SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus (COVID-19)

do you mean from covid? if so, that is true. but has no effect on long term effects of the vaccine, which will be unknown for a long time.
could they be worse? i have no idea, you would have to ask the scientists working on the vaccines, and i'm not sure they know the answer.

i'm not saying they will be, just quoting the ceo. mRNA is a fairly new game, from what i have read.

 

Your understanding is 100% wrong.
The quote that you managed to find is unfortunate in how it is presented and worded.

The objective of a real "vaccine" is to enable your body to "kill" the invading microbes before they can reproduce enough to cause a "disease".......which can then be spread.
The object is NOT to treat or prevent "symptoms" but to kill the invading cells (proteins technically).

Therapeutic treatment to minimize symptoms is a WHOLE different ballgame.

 

You may want to re-think that.
We just lost a longtime family friend to the 'rona - and she was retired......and fairly isolaty
She was a VERY feisty 81, with no major health problems other than a touch of obesity.

Hate to see you not make it to 100,000 posts.

As for me and mine?
People in my orbit are split - as are everyone in the nation but I would take any of the three vaccines TODAY if they let me.

BUT.....ramping up production and distribution for 10 gigadoses isn't doing to be a walk in the park - so vaccine deniers can play for some time.

Related - from one of my government-funded radio podcasts.......
Planet Money - Before The Shot In The Arm

 

I hope he was referring to the disease.......NOT to the vaccine.

 

Post deleted by author.
Having the system silently blank out quotes from ignored authors can be really confusing at times.

 

Would be nice if it put in [SPOILER] markup or something.

 

My point exactly.
But given the inattention of the owner here, that likely will NEVER HAPPEN.
Even though it should be a simple thing to change for the code maintainers.

 

Ideally, that is what vaccines should do, but not all the vaccines will prevent transmission. Many do, but not all. In the case of the novel mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, whether they will prevent the transmission or not has not been studied yet.

Here is a useful reading regarding the functions of vaccines in preventing transmission. The pertinent information comparing the mRNA-based vaccines by Pfizer/BioNTech and by Moderna compared to one from AstraZeneca using a more traditional adeno-vector to produce the spike protein is copied below the link.
Does the AstraZeneca Vaccine Also Stop Covid Transmission? | WIRED

The makers of the two other vaccines in play have reported only evidence that their drugs keep people from getting sick—which is to say, fewer vaccinated people have moderate to severe symptoms and test positive for infection. The vaccines do this very well. But researchers working on the AstraZeneca version said they also had signs of reduced transmission, of people spreading the disease from one person to another.​

Also, another information reference describing the potential pitfall of imperfect vaccines.
Vaccines FAQ - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center

Most vaccines do not completely prevent infection but do prevent the infection from spreading within the body and from causing disease. Many vaccines can also prevent transmission, potentially leading to herd protection whereby unvaccinated people are protected from infection by the vaccinated people around them because they have less chance of exposure to the virus.
​

The bottom line is that we don't know yet for sure how the new vaccines will behave to evoke the immune system in humans. For Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, their phase3 test results showed that their vaccines can be more than 90% effective in preventing the severe COVID-19 disease symptoms, but their effects on infection or transmission remain to be unknown at present.

 

SIGH.
No true vaccine ever created in the history of the world has ever had the capability to "prevent transmission".

EXCEPT that it greatly reduces the pathogen load (the number of virus cells present) so that the odds of contamination of a non-infected subject are greatly reduced.

By definition, in order to legitimately be called a "vaccine" it must reduce the number of viable virus cells in an infected organism enough so that the ODDS of transmission are greatly reduced.

A vaccine does nothing directly to prevent "transmission". It simply reduces the likelihood.
When you are able to achieve a 100% reduction of live virus cells in an infected host, then the odds of transmission reaches ZERO.
But that is not the same as "preventing transmission".

This is exactly, precisely why the current recommendation is to keep up the behaviors that DO prevent the transmission even after the vaccinations start......and even with those people who get the shots. Your body may not be able to perfectly rid itself of 100% of the virus if you do become contaminated.......and you might still be able to transmit it via the few remaining healthy virus cells that are left.

Remember "Typhoid Mary" ?? Apparently not.

 

We want @bisco to last longer than that

 

Sorry, I don't get your point. If you want to play with words, that's fine. For a practical sense "preventing" transmission and "reducing" the odd of transmission means the same. And it seems that we are in agreement in that no vaccine is made to prevent or reduce the odd of transmission 100%. As cited by @SFO in his comment #3075, I trust the credentials of Anthony Fauci, M.D., director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases more than yours.

Also, just to add a nit-picking point, there is no such thing as "live virus cells".

 

My understanding of the article may be 100% wrong, but you'll need to back that up with something that is related to what Fauci said.

Please reread the linked article or the sourced video interview with Fauci, then explain how my 'understanding is 100% wrong'.

 

NPR: some members of vaccine panel raise concerns about vaccinating nursing home residents without clinical trials of the population'.

 

'moderna to begin clinical trials on children'

 

We don't need that kind of censorship on the basis that someone might misinterpret the truth... that is ridiculous.

 

It isn't censorship to retract an article, archive it, and provide an update with a link to the archived original!

Portraying that as "censorship" is ridiculous.

 

Words are important for conveying proper information and helping with understanding.
"Transmission" is moving something from one place to another.
A vaccine does NOT prevent the virus from moving.

 

Thank you for repeating what already has been said. That was exactly the point I and others have been making all along.

Moderna coronavirus vaccine may NOT stop transmission admits chief scientist

MODERNA'S new coronavirus vaccine will prevent those who take it from contracting the disease, but might not stop those same individuals from spreading the virus to others.

By Brian McGleenon
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Wed, Nov 25, 2020 | UPDATED: 10:58, Wed, Nov 25, 2020

The chief medical officer at Moderna, Tal Zaks, said the pharmaceutical company has no data to determine if their vaccine stops people from spreading the deadly pathogen. In trials, it was found the Moderna vaccine is 94.5 percent effective at stopping severe illness from coronavirus. Mr Zaks said vaccinated people can still be carriers and spreaders of the virus.

Preventing transmission of the virus was not factored into the vaccine trials of both Pfizer and Moderna.
​

 

OK, so I pretty much know you are not that stupid......so I must assume that you are just being difficult on purpose.

The statement is mis-leading because NO vaccine stops the "transmission" of any virus.
If "live" virus cells are still present, then they can be transmitted.

It stops the INFECTION in the host.

 

I am not opposing your point that vaccines do not prevent transmission. The point was that you raised a question against @GreenJuice comment on #3071

by commenting

And when @SFO gave a perfectly correct answer to support the @GreenJuice comment by citing Dr. Fauci.

You then negated @SFO answer by saying

I then tried to explain the reason why there is not enough evidence for reducing the transmission is that the current on-track vaccines have not been studied for the effect on SERS-CoV2 viral infection or transmission, hence the initial comment by @GreenJuice.

The only results have shown so far for Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are that they prevented the development of clinical symptoms of COVID-19 in test subjects at over 90% efficacy compared to the placebo group when they are administered in randomized double blind studies. There just has not been any scientific study at least reported yet on those vaccines showing that viral transmission will be reduced or even initial infections are suppressed. We all hope they do, but that is just wishful thinking, not a science.