Vaccine Questions

[ChiliPepperGarage]

I have a couple questions about the vaccine that I can't find answers for on the internet.

If you are currently sick with covid will the vaccine help you? I am assuming the answer is no because if it did then we would not have any more covid deaths.

My other question is how do they test the effectiveness of it? Everything I read says it is 95% effective but how do they test it? Everything I've found only talks about testing for side effects. Do they give the vaccine to someone and then put them in a locked room with a bunch of infected patients and no PPE and then see if they get it or not? Or are they just saying 95% of vaccine recipients have not gotten the virus although they continue to wear mask, social distance, isolate and frequently wash?

Kind of reminds me of the old joke: I hold up a random item (a pen, cup, whatever) and say "This is an elephant repellent". When some asks, "How does that repel elephants?" I reply, "I don't know but you don't see any elephants around here do you?".

I had an appointment for tommorow morning to get the vaccine. I just canceled it.

 

[EmpirE231]

I believe it is “95%” effective after the 2nd dose.
I would think during the trials, after 2 doses, they would inject the virus into people doing the study and they found it to be 95% effective? Not sure exactly, but also find it hard to believe.

a nurse friend of our took her first dose of the vaccine, and about 6-7 days later got COVID. She does work around COVID patients... but pretty crazy to be around it for 9 months, never get it. Finally get a vaccine and then catch it.

 

[charred1]

I am almost positive someone will chime in and argue I am wrong, but here in San Diego my department is administering the vaccine,..not only to our own members but also to many of the other local agencies as well. One of the initial contraindications of getting the vaccine is that no one that has tested positive within 90 days is to be vaccinated. However, the contraindication has been changed to a consideration based on doctor recommendation.

 

[ChiliPepperGarage]

I am almost positive someone will chime in and argue I am wrong, but here in San Diego my department is administering the vaccine,..not only to our own members but also to many of the other local agencies as well. One of the initial contraindications of getting the vaccine is that no one that has tested positive within 90 days is to be vaccinated. However, the contraindication has be changed to a consideration based on doctor recommendation.

Interesting. So are they going to test you before you get the vaccine? The rapid tests aren't conclusive so there really is no point in getting tested.

If you haven't been tested within 90 days will they still give you the vaccine?

I wonder what happens if you are positive and get the vaccine?

 

[charred1]

At this time they are not testing prior to vaccination. This has raised a similar question as yours...what about folks that may have previously had the virus unknowingly or those that are currently asymptomatic with the virus? As a matter a fact, we had a guy at my station this morning, that got the vaccine yesterday and then a few hours later had an asymptotic test (which we offer on a weekly basis). His test came back positive this morning. Not saying that he got the positive from the vaccine...my point is that he got the vaccine while he unknowingly had the virus. We’ll see what the response is now.

 

[jet496]

My other question is how do they test the effectiveness of it? Everything I read says it is 95% effective but how do they test it? Everything I've found only talks about testing

Great question. They say they inject a certain group with vaccine and another with a placebo and then see how many people get sick while out and about in their daily life. They don't inject anybody with the vaccine from what I see. The following is right off the CDC website. It's kind of a joke the way they determine it.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
The first type of study design is called a randomized controlled trial (RCT). In a RCT, volunteers are assigned randomly to receive an influenza vaccine or a placebo (e.g., a shot of saline). Vaccine efficacy is measured by comparing the frequency of influenza illness in the vaccinated and the unvaccinated (placebo) groups. The RCT study design minimizes bias that could lead to invalid study results. Bias is an unintended systematic error in the way researchers select study participants, measure outcomes, or analyze data that can lead to inaccurate results. In a RCT, vaccine allocation is usually double-blinded, which means neither the study volunteers nor the researchers know if a given person has received vaccine or placebo. National regulatory authorities, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States, require RCTs to be conducted and to demonstrate the protective benefits of a new vaccine before the vaccine is licensed for routine use. However, some vaccines are licensed based on RCTs that use antibody response to the vaccine as measured in the laboratory, rather than decreases in influenza disease among people who were vaccinated.

Observational Studies
The second type of study design is an observational study. There are several types of observational studies, including cohort and case-control studies. Observational studies assess how influenza vaccines work by comparing the occurrence of influenza among people who have been vaccinated compared to people not vaccinated. Vaccine effectiveness is the percent reduction in the frequency of influenza illness among vaccinated people compared to people not vaccinated, usually with adjustment for factors (like presence of chronic medical conditions) that are related to both influenza illness and vaccination. (See below for details.)

 

[ChiliPepperGarage]

Great question. They say they inject a certain group with vaccine and another with a placebo and then see how many people get sick while out and about in their daily life. They don't inject anybody with the vaccine from what I see. The following is right off the CDC website. It's kind of a joke the way they determine it.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
The first type of study design is called a randomized controlled trial (RCT). In a RCT, volunteers are assigned randomly to receive an influenza vaccine or a placebo (e.g., a shot of saline). Vaccine efficacy is measured by comparing the frequency of influenza illness in the vaccinated and the unvaccinated (placebo) groups. The RCT study design minimizes bias that could lead to invalid study results. Bias is an unintended systematic error in the way researchers select study participants, measure outcomes, or analyze data that can lead to inaccurate results. In a RCT, vaccine allocation is usually double-blinded, which means neither the study volunteers nor the researchers know if a given person has received vaccine or placebo. National regulatory authorities, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States, require RCTs to be conducted and to demonstrate the protective benefits of a new vaccine before the vaccine is licensed for routine use. However, some vaccines are licensed based on RCTs that use antibody response to the vaccine as measured in the laboratory, rather than decreases in influenza disease among people who were vaccinated.

Observational Studies
The second type of study design is an observational study. There are several types of observational studies, including cohort and case-control studies. Observational studies assess how influenza vaccines work by comparing the occurrence of influenza among people who have been vaccinated compared to people not vaccinated. Vaccine effectiveness is the percent reduction in the frequency of influenza illness among vaccinated people compared to people not vaccinated, usually with adjustment for factors (like presence of chronic medical conditions) that are related to both influenza illness and vaccination. (See below for details.)

If that is the case then the testing is complete bullshit! I've been on numerous covid EMS calls and have not gotten it. So if I get the vaccine now and continue going on covid positive calls they can say, "see, the vaccine has prevented you from getting covid".

The only way to truly test the effectiveness is to have those injected with the vaccine and the placebo patients all go to the exact same places at the same times and then see who gets it and who doesn't. Otherwise, they are just guessing.

 

[jet496]

If that is the case then the testing is complete bullshit! I've been on numerous covid EMS calls and have not gotten it. So if I get the vaccine now and continue going on covid positive calls they can say, "see, the vaccine has prevented you from getting covid".

The only way to truly test the effectiveness is to have those injected with the vaccine and the placebo patients all go to the exact same places at the same times and then see who gets it and who doesn't. Otherwise, they are just guessing.

That's what I think. It's crazy they can even say they've tested it. Here's the ink to CDC (you can't make this stuff up). https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/effectivenessqa.htm

 

[FreeBird236]

If that is the case then the testing is complete bullshit! I've been on numerous covid EMS calls and have not gotten it. So if I get the vaccine now and continue going on covid positive calls they can say, "see, the vaccine has prevented you from getting covid".

The only way to truly test the effectiveness is to have those injected with the vaccine and the placebo patients all go to the exact same places at the same times and then see who gets it and who doesn't. Otherwise, they are just guessing.

The test for Pfizer, 36,000 people, half received the vaccine, the others placebo. results : 9 got covid with the vaccine, 139 got covid with placebo. 95% effective. Obviously the larger the test group the more accurate it becomes.

 

[jet496]

The test for Pfizer, 36,000 people, half received the vaccine, the others placebo. results : 9 got covid with the vaccine, 139 got covid with placebo. 95% effective. Obviously the larger the test group the more accurate it becomes.

Cool. I found that data on their website. Helps make a little more sense of it. Thanks.

 

[FreeBird236]

Cool. Where did you get this data?

First thing that popped up when I googled Pfizer test results. I think it was a publication called the Conversation.

 

[paradise]

The test for Pfizer, 36,000 people, half received the vaccine, the others placebo. results : 9 got covid with the vaccine, 139 got covid with placebo. 95% effective. Obviously the larger the test group the more accurate it becomes.

Question

I thought the Vaccine didn’t stop people from getting or transmitting the disease it only stopped the symptoms? That’s what the US Surgeon General said.

So did they not get it, or didn’t have symptoms? That’s two very different things

 

[FreeBird236]

Question

I thought the Vaccine didn’t stop people from getting or transmitting the disease it only stopped the symptoms? That’s what the US Surgeon General said.

So did they not get it, or didn’t have symptoms? That’s two very different things

That's a good question. out of my wheelhouse, I was just quoting the numbers from the trials. If this is truly the way the vaccine works however, I would say it still proves the effectiveness. There's a lot of talk about viral load, if you're not showing any symptoms, seems you wouldn't be as contagious, but that's a discussion for the experts.

 

[paradise]

That's a good question. out of my wheelhouse, I was just quoting the numbers from the trials. If this is truly the way the vaccine works however, I would say it still proves the effectiveness. There's a lot of talk about viral load, if you're not showing any symptoms, seems you wouldn't be as contagious, but that's a discussion for the experts.

Yeah I don’t know how that works either, just asking the question as it seems a little vague and disingenuous to say it doesn’t stop you from getting it in one breath and the next say it stops 95% from getting it?

I also find the infection rate a little silly too. Even in their placebo group only .7% got it.

 

[FreeBird236]

Yeah I don’t know how that works either, just asking the question as it seems a little vague and disingenuous to say it doesn’t stop you from getting it in one breath and the next say it stops 95% from getting it?

I also find the infection rate a little silly too. Even in their placebo group only 7% got it.

As far as infection rate I guess it would depend on the various locations of the subjects. I remember when Havasu was under 2, now I think it's around 15, and the state is 25. I keep thinking it should start coming down like June and July, but so far no luck.

 

[paradise]

As far as infection rate I guess it would depend on the various locations of the subjects. I remember when Havasu was under 2, now I think it's around 15, and the state is 25. I keep thinking it should start coming down like June and July, but so far no luck.

It’ll never come down... Keep in mind the stat you’re looking at is counting the number of positive tests (or maybe cases) vs the total population (or some other static metric). That number will eventually reach up close to 100%. Just like very few people can say they’ve never had the flu. The difference here is we are testing for this instead of just counting hospitalized cases.

edit: There are three types of lies: Lies, damn lies and statistics. You can make a stat say whatever you want. Right now ‘they’ want the scariest looking one. And with so many people thinking they will die if they get COVID they want to drive home that narrative of 25% of the people are testing positive (insert running around with your hair on fire here )

 

[musicFunsun]

I can get the vaccine at my work however my first thought is to wait because I rarely have patient contact, limited contact with co workers and most likely something better will come out. Decided to ask those in the know and was told that the vaccine will only lessen the symptoms if you get COVID. It does not prevent transmission. Also, no mention of criteria.

 

[ChiliPepperGarage]

The test for Pfizer, 36,000 people, half received the vaccine, the others placebo. results : 9 got covid with the vaccine, 139 got covid with placebo. 95% effective. Obviously the larger the test group the more accurate it becomes.

Did all of those people have the same exposure? Did they all go to the same places at the same time?

So out of 36,000 people, only 148 got covid? That is a 0.4% infection rate.

 

[FreeBird236]

Did all of those people have the same exposure? Did they all go to the same places at the same time?

So out of 36,000 people, only 148 got covid? That is a 0.4% infection rate.

No, No, Yes, Correct. I'm not saying this is good or bad, it's just the way the protocol has usually been done.

 

[t&y]

LOl... it was tested for years... oh I mean at least a full year.. no no... They got stellar results after a couple months so I'm sure it's just fine.

 

[ChiliPepperGarage]

LOl... it was tested for years... oh I mean at least a full year.. no no... They got stellar results after a couple months so I'm sure it's just fine.

It was tested in December 2020 and January 2021. So it was tested two years, right?

 

[traquer]

It was tested in December 2020 and January 2021. So it was tested two years, right?

I work in marketing, this is a good one I'm stealing this next time I need a stat like this

 

[wallnutz]

It was tested in December 2020 and January 2021. So it was tested two years, right?

You passed common core, congrats!

 

[FreeBird236]

I think in China they give half a million the vaccine, half a million not, then inject them all with Covid 19 and see how many die.

 

[t&y]

I think in China they give half a million the vaccine, half a million not, then inject them all with Covid 19 and see how many die.

As scary as that might sound I would not put it past them.

 

[TPC]

This past Wednesday I spent in a 3rd visit to heart specialists.
I had recently, that is before the vaccine, had a full physical for upcoming knee surgery. My heart was healthy, no issues at all.
No family history of heart issues either side.

Two months after the vaccine I was extremely fatigued and it felt like the motor mounts on my heart were broken.

Getting a cardiologist appt was near impossible, read on and you'll see why. USC is booked solid so I had to go elsewhere. But I did it eventually and a good one at that.

He sent me for tests and onto a panel of top cardiologists.
A month later after all the tests I talked to the heart specialists.

The vaccine damaged my upper heart chamber and blocked two nerve pathways and "we're seeing a lot of this" they told me.

I'm not getting the booster, that'll finish me off.

The cardiologists were impressed at my treadmill work. I iron manned it and blew out all the stops for a guy my age. Went the full max for the full time.
In spite of this, I feel like crap all the time. Lack of energy and a pounding chest.

So for those of you ducking the vaccine you very well may be doing the right thing.

 

[regor]

This past Wednesday I spent in a 3rd visit to heart specialists.
I had recently, that is before the vaccine, had a full physical. My heart was healthy, no issues at all.
No family history of heart issues either side.

Two months after the vaccine I was extremely fatigued and it felt like the motor mounts on my heart were broken.

Getting a cardiologist appt was near impossible, read on and you'll see why. USC is booked solid so I had to go elsewhere. But I did it eventually and a good one at that.

He sent me for tests and onto a panel of top cardiologists.
A month later after all the tests I talked to the heart specialists.

The vaccine damaged my upper heart chamber and blocked two nerve pathways and "we're seeing a lot of this" they told me.

I'm not getting the booster, that'll finish me off.

The cardiologists were impressed at my treadmill work. I iron manned it and blew out all the stops for a guy my age.
I feel like crap all the time. Lack of energy and a pounding chest.

So for those if you ducking the vaccine you may very well be doing the right thing.

Sorry to hear that TPC, but thanks for being honest and sharing. Posts like this will save lives.

It's worse with each booster, do NOT get anymore.

 

[musicFunsun]

First hand is the only way we find out about real side effects, thanks for sharing. Sure hope you’re better, soon. My husband was on the fence regarding the vaccine & got the Pfizer because we traveled last week to South Carolina for a wedding. Heart issues in his family.

 

[94Nautique]

The test for Pfizer, 36,000 people, half received the vaccine, the others placebo. results : 9 got covid with the vaccine, 139 got covid with placebo. 95% effective. Obviously the larger the test group the more accurate it becomes.

Thanks for the data.

So, of the placebo group, 18,000 total, only 139 got covid. Thats .77%. Off that less than 1% how many died or were hospitalized. As well, how many of these "positives" were tested positive but were asymptomatic?

For a disease that was supposed to wipe out the world, you would think the "experts" would share this very important data in a complete form. From what I see, a 99.23% of not catching it tells me it aint that bad. If you assume a 1% death rate of the people that caught it, we are looking at .00772% chance of actually dying. I think getting eaten by a goat is pretty close statistically.

Behind every good hoax is a smidgen of truth. By smidgen I mean .00772%

 

[FreeBird236]

Thanks for the data.

So, of the placebo group, 18,000 total, only 139 got covid. Thats .77%. Off that less than 1% how many died or were hospitalized. As well, how many of these "positives" were tested positive but were asymptomatic?

For a disease that was supposed to wipe out the world, you would think the "experts" would share this very important data in a complete form. From what I see, a 99.23% of not catching it tells me it aint that bad. If you assume a 1% death rate of the people that caught it, we are looking at .00772% chance of actually dying. I think getting eaten by a goat is pretty close statistically.

Behind every good hoax is a smidgen of truth. By smidgen I mean .00772%

Not sure how much of this data I believe anymore, a lot has changed in a year.

 

[propcheck]

To answer your OP you need to trust the science. I am not talking about the false conspiracies of Biology that determine gender I mean the real science the stuff generated by a large corporation with a history of criminal misconduct that has been validated by a pseudo government agency that has also been caught in a web of lies and corruption.

 

[EmpirE231]

This past Wednesday I spent in a 3rd visit to heart specialists.
I had recently, that is before the vaccine, had a full physical for upcoming knee surgery. My heart was healthy, no issues at all.
No family history of heart issues either side.

Two months after the vaccine I was extremely fatigued and it felt like the motor mounts on my heart were broken.

Getting a cardiologist appt was near impossible, read on and you'll see why. USC is booked solid so I had to go elsewhere. But I did it eventually and a good one at that.

He sent me for tests and onto a panel of top cardiologists.
A month later after all the tests I talked to the heart specialists.

The vaccine damaged my upper heart chamber and blocked two nerve pathways and "we're seeing a lot of this" they told me.

I'm not getting the booster, that'll finish me off.

The cardiologists were impressed at my treadmill work. I iron manned it and blew out all the stops for a guy my age. Went the full max for the full time.
In spite of this, I feel like crap all the time. Lack of energy and a pounding chest.

So for those of you ducking the vaccine you very well may be doing the right thing.

Sorry to hear that! thank you for sharing, and hope you recover from this!