thus far btw.

It is not all beer and skittles for the pharmaceutical companies, also btw. There are many dead ends while researching/inventing drugs, and it can cost 8 figures to get a drug through the FDA. In my own small field I am definitely not of the view that bigger is better, the big companies are prone to buying up small companies with useful niche products they are proud of, then ceasing production of same because they are insufficiently profitable.

Somewhat ironically I just heard a feature that they finally have a malaria vaccine which they think is useful and is going into clinical use. I have wondered all along about Covid vs malaria which kills hundreds of thousands a year, mostly kids, and has been a scourge for a very long time. I know nothing of the vaccine, but by the standards of you and others on this thread I am not sure why they are bothering, the report said it is only 40% effective and requires 4 doses ( partly joking, malaria is a very different disease and transmitted by mosquitos of course).

[nikster]

nope

So how doesnt the covid vaccine meet the definition? It does provide immunity

Lol it does?

Ok then take off your 5 masks and stop worrying about being infected.

yeah... and its not 100% effective, hence masks until this is under control

[ZB9]

The Comirnaty vax is different than the BioNTech vax and the Comirnaty vax is not available in the US.

The Comirnaty vax is the one that was FDA approved. There are no FDA approved covid vaccines available in the US.

So that is your confusion. Wow. What don't you get about Pfizer marketing the same vaccine under a name? From the FDA.gov site:

"The vaccine has been known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and will now be marketed as Comirnaty, for the prevention of COVID-19 disease in individuals 16 years of age and older."

Pfizer, the FDA, and everyone else involved say the same thing. The same vaccine has been given a more marketable name. Why is that so hard to understand?

https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/qa-comirnaty-covid-19-vaccine-mrna

How is Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) related to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine?

The FDA-approved Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA), made by Pfizer for BioNTech and the FDA-authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under EUA have the same formulation and can be used interchangeably to provide the COVID-19 vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. For purposes of administration, doses distributed under the EUA are interchangeable with the licensed doses. The Vaccine Information Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers provides additional information about both the approved and authorized vaccines.

I'm not interested in getting into that debate, but I though I should point that out to help with the confusion. Maybe having the same formulation means it's the exact same thing, or maybe it's a wording loophole. I'm not qualified to assess that.

Also it says one is authorized and the other approved. Again, wording which I'm not qualified to interpret.

Yea one is approved and the other is not. The other is only allowed in US because of emergency declaration.

Pfizer using misleading wording to market their product? No way

You dont have to be a doctor or scientist to be skeptical of Pfizer.

[ZB9]

So how doesnt the covid vaccine meet the definition? It does provide immunity

Lol it does?

Ok then take off your 5 masks and stop worrying about being infected.

yeah... and its not 100% effective, hence masks until this is under control

Well covid is never going to be zero percent. It's here to stay along with over 200 other pathogens.

People still catch covid with masks. You should wear a hazmat suit. You definitely wont catch it then. Actually, a space suit would be better.

[nikster]

Lol it does?

Ok then take off your 5 masks and stop worrying about being infected.

yeah... and its not 100% effective, hence masks until this is under control

Well covid is never going to be zero percent. It's here to stay along with over 200 other pathogens.

People still catch covid with masks. You should wear a hazmat suit. You definitely wont catch it then. Actually, a space suit would be better.

okay

[Texas Chuck]

Lol it does?

Ok then take off your 5 masks and stop worrying about being infected.

yeah... and its not 100% effective, hence masks until this is under control

Well covid is never going to be zero percent. It's here to stay along with over 200 other pathogens.

People still catch covid with masks. You should wear a hazmat suit. You definitely wont catch it then. Actually, a space suit would be better.

Ah yes the old this doesn't prevent everything so we should do nothing argument. Definitely not reductive or pointless in any way. This is sure to convince people of your position.

When I play hockey sometimes I might still get a concussion if I wear a helmet so I definitely shouldn't bother. Or sometimes in a car accident I still suffer injuries even with my seat belt engaged and the air bags deploy. I should never wear my belt and should disable all airbags. When I'm in extreme cold sometimes I still get frostbite even with quality gloves, I should stop wear any.

It's absurd. We know masks greatly reduce transmission. We should wear them when appropriate. This isn't that hard and it shouldn't have gotten political.

[ZB9]

yeah... and its not 100% effective, hence masks until this is under control

Well covid is never going to be zero percent. It's here to stay along with over 200 other pathogens.

People still catch covid with masks. You should wear a hazmat suit. You definitely wont catch it then. Actually, a space suit would be better.

Ah yes the old this doesn't prevent everything so we should do nothing argument. Definitely not reductive or pointless in any way. This is sure to convince people of your position.

When I play hockey sometimes I might still get a concussion if I wear a helmet so I definitely shouldn't bother. Or sometimes in a car accident I still suffer injuries even with my seat belt engaged and the air bags deploy. I should never wear my belt and should disable all airbags. When I'm in extreme cold sometimes I still get frostbite even with quality gloves, I should stop wear any.

It's absurd. We know masks greatly reduce transmission. We should wear them when appropriate. This isn't that hard and it shouldn't have gotten political.

yea then wear a hazmat suit. It protects 100 percent. Masks do not. Masks dont even work very well and often do more harm than good, not to mention polluting the earth.

Hazmat suit is too extreme? Oh is that where the line is? Says who? Isnt it about preventing covid?

[nikster]

Well covid is never going to be zero percent. It's here to stay along with over 200 other pathogens.

People still catch covid with masks. You should wear a hazmat suit. You definitely wont catch it then. Actually, a space suit would be better.

Ah yes the old this doesn't prevent everything so we should do nothing argument. Definitely not reductive or pointless in any way. This is sure to convince people of your position.

When I play hockey sometimes I might still get a concussion if I wear a helmet so I definitely shouldn't bother. Or sometimes in a car accident I still suffer injuries even with my seat belt engaged and the air bags deploy. I should never wear my belt and should disable all airbags. When I'm in extreme cold sometimes I still get frostbite even with quality gloves, I should stop wear any.

It's absurd. We know masks greatly reduce transmission. We should wear them when appropriate. This isn't that hard and it shouldn't have gotten political.

yea then wear a hazmat suit. It protects 100 percent. Masks do not. Masks dont even work very well and often do more harm than good, not to mention polluting the earth.

Hazmat suit is too extreme? Oh is that where the line is? Says who? Isnt it about preventing covid?

Just proof no point discussing it with this guy. Ignore the evidence masks reduce transmission, make up unfounded claims about harms, draw ridiculous comparisons

[ZB9]

Ah yes the old this doesn't prevent everything so we should do nothing argument. Definitely not reductive or pointless in any way. This is sure to convince people of your position.

When I play hockey sometimes I might still get a concussion if I wear a helmet so I definitely shouldn't bother. Or sometimes in a car accident I still suffer injuries even with my seat belt engaged and the air bags deploy. I should never wear my belt and should disable all airbags. When I'm in extreme cold sometimes I still get frostbite even with quality gloves, I should stop wear any.

It's absurd. We know masks greatly reduce transmission. We should wear them when appropriate. This isn't that hard and it shouldn't have gotten political.

yea then wear a hazmat suit. It protects 100 percent. Masks do not. Masks dont even work very well and often do more harm than good, not to mention polluting the earth.

Hazmat suit is too extreme? Oh is that where the line is? Says who? Isnt it about preventing covid?

Just proof no point discussing it with this guy. Ignore the evidence masks reduce transmission, make up unfounded claims about harms, draw ridiculous comparisons

[nikster]

yea then wear a hazmat suit. It protects 100 percent. Masks do not. Masks dont even work very well and often do more harm than good, not to mention polluting the earth.

Hazmat suit is too extreme? Oh is that where the line is? Says who? Isnt it about preventing covid?

Just proof no point discussing it with this guy. Ignore the evidence masks reduce transmission, make up unfounded claims about harms, draw ridiculous comparisons

You just continue to prove there's no point engaging with you. You really get your clinical information from package inserts?