Covid mandates and colleges

Idk. This is all old data that had to be court ordered, about a micro-organism which evolves at an unprecedented rate. So I don’t think it’s fully up to speed.

Thats pretty important though. I’m glad Pfizer considered VAE when looking for problems. Failure to do so would have been evidence of sloppiness on their part. I didn’t know it was a real thing. Glad the professionals did.

I do not see evidence of problem here. What am I overlooking?

I applaud your honesty. Others are stealing my year-old line and saying “but this is just evolution” when they’d dismissed it as crazy and impossible before back when I was telling them that evolution could do this, like that never happened.

Just a bunch of speculation. But that’s all we really have with an unprecedented thing like this.

If you read the link I posted to before, it can give you an idea of what some people are concerned about regarding what seems like a trend about vaccinated individuals actually being more susceptible than unvaxxed and not just having lost their vaccine protection but as I see it in my non-medical professional view as the synthetic vaccine somehow giving the virus a quicker way in before the immune response kicks in, and letting it repeatedly back in where an unvaxxed person wouldn’t, thus exhausting immune system continually.

Like I said I’m not a professional (although it seems I was right about the evolution bit all along, I have a microbiologist professor friend who i ask about this stuff–he says a lot of doctors and other healthcare workers don’t really understand or consider evolution when it comes to this).

Anyways I’m just trying to make sense of some weird data from different countries and explain the similar phenomenon I see in my own life where it’s vaccinated people who always seem to get covid. But of course that could be due to any number of unrelated factors.

I appreciate that.

Granted this is new to me. But what I am reading makes it sound like its not unprecedented at all. Looks like its extremely rare, but all vaccines can have this risk.

To date only 3 human vaccines have ever found this to be a side-effect. The vaccines for the dengue virus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and measles. Of these vaccines, only the dengue vaccine has been approved for use under certain conditions.

Not looking to get into a huge debate on this, but I am honestly asking. What is the concern here? There is an extremely rare condition that vaccines might cause, and despite its rarity Pizer checked and found that their vaccine does not cause it either.

This seems barely noteworthy. Or am I overlooking something?

1 Like

This is interesting, a look at several factors (economics, mortality, etc) state by state. The study looks long, but it’s mostly graphs. An easy read.

There will be those who complain about the authors being right-of-center. If you have those concerns I’d be interested in whether you find flaws with the study methodology itself.



This isn’t how vaccines or the human body work. If I’m wrong, please provide evidence instead of speculation based on anecdotes and “weird data.”

I know you’re not a fan of fact-checks (and facts?), but these seem relevant:

The best available evidence suggests unvaccinated people are more likely to contract the omicron variant than those who are fully vaccinated, experts told USA TODAY. They are also more likely to be hospitalized or die due to COVID-19.

Three studies reported in late January by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found booster shots provide substantial protection against the coronavirus. One of those studies – which analyzed the vaccination status of nearly 10 million COVID-19 patients from 25 state and local health departments – found that, in December, unvaccinated people were five times more likely to test positive for COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated and boosted.

Vaccinated people who had not received a booster were still nearly three times less likely to report a case than their unvaccinated peers.

That doesn’t mean the vaccines are a silver bullet, though.

“Because of the immune evasive mutations possessed by the omicron variant, those who are fully vaccinated – and even those who are boosted – are still likely to contract COVID-19,” Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, said in an email. “However, they are not more likely to acquire the infection than someone who is unvaccinated.”

But that doesn’t mean the vaccines are useless.

Booster shots of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were 90% effective at keeping people out of the hospital after they became infected with omicron, according to one of the three recent CDC studies.

Fact check: Omicron variant isn't more likely to infect vaccinated

It’s unprecedented because this mRNA shot is unprecedented. The mechanism by which it works is completely different to any vaccine.

I’ve already explained it from my end. I doubt if doing it again will be worth it. In case you skipped over that substack I posted to and are still asking then I’ll quickly mention there is weird data coming out of UK, Israel, Shanghai and other places that imo is worthy of some nonzero amount of attention. If there’s zero concern on your end about any of this, that’s great. But I can’t do anything about your confusion about why anyone at all would have any amount of concern.

Yeah, that’s why I said it. Of all the things I said you could have responded to. And you speak about people adding nothing to the conversation.

Why weren’t you educating Cheung on evolution when he kept saying how preposterous it was to consider that the vaccine might enhance the disease? Why are you only doing it now, a year later, to me, after a court order made Pfizer publicly acknowledge the possibility?

False. It’s not “completely different.” It primes the immune system to recognize and respond to pathogens when they enter the body, albeit by different means than an inactivated virus. If there’s a plausible biological reason to think that this approach is likely to have harmful effects, please explain it. Otherwise you’re just speculating.

Because the vaccine doesn’t “enhance the disease” – that’s an absurd misrepresentation. New variants can emerge when a pathogen encounters bodies that possess defenses against infection, regardless of whether they were acquired through vaccination or through contracting and surviving the disease. Like I said, that’s how evolution works; the same principle applies to pesticides and herbicides. Suggesting that we’d be better off without a vaccine because natural immunity is somehow “superior” to a vaccine-bolstered immune system is both scientifically illiterate and extraordinarily callous toward the millions of additional people who would have died without pharmaceutical interventions.

Perhaps you missed the rest of my post. I’ll reiterate it here in case you’d like to actually respond to facts instead of continuing to speculate.

Alternatively, you could continue to repeat the same debunked claim without ever responding to the counterevidence.

Indeed (?).

I can’t find the exact image but have you seen Dodgeball?

Peter La Fleur:
Alliteration aside, I’ll take my chances in the tournament.

White Goodman:
Yeah, you will take your chances.

Peter La Fleur:
I know. I just said that.

White Goodman:
I know you just said that.

Peter La Fleur:
I’m not sure where you’re going with this.

White Goodman:
I’m not sure where you’re going with this.

Peter La Fleur:
That’s what I said.

White Goodman:
That’s what I’m saying to you.

Peter La Fleur:
All right.

White Goodman:

…and then Peter makes a confused face. That’s the image.

Shouldn’t that be a mostly false?

You mean, the mechanism by which it works?

Some people are, aren’t they? Are you of the Vaccinate 100% of all Humans camp?

I defy you to show where I’ve suggested we’d be better off without it whatsoever. If it’s anything like the last supposed insinuation I made then it will remain fully in everyone’s minds without any evidence of ever being suggested by me whatsoever.

I specifically (and proactively at that) called it speculation. You call that a claim? I’m not married to this the way you are to your irreversible decision. I have vaccinated loved ones, I hope I’m wrong.

I didn’t ask about “any amount of concern” on a bunch of other things. You specifically mentioned that VAED was something to be concerned about in relation to these vaccines. I didn’t even think that was a real thing. I checked what you posted and found I was wrong. You also said that it was something to be concerned about. I checked the evidence you linked and it seemed to state the exact opposite.

So I thought to myself. “Well, if you were wrong about the first thing, are you wrong about it the second thing as well?” Hence me asking what I was overlooking. Nothing in that other thread seemed to answer that question.

But fair enough. If you want to let it go, fine with me.

1 Like

Antibody-dependent Enhancement (ADE) and Vaccines | Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

ADE – In this scenario, the antibodies that the vaccine generated actually help the virus infect greater numbers of cells than it would have on its own. In this situation, the antibodies bind to the virus and help it more easily get into cells than it would on its own. The result is often more severe illness than if the person had been unvaccinated.

Sounds like the vaccine enhances the disease. If that’s not exactly correct, calling it an absurd misrepresentation is a bit much. The vaccine can help the disease to be more severe than it would otherwise be. It also sounds like an instance where natural immunity could rightly be described as

Who were you quoting with that anyway?

By my standards anyway if not yours this is all still speculation when applied to the current situation. I mean people have been called conspiracy theorists for mentioning ADE, and people who are called that are never later proven correct after all. Ridiculous.

Although it would explain some of what I’ve seen.

We were talking about COVID-19, and your own source states that

Evidence of ADE has not emerged for COVID-19 vaccines even though concerns have been raised.

As @Mythfortune mentioned, the few vaccines that were found to cause ADE were withdrawn from the market. Fortunately,

Neither COVID-19 disease nor the new COVID-19 vaccines have shown evidence of causing ADE. People infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, have not been likely to develop ADE upon repeat exposure. This is true of other coronaviruses as well. Likewise, studies of vaccines in the laboratory with animals or in the clinical trials in people have not found evidence of ADE.

While it’s true that vaccines can cause ADE, there’s no evidence that any vaccines that are currently being produced (including COVID vaccines) do so.

Again, from your own source:

early during the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns about ADE were top of mind. During this time, a few scientists tried to predict whether ADE would occur by evaluating genes for similarities and differences. While this was a useful approach at a time when we did not have much information about what might happen in people, we have since accumulated several lines of clinical evidence that confirm ADE is not an issue for COVID-19 or the vaccines …

Unfortunately, some people continue to spread misinformation suggesting that ADE is an ongoing concern for COVID-19 vaccines; however, scientists and clinicians are continuing to monitor COVID-19 infections and, to date, no evidence to validate this concern has emerged.

1 Like

What if it’s a vaccine-hindered immune system? Did you ever consider that?

I posted this in the other thread too, where @Leopoldo_Blume shared yet another anecdote about a boosted coworker sick for four weeks. These kind of things just keep piling up…

People are mostly calling it “chronic covid,” with some trying to coin their own terms for it, but that it seems to affect the vaxxed much more is undeniable from my standpoint.

I’ve admitted straight up that any attempt to explain how or why is speculation. I’m not a scientist. I drive a forklift. I’ll admit that I zoned out when reading that study and don’t fully understand all the science stuff. Guilty on all charges.

But haven’t you ever had a naive child who knows shit about shit just put everything into perspective so succinctly and profoundly on a visceral level apart from all the details than can bog down these eggheads from seeing the bigger picture? Anyone with kids who have reached 8 years of age will know what I’m talking about. Yes, in this analogy I’m the 8 or under know-nothing kid.

But it seemed to me when these shots were first rolled out (I won’t say “when they were new,” because they’re still quite new) that irreversably changing the way your body responds to infection, based on one specific part of one specific variant of what I think is the most speedily adaptable virus we have ever known is just downright short-sighted and reckless. And almost two years later, after everything I’ve seen since then, I still think that even more than I did before.

It looks to me like the sin of pride.


1 Like

@Schopenhauer I don’t waste my time with that guy any more. What he’s got, there ain’t no cure. But good luck with that.


Have you asked yourself why?

This one has about as positive a spin as you can make without having to hand in your ‘science card’:

1 Like

@Schopenhauer @Mythfortune

…inherent limitations of VAERS notwithstanding.

…less likely to be hospitalized…and not as sick even if you are.


Eleven states didn’t impose mask mandates, 39 did. This graph is fascinating, if it’s accurate:


Per the source, hospitalizations and deaths show a similar pattern. This is the article:

1 Like

Unless this graph mimics the talking points of the mainstream media and Democratic Party, it is clear misinformation.

1 Like