False. Pfizer alone will manufacture 2.5 billion doses this year, 3 billion next year. Considering EU/US already at 50-60% vacicnated, there are a lot of doses for the rest of the world.
Moderna will likely have similar production. The other simpler ones even more.
> If it is true that only unvaccinated people generates new dangerous versions of the virus
You get infected, virus can mutate, it's that simple.
> which is completely false since leaky vaccines can cause enhanced versions of the virus
You do realize you are not on reddit or an anti-vax forum?
If yes, please back up this statement with proper scientific sources.
If in good faith, for your own well-being please get out of that conspiracy theory rabbit-hole
Anyway I am sorry I didn't share an article about what I mentioned, I thought it was known enough to not need an article. (I might say the same about your numbers)
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/info:doi/10.13...
The journal you reference studies Marek's disease in chicken. The vaccine does not prevent transmission (which farmers found good enough). As such, all vaccinated chicken can get the virus but dont get sick and still transmit it.
That is irrlevant since, its a study on chicken, with a vaccine that wouldn't be approved for humans. Also all vaccines stop transmission with 90-95% or less for poorer vaccines (you are 95% less likely to catch it)
All the study shows is the need to vaccinate everyone and extinguish the virus same as polio before it evolves.
As for numbers source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-09/biontech-...
As for difficulty distributing vaccines in Africa. Where there's a need people will figure out a way.
But you are correct that the lower the transmission rate from vaccinated people, the lower the risk of enhanced viruses.
But your 95% is debatable. The number goes drastically down depending on which vaccine you use, the new strains, and probably time.
My point is that the myth that unvaccinated people are the part of the population creating enhanced variants is false. Before the vaccination propaganda started it was known to everyone that isolating the sick tends to forces the virus to evolve in less dangerous strains.
Incorrect. By logic, 95% (or whatever % you want) of the vaccinated population will not catch virus. As such, virus cannot evolve in them. Logical right?
This is what they study says.
> ... anti-disease vaccines that do not prevent transmission ...
The vaccines we have PREVENT transmission with various effectiveness. The vaccine in study did NOT. Since viruses could still infect vaccinated chicken, it evolved.
But the final point I was trying to pass is that isolation of the sick will slowly push the virus to evolve in more contagious but less risky variants. Undetected infections in the vaccinated might cause strains that evade the vaccine and possibly be more dangerous (because of the lack of symptoms and isolation.)
I bet you would like to go back in time and tell the people that vaccinated against polio that they were doing it wrong too?
We are vaccinating to stop the pandemic.
India is an example what happens without vaccines btw
tot cases/1M pop -> usa 104525 india 22200 deaths/1M pop -> usa 1872 india 295
There is no single country in asia that did as bad as the USA in the deaths department. What's now your next extravagant excuse? That the usa has been overcounting its deaths to scare its people into covid mrna therpies?
I know people that have lost family members there. They were struggling to get them spots in hospitals, everything is mess of corruption, under reporting, overflowed hospitals.
They're not even testing properly... See the airplane full of corona positive people with negative 'PCR' tests.
I can't tell how much of it is undercounting in India, how much is overcounting in the USA, and how much of it is that the friends and family networks in India count hundreds of people as opposed to the westerner ones.
It's also easy to have good numbers if you issue negative results without doing the actual tests and if you count the deaths as that of something else.
Hints of the false tests are:
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/20/49-passengers-on-in...
- all of the ones that were positive had negative PCR tests... done in india
Similar things were happening in Communist Romania, hence my skepticism of India's number (back then - record "harvests", everybody well fed and happy, etc, meanwhile everyone was starving as crops were sold off on external markets)
Either way, best of luck, this discussion was fun for a while.
I mean, I agree that official data can be forged and should be taken with a grain of salt but come on. You can do better than this.
Also it has been proven that there is a strong inverse correlation between vitamin D levels and covid severity. If we assume that you are right and many more people died in India, how can you prove that it's because the vaccine that in Europe the mortality is so much lower?
https://academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article/doi/10.1210/cl... + https://revista-fi.com.br/upload_arquivos/201606/20160600681... + https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S24054...
In April 1955, soon after mass polio vaccination began in the US, the Surgeon General began to receive reports of patients who contracted paralytic polio about a week after being vaccinated with Salk polio vaccine from the Cutter pharmaceutical company, with the paralysis limited to the limb the vaccine was injected into. The Cutter vaccine had been used in vaccinating 200,000 children in the western and midwestern United States.[76] Later investigations showed that the Cutter vaccine had caused 40,000 cases of polio, killing 10.[76] In response the Surgeon General pulled all polio vaccines made by Cutter Laboratories from the market, but not before 250 cases of paralytic illness had occurred. Wyeth polio vaccine was also reported to have paralyzed and killed several children. It was soon discovered that some lots of Salk polio vaccine made by Cutter and Wyeth had not been properly inactivated, allowing live poliovirus into more than 100,000 doses of vaccine.
> The inactivated polio vaccines are very safe
2. Do you have to worry about polio now?, no, why?
3. We have processes in place to verify vaccines, that's why you got news about janssen or whatever throwing away millions of doses due to contamination.
These are not vaccines but gene therapies that have never been tested. History proves risks do exist when new therapies are given to people.
I suppose when a normal vaccine like the novavax is coming out there won't be as much opposition.
Alas... not my business... I took the vaccine and there are no side effects. Same for all people I know. Same for countless others.
If you bring up risk, I think a much bigger risk is the virus destroying a good part of your lungs/kidneys/heart/etc... Ending up in ER and dieing...
And without everyone vaccinating it won't disappear. Either way, good luck
There are big doubts about it.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.27.20240309v...
Also: many people that look into the data of how therapies are going, have high hopes for Novavax, which seems very promising and works in a more "classic way". Sure some people will never get inoculated with anything but that's a different story.
> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33909660/
This in essence states that given a immune population (either vaccine or natural), virus will evolve strains to escape anti-bodies... which is logical... if one such variant evolves, it will have a huge potential for multiplication.
It then states that strategies for viral elimination should be diversified... I would argue vaccinating everyone will lead to viral elimination... Otherwise virus is free to mutate in non-immune people.
> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33688681/
It's a study on the viruses natural mutation potential... and it's worrying... nothing regarding vaccines and so on... it's basically a warning that it can evolve to bypass vaccines and we'll be back to square one...
Again... nothing to help your argument about 'leaky' vaccines...
Have you read them yourself?
2)Wrong again: "In the presence of mixed sera from multiple previously infected and/or vaccinated individuals these infections would create the appropriate conditions both for genetic recombination to occur, and for selection to rapidly sort multiple recombination-generated combinations of input immune evasion, cell entry and replication impacting mutations."
My original point is that people that made use of covid mrna therapy can be the source of new versions of the virus (because the therapy doesn't prevent infection nor spreading of the virus).
While it's true that the second study talks about mutations in both vaccinated and unvaccinated hosts, the first is clearly looking into the spike protein based therapy:
"The spike protein receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 is the molecular target for many vaccines and antibody-based prophylactics aimed at bringing COVID-19 under control. Such a narrow molecular focus raises the specter of viral immune evasion as a potential failure mode for these biomedical interventions."
Here's the flaw in your argument. All vaccines provide immunity so the study does not apply.
> because the therapy doesn't prevent infection nor spreading of the virus)
Wrong. Biontech - 95% of the population is immune. It prevents spread to 95% of vaccinated people. The rest for some reason or another it doesn't work.
So you build your whole argument on a logical fallacy.
I think I repeated this a few times so no point in continuing if you can't wrap your head around this.
95% is based on faulty/old data.
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...
Oh man... so you do agree with me it prevents infection...
You are contradicting yourself...
So, its not 95 its 64, it still gives immunity... check mate?
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm
If it prevents infection in 64% of cases it doesn't grant immunity.
64% or 95% or whatever of the population are IMMUNE.
It's not 'prevent infection 64% of the timr' as you would in a videogame... It's 'get vaccinated and you have X% chance to develop antibodies, if you do, you are immune.'
And this sentence is from the study. A study about Covid "vaccines". Not me.
And those vaccines are which?, does the study allege any of the current vaccines does not provide immunity?, is so please put the quote and the study for that.
Otherwise this is a hypothetical... if x then y... when x is false in reality...
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.27.20240309v...
47 in link above is a study of the cruise ship, not what you think.
If you meant the actual link above, it clearly states vaccines give immunity but it might be waning, i.e: won't last, same as natural immunity
Best of luck, thought I might help with your logic, but I admit defeat there.