Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

Isn't it a bit strange that your deemed safe for 6 months after a positive PCR, but only 5 or 3 from vaccines.

Strange indeed, given it's been found that antibody levels and immunity appear to drop in the previously infected and that this can vary by quite a lot depending on the severity of the infection. IE roughly speaking it seems those with a more protracted and severe illness show more immunity. Plus we also hear that vaccination gives better immunity than natural infection.

Much of the boosters stuff came from Israel who were vaccinating early on with mostly Pfizer and they noted waning immunity and higher intakes into hospital among the elderly and chronically ill. The difference between five months for boosters of Moderna/Pfizer and three months for J&J was down to a single study of the latter involving a little over a hundred American veterans, majority male, average age 61, a third diabetic, over a half obese and over a half who required at least one hospital stay in the previous year for non covid related health problems. Clearly representative. Other far larger studies involving over half a million subjects in a couple of countries by Janssen and independents including the CDC in America showed slightly less protection against hospitalisation and death than Pfizer, but that protection lasted for at least eight months and actually got stronger over that time. They also found the best clinical results and protection from a booster of that vaccine came not at three months, but at eight or more. Janssen only started talking about boosters after Pfizer did. At the time that boosters were mooted, Janssen released their study that said all was pretty good at eight months. So which study is the more accurate one?

I did. In 2015 fourteen children under the age of 15 died on our roads. In 2020 and 21 seven have died of Covid and that's including those up to age 25. A tragedy for that seven and thier loved ones*, but an absolutely tiny risk for those under the age of 25. In the US of A with more vaccine refuseniks and more obesity and type two diabetes in kids the death toll is around 700, out of 73 million kids under the age of 18. Them's the actual facts I'm afraid.

*I have to keep saying that or some Maude Flanders with an attack of the emotionals will accuse me of being callous.

It's just an arbitrary amount of time that covers most situations, the 5 months is really because a lot who got AZ didn't finish their course till June or July (due to the extra weeks added when figuring out clotting issues). Ideally it would be an antibody level test to figure out who needs a booster or not, but that's not that practical (as is figuring out if people infected got a severe enough dose to last even the 6 months). As it's deemed safe, it doesn't seem to matter how exact it is.

My issue is the flimflam from politicians and their advisors based on really flimsy even shítty science. If a group of studies involving hundreds of thousands over eight months from first clinical trials to the end of this summer says X and another single study of a hundred half fecked indivduals over the course of three months where the authors themselves state has limitations, I know let's go with that one. It's... I think the technical term is Askmebollix. 😁

As for safe; the single biggest reason Moderna et al went into what was the poor cousin of vaccine research after their other trials of mRNA therapies were stopped because no way were they going to even risk human trials because the animal trials showed such serious risks, was that vaccines were seen as safer because of dosage levels and number of doses. Yet it seems outside of cross eyed loonies on Arsebook nobody is asking hang on with regard to boosters of the same therapies potentially every few months.

Similarly with the rules (close at midnight, Netherlands 5-5, wears masks in these places but not these, COVID cert here but not there), they're more based on practicalities that they may reduce R enough to work than being the "best" restriction (lock everyone in the world away from each other for 2-4 weeks). Even the pantomime advice while not being officially a restriction has had an effect and will stop some infections happening (at cost to the businesses involved of course).

As I said earlier if this was airborne pneumonic plague, which environment would you feel safer in, a local newsagents with a mask on or a full pub without? If you were in charge Astro, which environment would you call for more precautions in? I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't point at the shops. We even have real world evidence in this. Throughout this pandemic I've yet to see an example of clusters coming from a retail environment even pre masks etc, but pubs, clubs, concerts and sporting events have certainly been implicated. IMHO it's almost entirely a political and economic sop. As is transmission magically stopping at the school gates.