304 replies to this topic

[geo12the]

geo12the, on 24 Mar 2021 - 08:29 AM, said:

They talked about this on This week in virology (TWIV) a few weeks ago. The consensus of the this week in TWIV nerds is that there is no need to wait if you have been recently infected. 

 

They may be completely right on this, but since your immunity from being infected is going to last at least several months, I would play it safe and wait as the immunologist suggests.

https://www.foxnews....e-size-fits-all

 

My original post was not accurate.  I just listened to the TWIV from last Saturday and they discussed this in depth. They recommend that if you are sick with any illness you should not get vaccinated because it is hard on your immune system.  If you have COVID they recommend waiting one month after testing negative before getting vaccinated (applies to the first or second dose)

 

 

[xEva]

 

 

 

But whoever is right, I would err on the side of caution and wait.  If it were me, I would wait and take the sputnik shot.

 

 

Being in the US, how would you obtain Sputnik-V?

What, travel to Mexico?

 

[geo12the]

 

 

But whoever is right, I would err on the side of caution and wait.  If it were me, I would wait and take the sputnik shot.

 

The Russians are pushing the propaganda, they have been effective at manipulating  segments of the US population, but why on earth would you believe them? I don't understand. The Moderna and Pfizer are super effective and the fact that they cause side effects is an indication they are working. Why believe Putin's propaganda?

[xEva]

I happen to know lots about Russia and trust their scientists. USSR/Russia  has a long history of developing effective and safe vaccines. I believe Sputnik is the safest vaccine.  

 

re propaganda, you may wanna take a fresher look at your own sources of info about Russia

[geo12the]

I happen to know lots about Russia and trust their scientists. USSR/Russia  has a long history of developing effective and safe vaccines. I believe Sputnik is the safest vaccine.  

 

re propaganda, you may wanna take a fresher look at your own sources of info about Russia

 

 

At the end of day vaccines work or not and the published evidence suggests Sputnik V works AND is safe and effective. I am not questioning if it works and if it is safe. But I don't believe for a second that Sputnik is superior to the vaccines developed in the west. Russia has an active propaganda machine, even a "Troll farm" to spread disinformation. It has actively been spreading propaganda against the west-developed vaccines. 

 

https://www.politifa...-disinformatio/

https://fortune.com/...ial-media-star/

https://www.wsj.com/...say-11615129200

[Gal220]

At the end of day vaccines work or not and the published evidence suggests Sputnik V works AND is safe and effective. I am not questioning if it works and if it is safe. But I don't believe for a second that Sputnik is superior to the vaccines developed in the west. 

 

But is it less toxic?  The mRNA manufacturers would not even answer the question about a known safety issue.  I think they are a terrible country, very anti-communist here.  I hate seeing all the google, facebook, twitter, amazon censorship.. people are quietly submitting to communist rule.  But all that aside, Trump should have started the testing on this when it became available.  Politics is again killing people.

 

Hopefully the lipid nanoparticles are no big deal, but the lack of transparency makes no sense... they still want us to take the shot.

 

Bottom of the article

Regulators and manufacturers contacted by The BMJ for this article did not wish to address any of the questions raised by Ulm’s rapid response

[xEva]

I wike it how quickly you went from Putin's propaganda to not questioning the safety!

 

But what makes you so certain that vaccines developed in the west are superior? You mean because they are based on the latest technology?

 

I agree with you and say that that's exactly the problem. We do not know the long-term effects:

 

a) Where do lipid particles go and for how long they linger?

 

b) The linear DNA contaminants are really scary! 

 

c) It's concerning that the initial trials were done with specially produced "super-clean" vaccines, an expensive process that had to be compromised when it came to mass-production.

 

 

In contrast, Sputnik is based on the old, well known and used throughout many decades technology. Its only "novelty" is that human adenoviruses were genetically modified to produce sars-cov2 proteins -- while all the rest, from what side effects to expect to how to mass produce it, is same old same old.

 

 

Maybe 5-10 years from now it will turn out that indeed Pfizer and ModeRNA vaccines are superior in some way. But with info available now, given the choice, I'd go for Sputnik, for now.

 

 

The Russians are pushing the propaganda, they have been effective at manipulating  segments of the US population, but why on earth would you believe them? I don't understand. The Moderna and Pfizer are super effective and the fact that they cause side effects is an indication they are working. Why believe Putin's propaganda?

 

 

At the end of day vaccines work or not and the published evidence suggests Мытищи. I am not questioning if it works and if it is safe. But I don't believe for a second that Sputnik is superior to the vaccines developed in the west. Russia has an active propaganda machine, even a "Troll farm" to spread disinformation. It has actively been spreading propaganda against the west-developed vaccines. 

 

https://www.politifa...-disinformatio/

https://fortune.com/...ial-media-star/

https://www.wsj.com/...say-11615129200

 

[geo12the]

I wike it how quickly you went from Putin's propaganda to not questioning the safety!

 

But what makes you so certain that vaccines developed in the west are superior? You mean because they are based on the latest technology?

 

I agree with you and say that that's exactly the problem. We do not know the long-term effects:

 

a) Where do lipid particles go and for how long they linger?

 

b) The linear DNA contaminants are really scary! 

 

c) It's concerning that the initial trials were done with specially produced "super-clean" vaccines, an expensive process that had to be compromised when it came to mass-production.

 

 

In contrast, Sputnik is based on the old, well known and used throughout many decades technology. Its only "novelty" is that human adenoviruses were genetically modified to produce sars-cov2 proteins -- while all the rest, from what side effects to expect to how to mass produce it, is same old same old.

 

 

Maybe 5-10 years from now it will turn out that indeed Pfizer and ModeRNA vaccines are superior in some way. But with info available now, given the choice, I'd go for Sputnik, for now.

 

"old, well known and used throughout many decades technology" does not mean better or safer. I personally feel safer being vaccinated with mRNA that causes your body to temporarily make COVID Spike protein than to be vaccinated with a recombinant hybrid virus. Not saying that that the Sputnik technology is bad or unsafe but I think the mRNA approach is more precise. The scare tactics against the mRNA viruses I don't believe.  Just my personal opinion. mRNA vaccines have been studied in clinical trials for other viruses and for cancer going back at least to 2017 or earlier. If you search PubMed you can find lots of pre-COVID papers on mRNA vaccines. 

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/33632261/

[xEva]

"old, well known and used throughout many decades technology" does not mean better or safer. I personally feel safer being vaccinated with mRNA that causes your body to temporarily make COVID Spike protein than to be vaccinated with a recombinant hybrid virus. Not saying that that the Sputnik technology is bad or unsafe but I think the mRNA approach is more precise. The scare tactics against the mRNA viruses I don't believe.  Just my personal opinion. mRNA vaccines have been studied in clinical trials for other viruses and for cancer going back at least to 2017 or earlier. If you search PubMed you can find lots of pre-COVID papers on mRNA vaccines. 
 
https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/33632261/

 
 
re" mRNA vaccines have been studied in clinical trials for other viruses and for cancer going back at least to 2017 or earlier."
 
mRNA vaccines that have been studied have never been produced on mass scale.
 
 
re ""old, well known and used throughout many decades technology" does not mean better or safer."
 

better or safer than what? It is a comparison between a known and an unknown. We will know though, in a few years.

[Gal220]

Couple of outlets covering data from Kings College, more side effects(3x more likely) if already infected.

Covid vaccine side effects up to three times more common in those who have had virus

Patients who have had Covid more likely to suffer vaccine side effects

Mercola

The latest data from the King's College ZOE app, which has logged details from more than 700,000 vaccinations, found those with a prior infection were far more likely to report side effects than people who have not had the virus. The difference between the two was particularly pronounced among those who had been given the Pfizer jab. More severe side effects are often a sign of better immunity, and emerging research suggests just one dose of vaccine gives a similar protective effect to two doses in people who have had a previous infection.

 

As already mentioned, Noorchashm thinks people should be tested

Noorchashm is now pushing for the implementation of a prevaccine screening campaign (#ScreenB4Vaccine), using PCR or rapid antigen testing to determine whether the individual has an active infection, and an IgG antibody test to determine past infection. If either test is positive, he recommends delaying vaccination for a minimum of three to six months to allow your IgG levels to wane. At that point, he recommends testing your blood IgG level and use that as a guide to decide the timing of your vaccination.

 

Women far more likely to have a negative reaction, I have seen this in the Mexico and EU data as well.

The King's research showed that women were twice as likely as men to suffer side effects from the Pfizer jab and around 50 per cent more likely from the AstraZeneca vaccine

 

Edited by Gal220, 30 March 2021 - 09:45 PM.

[Heisok]

Hi geo12the,

 

Following the timeline since the initial post, did you get number 2 if you want to share? Anybody know somebody who shared second dose experiences?

 

I also wonder if there might be a slightly different injection site discomfort or whatever effect if 2nd doses are given to the other arm.

 

Thanks.

 

[geo12the]

Hi geo12the,

 

Following the timeline since the initial post, did you get number 2 if you want to share? Anybody know somebody who shared second dose experiences?

 

I also wonder if there might be a slightly different injection site discomfort or whatever effect if 2nd doses are given to the other arm.

 

Thanks.

 

Got my second shot last Friday morning. I got it in the same arm.  I felt very energized Friday evening but my arm was hurting. My arm was very painful and I had trouble sleeping. Pain was slightly worse than the first shot. Saturday I felt mild body achiness and a mild headache and fatigued. I am not sure if the fatigue was caused by the shot or lack of sleep. I think probably both. By Sunday I felt 100%  back to normal. My Mom and sister both had worse reactions to the second shot: fever, chills and felt crappy. My dad had no side effects.  My Husband got his shot yesterday and only had some soreness in his arm. A good friend got it Monday and also only had some soreness in his arm. They say the side effects are worse in women and that certainly is what I have observed among the people I know who got their second shot.     

[Lazarus Long]

I had my second shot of the Pfizer vaccine a week ago.

After the first shot (which was almost painless in itself) I developed muscle pain after about 4 to 5 hours. I took acetaminophen and experienced some relief. What I did experience was serious fatigue. It began toward the evening of the shot and was more pronounced the day after.

During the night I developed pain at the site of the vaccination, and generalized muscle pain that exacerbated my already present arthritic joint pain. The second day of achiness and fatigue was the most significant, but the effects diminished steadily over the following 2 days, disappearing entirely after 3 days.

I took a different approach to the second shot. The vaccination was administered well and I suffered no significant effects.

Upon getting home I decided that instead of taking Tylenol as a prophylactic, I would eat a THC laced brownie with whose effects I was familiar.

After that, while I was waiting the usual hour or two to experience any effect, I began serious physical activity, and sustained it at a steady, heavy rate for about 4 to 5 hours by splitting, transporting, and stacking about a cord of firewood. During the entire time I didn't even notice the injection or any negative effects.

That night I did notice some stiffness and mild pain in the arm I had received the shot. However, being well exhausted by the physical activity I had performed, I could not discern any fatigue associated with the vaccine.

I woke the next day and noticed some stiffness in the arm, and mild pain at the site of the shot, which all disappeared after a hot shower. However, I did take a 500mg Tylenol in anticipation of continued effects. I then returned to considerable physical activity for the entire day (10 hours) and didn't experience any of the fatigue I had experienced with the first injection. After that I never experienced any more negative effects of the vaccination.

8 days later I'm definitely relieved at being fully vaccinated.

[Heisok]

Hi. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

 

I got the first Moderna shot 2 days ago. I slept about 1 1/2 hours longer than I have recently. I went from about 6 1/2 hours to 8 and 8 1/2 hours. I feel fatigued. (I can not 100% confidently attribute either of these to the vaccine.) I have a pretty sore arm at the injection site. Sore enough that I can not push on it.

 

As an aside, I did not want to get vaccinated.

[Lazarus Long]

Thanks for reminding me.

When I returned home from getting the second shot, I did a few things for a half hour or so, ate that brownie, then lay down and fell asleep for 2-3 hours, before getting up to split wood.

The sleep part is an important detail I suspect.

[Gal220]

Seems like Moderna is the safer choice.

 

Canada data showing Moderna shot has fewer serious side effects

 

From the CDC on page 13

 

 

 

[Lazarus Long]

It's purely anecdotal, but I had Pfizer, my wife and many family and friends had the Moderna. In our group and area we're observing the opposite. Moderna seems to have more side effects, they last longer, may be experienced as more serious, and by more people.

However, that is a totally unscientific observation of 20-30 random members of the community. I'll be curious to read the data in a year or so when it will finally be gathered, vetted, in sufficient numbers, and analyzed scientific manner. What I do hear from too many is the bias to find fault and confuse correlation with causation.

[joelcairo]

Well you're supposed to have side effects - fever, muscle aches, nausea, etc. The whole point of the vaccine is to trigger a strong immune response. If you got both jabs and didn't feel any side effects, you'd legitimately wonder if you are well protected.

[geo12the]

Well you're supposed to have side effects - fever, muscle aches, nausea, etc. The whole point of the vaccine is to trigger a strong immune response. If you got both jabs and didn't feel any side effects, you'd legitimately wonder if you are well protected.

 

 I am not sure about that. There are people who catch the virus and are asymptomatic. Presumably those folks still make antibodies and have an immune response. It could be the same thing with people who are vaccinated but don't get as strong a response. That is just my hypothesis but I am not a virologist or expert on vaccines. 

[joelcairo]

Actually there were studies early on in which people who had mild/asymptomatic cases of COVID-19 did not develop a strong immune response, and therefore might not be well protected against reinfection. Presumably their innate (non-learned) immune system was strong enough to fight off the infection.

 

BTW, I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't talk about the side effects. It's interesting to hear what people are experiencing and I posted something about my own experience somewhere in this forum. It's just that there are certain people conflating normal and expected side effects with which vaccine is the "safest", which I find to be highly misleading.

 

Vaccines against the coronavirus will have side effects – and that’s a good thing

https://www.pbs.org/...ts-a-good-thing

 

Edited by joelcairo, 04 April 2021 - 05:15 PM.

[pamojja]

.., which I find to be highly misleading.

Guess its also misleading to assume from the available data, that to get any covid shot in the US is almost 10 times less likely to result in adverse events:

https://www.greenmed...jury-statistics

Can We Trust America's Covid-19 Vaccine Injury Statistics?

Posted on: Monday, March 29th 2021

According to the latest figures derived from the European Medicines Agency's database of Covid-19 vaccine adverse reactions, 162,610 injurious events and 3,964 deaths have now been reported. Among the three major vaccines approved and deployed in Europe, Pfizer-Biontech's vaccine accounts for over two-thirds of reported injuries and mortalities, or 102,100 and 2,540 events respectively. Curiously, women disproportionately account for 77% of adverse events; this greater than 1:4 gender ratio is also being observed for Moderna's and AstraZeneca's vaccines. So far there seems to be no scientific explanation to account for this gender disparity.

Recently, we have been alerted that AZ's adenovirus vaccine is particularly worrisome. It has been less than two months since its administration in the EU commenced; already there have been over 54,000 injuries and 451 deaths registered. Consequently, many European nations, which are more committed to protecting their citizens than increasing pharmaceutical profits, have placed moratoriums on administering AZ's Covid vaccine. In the UK, over 114,000 adverse reactions from AZ's product or 4.6 reactions per 1,000 recipients have been reported.

However, the EU's vaccine injury statistics are disturbing for another reason. It seems very apparent in our review of government and institutional figures that the EU has a far more robust and accurate vaccine injury reporting system in place. Given that the US started vaccinating adults against SARS-CoV-2 before the EU, we would expect to observe the number of reported adverse effects higher or at least proportionate. However, this is not the case. Since December 14, 2020, the CDC's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has only reported 44,606 adverse events and 2,050 deaths - a small fraction compared to Europe and where the average European citizen is generally healthier and where far fewer doses have been administered.

Consider two other anomalies. According to Oxford University's global Covid-19 vaccine tracker, as of March 27th, the US has administered over 136 million doses, which accounts for about 25 percent of all Covid-19 vaccines administered worldwide. On the other hand, the EU nations have only administered 66 million doses -- less than a half compared to the US. In addition, the US vaccination rate is now approximately 41 per 100 Americans. EU nations have individually vaccinated 17 per 100 citizens or less. Therefore, why is there such an enormous discrepancy of adverse vaccine reactions between the US and EU? The EU is reporting a 0.2 percent adverse reaction rate whereas the US is claiming only 0.03 percent, almost a ten-fold difference.

Various studies have estimated that only between 1 to 10 percent of vaccine injuries are reported in VAERS. In the past, the CDC has relied upon the conservative 10 percent estimate, which may account for the ten-fold discrepancy in adverse Covid-19 vaccine events in the EU and US...

Edited by pamojja, 04 April 2021 - 08:21 PM.

[Gal220]

It's just that there are certain people conflating normal and expected side effects with which vaccine is the "safest", which I find to be highly misleading.

 

Its the only thing I care about, if I wind up having to get a vaccine for travel reasons, I am going to take the safest one possible.   I was already doing the I-mask protocol(mutli, quercetin, melatonin) for other health reasons before this mess started.  Anyone under 65 has no reason to fear covid.

 

This is exactly what the Health Ministries in Canada and Germany have concluded, they nixed the AZ shot for those under 60 over a small chance of blood clots.  I dont mind anyone disagreeing with them, but corona was not going to kill any of the women under 55 that the AZ shot wound up killing.

But they found that if there is indeed an imbalance, it’s most noticeable in the younger age cohort and not in the older. The PEI mentioned today that of the 31 cases they have analyzed, 29 of them have been women, which certainly seems significant as well.

 

It would be really nice if they would give out vaccine passes for one shot of Moderna or Pfizer, avoid the worst of the side effects. Some media outlets are already noting UK did it smarter than us

 

I will wait around as long as possible, hopefully there is a clear winner in terms of safety if I have to take it.

https://www.greenmed...jury-statistics

Thanks for this link !

 

EU database is missing shot totals, but some countries are listed here if  you want to do some calculations.

Edited by Gal220, 04 April 2021 - 10:26 PM.

[joelcairo]

... Anyone under 65 has no reason to fear covid.

 

Hmm, tell this to the Vancouver Canucks hockey team. More than 20 players and coaches have tested positive this week, all I believe for the Brazilian P1 variant. Many are seriously ill and several are said to be on IV drips (but not hospitalized).

[Gal220]

Havent looked into this variant much, Ive been sold on the H202 therapy.  If I did get the vax, it would because of travel.

 

Ive wondered about some athletics, if they are open to worse outcomes since they push so hard. 

Hockey players are in such a sport, they do shifts around 47 seconds before they swap out. Pushing themselves to exhaustion.

[pamojja]

They said it would not prevent infections..
 
 

INTERNATIONAL

CCP Virus Variant Affects Vaccinated People More Than Unvaccinated People: Study
April 11, 2021 18:37, Last Updated: April 11, 2021 20:04
By Jack Phillips
 
A study from Tel Aviv University found that a South African variant of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus affects people vaccinated with the Pfizer shot more than unvaccinated people.


The study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, indicated that the B.1.351 variant of the virus—also known as the novel coronavirus—was found eight times more than individuals who were unvaccinated, or 5.4 percent against 0.7 percent. Clalit Health Services, a top Israeli health-care provider, also helped in the study.
 
“We found a disproportionately higher rate of the South African variant among people vaccinated with a second dose, compared to the unvaccinated group,” said Adi Stern of Tel Aviv University. “This means that the South African variant is able, to some extent, to break through the vaccine’s protection.”
 
The study looked at 400 people who received at least one shot of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and had contracted the COVID-19 variant and compared them to the same number of people who were infected and unvaccinated. Moderna’s vaccine is also used in Israel, but it was not included in the study.
 
“It is the first in the world to be based on real-world data, showing that the vaccine is less effective against the South Africa variant, compared to both the original virus and the British variant,” said Professor Ran Balicer, director of research at Clalit, according to news reports.
 
Stern said the study’s findings came as a surprise.
 
“Based on patterns in the general population, we would have expected just one case of the South African variant, but we saw eight,” Stern told the Times of Israel. “Obviously, this result didn’t make me happy.” He added, “Even if the South African variant does break through the vaccine’s protection, it has not spread widely through the population.”
 
He continued: “These preliminary findings necessitates close continued attention to the dissemination of this strain in Israel, emphasizing the need for epidemiological monitoring and systematic sequencing, in order to contain further spread of the South African variant in Israel.”
 
The South African variant accounted for less than one percent of all COVID-19 cases in Israel, reported AFP, citing the study.
 
“This means that the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine, though highly protective, probably does not provide the same level of protection against the South African (B.1.351) variant of the coronavirus,” the study said.
 
Israel, separately, has rolled out a so-called “vaccine passport” system that allows people who have been vaccinated privileges over individuals who are not vaccinated. Such systems have been criticized by civil liberties groups, saying it would be an infringement on people’s rights, including privacy, and would potentially create a two-tiered class system of vaccinated and unvaccinated people.
 
The Epoch Times has contacted Pfizer for comment.
 

View on theepochtimes.com

Edited by pamojja, 12 April 2021 - 09:07 AM.

[Gal220]

They said it would not prevent infections..

This will just lead to the first booster for Pfizer

[geo12the]

They said it would not prevent infections..
 
 

 

The mRNA vaccines are about 90% effective. That means 10% of people may get the virus and that is a large number of people considering how many people are getting vaccinated. It is not particularly surprising that vaccinated people would get the variants more than they would against the standard circulating strains.   You would predict that. The Epoch times is not a reliable news source and has a history of spreading misinformation. It's a joke newspaper. It's not surprising they would try and misrepresent this study and make it seem more nefarious than it actually is.  

 

https://en.wikipedia...The_Epoch_Times

[Gal220]

Lots of chatter on Reddit about heavy periods for women, not sure if there is a longecity thread,  Any thoughts?  - Link

 

Most informed page I have seen so far is here - Link

This doctor contacted various people she assumed would be in the know(vaccine makers), but nothing.

 

She suggest

 

The three ways the COVID-19 vaccine could potentially impact menstruation are:  

• Impact on the chemical messaging from the brain to the ovaries. 

• Impact on the chemical messaging from the ovaries to the uterus.

• Impact that directly affects the lining of the uterus

[Droplet]

 

Lots of chatter on Reddit about heavy periods for women, not sure if there is a longecity thread,  Any thoughts?  - Link

 

Most informed page I have seen so far is here - Link

This doctor contacted various people she assumed would be in the know(vaccine makers), but nothing.

 

She suggest

 

The three ways the COVID-19 vaccine could potentially impact menstruation are:  

• Impact on the chemical messaging from the brain to the ovaries. 

• Impact on the chemical messaging from the ovaries to the uterus.

• Impact that directly affects the lining of the uterus

 

 

I'm female and so far, my periods have not changed in any way. My second dose is due on 15th May 2021. Will mention if anything does change.
 

[kurdishfella]

can parents force their kids under 18 to take vaccine? im trying to convince my parents not to take it and they arent in risk group yet them and me who is 23 got a mail from hospital for free vaccine. wtf why would they ask me.. do they base it on my journal. they tryna kill all immigrant and criminals etc first

Edited by kurdishfella, 07 May 2021 - 08:27 AM.