HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Article on covid vaccines - and possible repercussions

Support Forums
>
Lyme Disease
✚ New Topic locked
12
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 4/16/2021 5:46 AM (GMT 0)
Your thoughts?
Can they alter genetic code?



https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/johnson-johnson-vaccine-scientists-perspective/?utm_source=salsa&etype=emailblastcontent&eid=5f48ebab-21d5-48f3-a27c-45998b30ef48&fbclid=iwar3ejkdhcck3rm5aoy1295eczridm0ugbyatxlq1e7g59k8fenr24paovei
Posted 4/16/2021 2:11 PM (GMT 0)
"Dr. Tal Zaks, the chief medical officer at Moderna Inc., explained in a 2017 TED talk how the company’s mRNA vaccine was designed to work. Over the last 30 years, he said, “we’ve been living this phenomenal digital scientific revolution, and I’m here today to tell you, that we are actually hacking the software of life, and that it’s changing the way we think about prevention and treatment of disease.”

He went on to explain [see video below] that the human body is made up of organs and organs are made up of cells.

“In every cell there’s this thing called messenger RNA or mRNA for short, that transmits the critical information from the DNA in our genes to the protein, which is really the stuff we’re all made out of. This is the critical information that determines what the cell will do. So we think about it as an operating system.

“So if you could change that, if you could introduce a line of code, or change a line of code, it turns out, that has profound implications for everything, from the flu to cancer.”

I reported on Feb. 4 that Moderna describes its new vaccine as “a computer operating system” but I was not aware at that time that Zaks had spoken three years ago about this, totally debunking the establishment media’s lie that mRNA vaccines don’t alter your genetic code.

He could not be more clear when he said “We are actually hacking the software of life.”"

https://www.worldviewweekend.com/news/article/modernas-top-scientist-we-are-actually-hacking-software-life

The video of the CMO (Moderna) speaking is at bottom of article.
Posted 4/16/2021 2:45 PM (GMT 0)
From the CDC's website:

Q: Will a COVID-19 vaccine alter my DNA?

A: No. COVID-19 vaccines do not change or interact with your DNA in any way.

There are currently two types of COVID-19 vaccines that have been authorized and recommended for use in the United States: messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines and a viral vector vaccine. Both mRNA and viral vector COVID-19 vaccines deliver instructions (genetic material) to our cells to start building protection against the virus that causes COVID-19. However, the material never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA is kept. This means the genetic material in the vaccines cannot affect or interact with our DNA in any way. All COVID-19 vaccines work with the body’s natural defenses to safely develop immunity to disease.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html

---

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines give instructions for our cells to make a harmless piece of what is called the “spike protein.” The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19.

1. First, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle. Once the instructions (mRNA) are inside the immune cells, the cells use them to make the protein piece. After the protein piece is made, the cell breaks down the instructions and gets rid of them.

2. Next, the cell displays the protein piece on its surface. Our immune systems recognize that the protein doesn’t belong there and begin building an immune response and making antibodies, like what happens in natural infection against COVID-19.

3. At the end of the process, our bodies have learned how to protect against future infection. The benefit of mRNA vaccines, like all vaccines, is those vaccinated gain this protection without ever having to risk the serious consequences of getting sick with COVID-19.

Facts about COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines

They cannot give someone COVID-19.
* mRNA vaccines do not use the live virus that causes COVID-19.

They do not affect or interact with our DNA in any way.
* mRNA never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA (genetic material) is kept.
* The cell breaks down and gets rid of the mRNA soon after it is finished using the instructions.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/mrna.html

---

From YouTube, a video by Paul Offit, MD (Bio: https://www.chop.edu/doctors/offit-paul-a):

Can mRNA Vaccines Alter a Person’s DNA?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igkg9rj9w1s
Posted 4/17/2021 12:46 AM (GMT 0)
Girlie, i posted about that recently, but it was deleted without any explanation. A new study, not from CDC, but by independent scientists from MIT and Harvard done in late December 2020, demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 RNA is integrated into the human genome, it has been proven by them here:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.12.422516v1


RNA from covid was thought impossible to integrate in to human genome, they all said to us that was impossible, but it was shown it really does, yes, that "functional coronavirus clearly appears capable of transforming the human genetic code", there is no doubt on that anymore. Could it be, as the study had shown, that the RNA from the synthetic piece of genetic code inside the mRNA vaccine, can similarly integrate into human genome?

We still don't know, but its probable, given the discovery made in that study. This should be studied, but has you will find, no one is interested in doing that, because they believe that this cannot possibly happen, so how could they investigate that in the first place?

Some people believe that what is right today, is right forever!! I would not call that science, but dogma. Science is right today, wrong tomorrow. Its not written in stone, its changing all the time with new discovered evidences, that is real science. Real scientists are not parrots, who only repeat what others say about something. Scientists believe in possibilities, they challenge their beliefs about something every day and the scientists that made this study, are part of them. They ignored the parrots, that repeated in their mind, that the possibility of the virus to integrate into out genome was impossible and they prove them wrong!!! Fortunately we are grateful that independent scientists don't listen to these parrots and try to go to the "moon" and they get there, if you know what i mean.

By the way Girlie, thank you for bringing that post. The writer in childrenhealthdefense puts so many logical and obvious reasons why people should not be so easily convinced to take a product that only has some months of existence. Instead of extending the animal studies, wish only lasted for a month, they decided that the long term trials should be done in humans, i call it "the humanimal trials", that started in December 2020 and are still running as of today.

They just posted another great information were CDC contradicts itself despite being warned by independent scientists. They are warning that pfizer and moderna vaccines, have the same or even more prevalence of blood clots than astrazeneca and johnson, but instead, for reasons no one can understand (i will leave that for people to figure that out), are denying that...

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/pfizer-moderna-vaccines-blood-clots/

Post Edited (isitlyme) : 4/16/2021 7:02:48 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/17/2021 5:32 AM (GMT 0)
Responding to the above pre-print that has not been peer-reviewed:

TWiV 696: Tear Down That SARS-CoV-2 Manuscript
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieczunjpt18&t=1822s
Posted 4/17/2021 3:26 PM (GMT 0)
Dude ABides, the virologists" on the youtube you refer, are the same virologists, who said in march 2020 that masks are not recommended and should not be used, so this says everything about the knowledge they have about "not yet discovered science." This "so-called" virologists laughed at the idea of using masks, they dont laugh now..

Why would we believe they would behave differently, when new studies about things they don't agree, are published? I guess in the beginning of the pandemic, they also considered "non peer reviewed" studies about the recommended use of masks like "trash", as they said in the video you refer. Now, everyone is using masks worldwide...
Just start to hear them from the 1 hour and 35 minute mark, we can hear their thoughts about masks and how they laugh to each other about it, and why they should not be used, and how they criticize the studies in 2004 that defended the use of masks in protecting us from COVID.

TWiV 591: Coronavirus update with Ralph Baric

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bze-7brlzti

So what should we expect from these people, to say about this new SARV-COV2 genome integration study? Well, in the video they are doing the same laughs and line of thoughts, like they did with the masks, in march 2020, so its not surprising. If we search their videos about blood clots, they minimize it, just as expected.

I believe they have no problem at all, like many "experts", to encourage the injection of that same covid vaccines, despite deaths and injuries, saying the usual irresponsible things like "there is no link to vaccine" and it was "unexpected", "natural cause" or "underlying conditions", but never the vaccine. These people are never willing to research injuries or deaths from vaccines as they are never willing to research any possible Covid vacine interaction with our genome, but they will jump from their cages immediately if any researcher challenges their beliefs, because that's what science is, a belief that is challenged with new evidence, the diffrence, is that some "experts" prefer to stay in stone age..

I prefer to run away from these people, they remind me the IDSA panel of doctors against chronic lyme laughing at chronic lyme disease sufferers.

I like very much the initial words from the author of the article, Dr. Ken Biegeleisen, M.D., Ph.D when he says:

"Everyone is talking about DNA/RNA vaccines. Can they alter our own genetic codes?"

The vaccine lobby says “Never!” I, however — laboring beneath the weight of a Ph.D. in virology — would instead quote Gilbert and Sullivan: “Well, hardly ever.”

I am grateful for Virologists like Dr. Ken Biegeleisen, M.D., Ph.D who wrote this article on childrenshealthdefense about the possible DNA alterations from Covid vaccines and also for researchers like Dr. Doug Corrigan who also explained very well how this can happen.

Post Edited (isitlyme) : 4/17/2021 5:43:18 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/17/2021 4:04 PM (GMT 0)
Cool story, bro.
Posted 4/17/2021 7:27 PM (GMT 0)
Fluoroquinolones, imidazoles, plastics, stress, many viruses, and radiation all have been found to alter the DNA. When folks with Lyme are taking fluoroquinolones or imidazoles, using plastics, stressing out hugely, and undergoing tests that cause radiation, I think usually they are given the advice that those things are okay in moderation when they are called for. While I have read no convincing scientific evidence that the mRNA vaccines do alter DNA, I guess I'm surprised that people here (where people bombard their bodies with pharmaceuticals literally for years) would care much.

I understand that the experience of being chronically ill has rendered us all distrustful of mainstream medicine, for good reason. But at least in the US, the political frame of this issue is extremely stark. Perhaps that's why users who reside in other countries don't understand why these posts keep getting deleted.

In addition to not taking COVID vaccines, the CDH website also advises folks to become vegan, stop using plastic, and stop using wifi and mobile phones, for what that's worth. Something tells me the website is getting way more clicks for their COVID claims than they are those other topics!
Posted 4/17/2021 8:47 PM (GMT 0)
I linked the same preprint a few months ago and it wasn't deleted.
Posted 4/17/2021 9:28 PM (GMT 0)
Its easy to understand why those who already took the vaccine, have no interest or care much about it. But surprisingly, they care and post much about vaccines topics, like how important it is to take it, how well it went or not, after they took it, etc. In the other hand, when someone posts something negative about it, it is suggested that these are or need to be deleted, i wonder why this isn't suggested in the positive threads too..

Not any user, regardless the country, understands why posts showing the dangers of vaccines keep getting deleted or locked, while posts about positive things about COVID vaccines like, "I took the vaccine", "Take the vaccine", "Anyone took the vaccine?" are not.

CHD doesn't advise people to become vegan, stop using plastic, that is so wrong and untrue. In we speak about the plastic topic alone, they only expose Big industries that waste plastics on our environment and don't do anything to recycle them, we must not confuse things. They show transparency, free of conflict of interests, help people based on scientific backgrounds and expose the danger of drug companies and their real intentions towards the public. They defend the interests of patients, not from Big Pharma.This is indeed familiar to all lyme users here, IDSA is only a small example.

What surprises me most is how people can trust a vaccine, whose agencies swore to be safe and let people risk their lives, and then suspend it again and again. This just shows that people are nothing more than laboratory rats and if things go wrong, they suspend it or stop, but until then, they carry on the tests on humans instead of carrying them out on animals first. This back and forth with vaccines only means to people that, if something goes wrong in the long term, they will also be suspended, but at what cost? At the costs of thousands of lives? No, thanks i will not buy it.

Post Edited (isitlyme) : 4/17/2021 5:16:51 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/17/2021 11:14 PM (GMT 0)
There are people with Lyme on this forum who have not yet decided whether to take the vaccine and want to hear other's opinions (both sides) on the issue.

Questioning the safety or efficacy of a vaccine is not usually done because of politics.

Some of us who have Lyme know how damaging it can be and are willing to try long-term ABX. Lyme could do more harm to our bodies than the ABX especially if the ABX end up helping us to remission.

Perceived risk vs. benefit.

Post Edited (ChristianWithLyme) : 4/17/2021 5:17:33 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/18/2021 11:13 AM (GMT 0)
Just an interesting tidbit:

As reported by David Martin, Ph.D. "Moderna describes its product NOT as a vaccine, but as 'gene therapy technology' in SEC filings. This is because neither Moderna nor Pfizer make any claims about their products creating immunity or preventing transmission."

Additionally, Moderna's SEC filings specifically state that "Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA.

mRNA Is 'Proven Form of Gene Therapy':

In a February 2021 article, MIT Technology Review reviewed the history of mRNA technology in general, and Moderna's in particular, stating: "Vaccines were not their focus. At the company's founding in 2010, its leaders imagined they might be able to use RNA to replace the injected proteins that make up most of the biotech pharmacopoeia, essentially producing drugs inside the patient's own cells from an RNA blueprint. 'We were asking, could we turn a human into a bioreactor?' says Noubar Afeyan, the company's cofounder"...

Bloomberg, in August 2020, reported that the Moderna vaccine would seek to transform your body into "a vaccine-making machine." The New York Times was more to the point. In May 2020, they reported that "Researchers at two Harvard-affiliated hospitals are adapting a proven form of gene therapy to develop a coronavirus vaccine." Read it again — A proven form of gene therapy.

So, to summarize: The definition of "genetic" is something relating to genes, and the definition of "therapy" is the medical treatment of a disease. The definition of "gene therapy" is the process of modifying or manipulating the expression of a gene, or altering the biological properties of living cells.

mRNA are snippets of genetic code that instructs cells to produce proteins. mRNA COVID-19 therapies "deliver genetic instructions into your cells," thereby triggering your body to produce a fragment of the virus (the spike protein). So, mRNA vaccines ARE gene therapy. There's simply no way around this. They fulfill all the definitions of gene therapy and none of the definitions for a vaccine.

Denise
Posted 4/18/2021 11:26 AM (GMT 0)
Got my first dose of Pfizer Wednesday.

By that night it had triggered some bad internal vibrations. Thankfully my gf slept on the couch and gave me the bed to sprawl out in, I slept well and woke up fine. Haven’t had problems since, knock on wood. Glad to be on my way to immunity now.

Getting covid is a disaster for those w chronic illness. One of the guys I talk to got it 6m ago and it retriggered his dysautonomia which he is still unable to shake. His fingernails are also cracking and pitting.

I was concerned at first too, but enough data is out there in terms of safety and efficacy that the risk/reward is highly skewed towards getting the vaccine at this point.

Post Edited (dcd2103) : 4/18/2021 5:30:56 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/18/2021 11:56 AM (GMT 0)
COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Not "Gene Therapy," As Some Are Claiming
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2021/03/17/covid-19-mrna-vaccines-are-not-gene-therapy-as-some-are-claiming
Posted 4/18/2021 12:08 PM (GMT 0)

ChristianWithLyme said...
There are people with Lyme on this forum who have not yet decided whether to take the vaccine and want to hear other's opinions (both sides) on the issue.


So two sides, one w reasons for and one w reasons against..

The way I see it is that the side w reasons against is being contaminated.. and those who are contaminating it happen to be relentless.

But really I think people are interested in hearing about actual experiences more than opinions.
Posted 4/18/2021 1:22 PM (GMT 0)

potsnpans said...
But really I think people are interested in hearing about actual experiences more than opinions.

Not taking it, is an actual experience.. and a good one with lots of relief and people like to hear about it and feel that relief too. I am certain that many are already feeling the relief of it after so many contradictions and suspensions. Media is 24/7 interviewing people taking the vaccines and lots of selfies from the celebrities that were discovered being paid for that. Like they say in my country, "When alms are too much, the poor suspects"

Post Edited (isitlyme) : 4/18/2021 11:06:06 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/18/2021 1:30 PM (GMT 0)

potsnpans said...

The way I see it is that the side w reasons against is being contaminated.. and those who are contaminating it happen to be relentless.

But really I think people are interested in hearing about actual experiences more than opinions.

Nah, there are analytical people in this world, and here, that want to hear both experiences and opinions.

However, what I'm not interested in is your constant passive-aggressive comments slamming anybody who you target as disagreeing with your beliefs. Not cool, man. Be better than that.
Posted 4/18/2021 1:36 PM (GMT 0)
I am retired (in my 60's) and refuse to get this gene therapy injection (as stated above this injection is not a vaccine by legal definition). I do not want to be an experiment. There are alternative medicines that work great if I happen to get Covid.

I am not in the mindset of being brainwashed by the MSM and I have no fear of this virus. I feel sorry for those who watch MSM and feel like the MUST get this injection. I also feel sorry for those who are scared.

No one knows what the long term side effects may be and I don't want to find out.

That said, as far as the CDC I believe they are corrupt.

Denise
Posted 4/18/2021 1:51 PM (GMT 0)

1000Daisies said...


DCD - you have some great posts and information which is valuable to the community. However, I'm going to challenge your statement on this, and please do not take this personally in any manner (as I'm challenging the statement).

COVID is a disaster for those with chronic illness? This is definitely an over generalization. Can it be? Certainly. Is it for all of those with chronic illness? Nah.

I believe age, based on the data from the past year, is the bigger factor.

It's interesting here how lots of people focus on the worst case scenarios, but they just breeze by the millions of people who had COVID and recovered/no long term effects. They focus on the 1 person dying out of 100, instead of the 99 who recovered (for example). People are just anxious because they simply don't know how it will affect them.

It's hard for me to relate to many of you people here who are so deathly afraid of COVID. Now, if I were in retirement age (and older), then, of course, my viewpoint would be different. And I've stated many times how I'm concerned for them. However, I'm baffled by many of the younger generation being so disabled from the anxiety (and yes, I know many in real life like this), despite 99.9+% survival rate for their age brackets. I can't help but wonder if they have underlying anxiety issues anyways.

I have a friend who has severe immune/health issues (honestly, worse than many on this board, and that's saying something!). She was incredibly terrified of getting COVID. Then her whole family got COVID, and guess what? She was shocked how it wasn't a big deal for her at all. No long term effects from such either.

I have another friend with serious immune/health issues (not as severe as above friend, but severe nonetheless), and she had an allergic reaction to the COVID vaccine (she can't have the second vaccine) and ended up getting COVID anyways. sad (I also know many who got the vaccine and did not have any serious short term side effects... who knows long term though, as that story is still being written.)

I just don't care for blanket statements like this, and it only feeds the fear/anxiety. Many, many, many (in fact, majority) non-retirement people get COVID and recover fine from it.

I'm not downplaying the severity and concern of COVID (especially in the older generation). But let's put it into perspective please. Not everybody with immune issues will have issues with COVID (again, age being a factor).

No worries daisies, I don’t take offense. And you are right, I may have spoken in too absolute terms. I tend to do that from time to time without realizing it, until someone like you puts it into perspective. I do know some people w various chronic illnesses who were fine and returned pretty quickly to baseline after covid.

But I do think that people w immune activation and dysautonomia are particularly at a much greater risk. For every person with chronic illness I know/speak to regularly in the chats who was fine, it seems like I know someone who really struggled or is complaining it set them back.

If you have an immune system and/or ANS on a hair triggers edge, a virus like that really can and often does wreak havoc.

Post Edited (dcd2103) : 4/18/2021 8:03:53 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/18/2021 2:02 PM (GMT 0)

Daisies said...
However, what I'm not interested in is your constant passive-aggressive comments slamming anybody who you target as disagreeing with your beliefs. Not cool, man. Be better than that.


Huh??

I rarely post about what I believe in these threads.. probably trying to figure out what I believe more than you realize. But if you ever take issue with the content of any of my posts, please speak up about it! I don't remember you ever doing so before.

Edit: I'd like to know what prompted the above comment if you don't mind.. a specific example might actually be productive.

Btw, I'm 40 and I'll be getting vaccinated with the hope that it will prevent or greatly reduce my likelihood of getting long covid.. not afraid of death by covid. I'm curious why your response to dcd was so heavily focused on deaths when it seemed the original focus was on covid's potential for exasperating chronic illnesses. This also kinda intersects with why I think people here are more interested (generally) in hearing about experiences rather than opinions.

When you say that people here "focus on the 1 person dying out of 100, instead of the 99 who recovered" ...how many of those 99 would you say are still struggling with long covid?

Post Edited (potsnpans) : 4/19/2021 6:52:08 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/18/2021 2:16 PM (GMT 0)

dcd2103 said...
Got my first dose of Pfizer Wednesday.

Getting covid is a disaster for those w chronic illness. One of the guys I talk to got it 6m ago and it retriggered his dysautonomia which he is still unable to shake. His fingernails are also cracking and pitting.

I was concerned at first too, but enough data is out there in terms of safety and efficacy that the risk/reward is highly skewed towards getting the vaccine at this point.

dcd2103 if that was true, pfizer and other big pharma would not come out to the media, encouraging people to take a third dose. They now know that the people who got the first shots, will be susceptible to variant viruses, severer infection and death anyway, and this will also happen with with the third, forth, fifth and so on. Why wouldn't it? If it didn't work with the first ones? Virus is constantly mutating, the vaccine its not only useless, but carries dangerous risks. Who wants to take that risks? Meanwhile uninformed people risk their lives in taking a vaccine. Its not only dangerous but also ineffective. People need treatments that treat, not covid vaccines full of uncertainty and possible dangerous side effects.

It was already published by the Waterloo University that Pfizer and Moderna concealed the absolute risk results from the data, the data shows that the absolute risk avoidance for covid infections are less than 2%, meaning useless. But as you will find, the media and the "usual agencies" did not report that. You can check the interview with the researcher from Waterloo university here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkwn5i8tlme

If Moderna and Pfizer and FDA, did not reveal this in the first trials data, why would people expect them to do the same in all future vaccine data?

Post Edited (isitlyme) : 4/18/2021 5:05:18 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/18/2021 2:26 PM (GMT 0)

isitlyme said...


dcd2103 if that was true, pfizer and other big pharma would not come out to the media, encouraging people to take a third dose. They now know that the people who got the first shots, will be susceptible to variant viruses, severer infection and death anyway, and this will also happen with with the third, forth, fifth and so on. Why wouldn't it? If it didn't work with the first ones? Virus is constantly mutating, the vaccine its not only useless, but carries dangerous risks. Who wants to take that risks? Meanwhile people risk their lives in taking a vaccine. Its not only dangerous but also ineffective. People need treatments that treat, not vaccine full of uncertainty and possible dangerous side effects.

It was already published by the Waterloo University that Pfizer and Moderna concealed the absolute risk results from the data, the data shows that the absolute risk avoidance for covid infections are less than 2%, meaning useless. But as you will find, the media and the "usual agencies" did not report that. You can check the interview with the researcher from Waterloo university here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkwn5i8tlme

If Moderna and Pfizer and FDA, did not reveal this in the first trials data, why would people expect them to do the same in all future vaccine data?

I dunno. If my absolute risk falls from 2% to .1%, that’s a pretty big deal no? Remember that absolute risk is over the length of the study. So 2% caught covid over the length of the study. Over an indefinite time frame that relative risk goes much much higher. In addition, what happens to the R_0 of the virus is you reduce transmission by 95%? Goes way down. Finally, as I found with my polling, people are reacting very well on average. I was skeptical as well at fists, you have to be initially, but I now think it’s in everyone’s best interest if we all get vaccinated. Just my $.02 and how I feel, personally. At the same time, I fully believe in your constitutional right to express your opinion, and to choose not to be vaccinated.
Posted 4/18/2021 3:21 PM (GMT 0)

isitlyme said...


Thank you for your opinion dcd, but that is incorrect. Both relative and absolute risk are calculated and estimated at the end of the study, regardless the length of it.

The problem with using only RRR - Relative risk reduction is that we cannot assess the actual effect size, if the event rate in the control group (placebo) is not known, and as the Waterloo researcher points out, Pfizer, moderna and FDA know this, but they choose to ignore it by the reasons one cannot possibly understand, but everyone can see why - the researcher from Waterloo calls the real reason, with a simple word: - Bias..

In the ARR the control group is taken in account. Absolute risk reduction (ARR) – also called risk difference (RD) – is the most useful way of presenting research results to help your decision-making for the real world.

I haven’t spent more than 2 minutes looking at how this is calculated, but I’d still bet dollars to donuts what I said is right. They take the number of people in the vaccine and control groups who caught the virus during the length or the study, and compare them. Meaning the absolute risk ai the risk of catching the virus during the length of the study, not indefinitely. Are you implying that the absolute risk they are calculating is an estimation of your risk of catching the virus over an indefinite forward looking time frame? That makes no sense, why complicate it and how would they even estimate that, no one kjows how long this thing will be around

Post Edited (dcd2103) : 4/18/2021 9:24:25 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/18/2021 3:55 PM (GMT 0)

isitlyme said...


dcd, its not "over the length", not "during", not "indefinitely", i never said indefinitely, i said at the end of the study, if you read correctly or the total length of time the study lasted, its the same thing, but "during" or "over" the length of the study is not correct and misleading, that´s what i was pointing out.

These are all the same thing. So you basically took me on a detour to argue about semantics for nothing, my original point stands

Post Edited (dcd2103) : 4/18/2021 9:58:07 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 4/18/2021 4:02 PM (GMT 0)
Yes, and to my original point which you took issue with, the longer the study the higher the absolute risk, the higher the absolute risk reduction.

If we do a 6m study and 20 people out of 1000 get covid that’s an absolute risk is 2%. If we do a 1y study you’d expected 40 people to get it which would be an absolute risk if 4%
✚ New Topic locked
12