Covid vaccine

[Loki700]

The risk is not the same and I was not implying that.  I am someone who takes covid, social distancing and wearing a mask very seriously. I think a lot of people are behaving carelessly now that there is a vaccine and the only people I know who have gotten covid (in the past few months) are vaccinated people who go out and act as though they are completely immune.   I appreciate your response and the numbers breakdown you included.  Can you link where you got that information from?

Also the media is pushing the vaccine so hard because they are literally paid by the vaccine companies.

I apologize for assuming that you were implying that.  I'm used to people doing such when saying you can still spread it with the vaccine, because that's true of every vaccine and it's usually meant to be misleading.

I got the information from the CDC for the hard numbers on vaccinated vs. unvaccinated.  I took snapshot figures whereas the CDC seems to have done an average for the month to get their comparisons.

As far as the length of infections, that was from memory, but Influenza gives a good indication of what typical values for illnesses are, where you tend to be sick for around 2 weeks and contagious for about 1.  For info on the increased viral load decline and and thus reduced length of illness, The Lancet has a good summary of the data. It also highlights how vaccinated people don't transmit the virus as easily, much like this study from the UK.  Another study also shows that vaccinated people stop shedding the virus sooner, and the particles shed are less infectious.NYC Health likewise highlights that 96% of cases of Covid have been among unvaccinated people, showing that vaccinated people are still far less likely to transmit the virus, and thus the vaccine has been very effective.

Can you link some sources for all the numbers in that post? Thanks!

My understanding is that the omicron variant was first discovered in vaccinated individuals.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BWGovernment/status/1463874240130785280

Expand Quote

The Presidential COVID-19 Task Force informs the public that four (4) cases of a new COVID-19 variant now known as B.1.1.529, were reported and recorded on Monday 22nd November 2021. The four (4) cases were detected among travellers who tested SARS-COV-2 positive on routine pre travel testing. The variant tests were carried out as part of the routine genomic surveillance of SARS-COV-2 as prescribed in our COVID-19 response plan.

The preliminary report revealed that all four had been fully vaccinated for COVID-19. As part of the continuing investigations into the virus to establish and contain its local transmissions, contact racing has revealed close contacts who are currently awaiting their results and the public will be informed regarding the outcome of the exercise.

[close]

Yes, it was discovered in vaccinated people.  That does not mean it originated from unvaccinated people.  The reason they were able to be infected in the first place is because it was such a different variant.  Luckily research is suggesting that the vaccine isn't completely sidestepped by Omicron much like it wasn't by Delta, it just means the vaccine isn't as effective against those strains, and we'll need boosters that target those strains.

To actually mutate to that point though, it needs to be transmitted many times.  That's why these variants have cropped up in areas with low vaccination rates, because it's easier for the virus to transmit, and the more times it's transmitted the more opportunities for mutation there are.  Those multiple mutations are what creates a new strain.

Expand Quote

You can only spread the virus if you actually get sick

[close]

Fauci has said the opposite
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP9iHyj1uiU

I apologize, I wasn't clear in my language.  When I said "get sick", I meant to say "contract the virus", meaning it has actually infected you, not that you are symptomatic.  That's what he's saying in that video.  As for the ability to infect other people, as I pointed out above in my response to Jeremy, it's far lower for vaccinated people due to a shorter infection period, lower number of shed particles, and less potent particles.

To try to make it more clear, because I have a habit of not being as clear as I intend, let's say boy A and boy B are both vaccinated and are exposed to the virus.  Neither of them show any symptoms, but boy A "gets sick", however boy B does not and the vaccine/antibodies have successfully prevented him from getting infected.

If both of these boys were to get tested for Covid, boy A would return a positive result and boy B would return a negative result even though neither show symptoms.  Boy A is what I meant by "gets sick", however as shown in the above links, he would have an even lower chance of transmitting the virus than another vaccinated person who contracted the virus but was symptomatic.

[Decreed Bratton]

Expand Quote

why can't anyone who is pro vaccine admit the vaccine isn't as effective as originally promised?  That right now being unvaccinated I can still get and spread covid but that would remain the same if I was vaccinated.

[close]

This is just patently false, or at least disingenuous because you're implying that the risk is the same.

In August, 0.88% of unvaccinated people contracted Covid, while 0.13% of vaccinated people contracted Covid which shows 85% efficacy.  People who were unvaccinated were 6.8 times as likely to contract Covid.  Even going with the most recent numbers from October of 0.45% and 0.09%, that's still 5 times as likely and 80% efficacy.

Why don't we look at deaths too?  In August, 0.018% of unvaccinated people who got Covid died, while only 0.001% of vaccinated people who got Covid died, meaning that your risk of dying was 18 times higher, and funnily enough that shows a 95% efficacy.  Most recent numbers?  0.007% and 0.0006%, meaning a 9 times higher risk and an efficacy of 93%.

You can only spread the virus if you actually get sick, so a lower likelihood of getting sick means you're less likely to spread the virus, yeah?  Also, you can only spread the virus for about half the time you're sick, yeah?  So if you have less severe symptoms, you're less likely to cough to spread it, and if your time that you're sick is cut in half, which is the current trend, then your time that you're contagious is cut in half, yeah?

All of that means that you're far far less likely to spread the virus to other people if you're vaccinated, because you're less likely to contract it, and if you do the milder symptoms and shorter window means you're still less likely to spread the virus.

If you're more likely to spread the virus, that means more people will get infected, meaning the virus is more likely to mutate and create new strains, which will in turn infect more people, right?  So you absolutely are killing people by refusing to get vaccinated if you're fully able to be vaccinated, because they have been shown to be extremely safe.

Expand Quote

I’ve already had covid and recovered and it was an incredibly mild experience. Some sniffling, a bit of sore throat and lethargy for two weeks, and that was it...

...I have never seen anything pushed harder by the media, and the fact that Pfizer sponsors so many of the news programs gives me serious cause for concern.

[close]

My experience was the same except I also lost smell.  You and I are extremely lucky.  I have had friends who were perfectly healthy and wound up in the hospital on a ventilator.  It's a complete crapshoot how you'll react to the virus.

As for the media pushing the vaccine hard, it's because if we don't vaccinate then the virus will mutate and more people will die.  That's how Delta and Omicron came about like I mentioned in PMs.  Vaccines have been pushed hard in the past, like inoculations for smallpox and the polio vaccine.  It's actually a pretty standard response for vaccines to be pushed hard during an epidemic/pandemic because they're the only way to truly deal with the illness.  This is just the first pandemic of this scale to exist in a society where media is so prevalent.

Expand Quote

Anyway we're at a point now where at least the anti-vax crowd can get some pills or infusions or whatever should they end up getting really sick.

[close]

I think this is a really bad take, because without being vaccinated they are still more likely to spread it and lead to mutations that could be harder to defend against or could be less survivable.  People who can get vaccinated still should.

By reading your posts Loki, I can tell you are someone who has spent a lot of time researching the subject.  Props to you. Many people want to take a piece of data and cherry pick to suit their agenda (on either side of the coin).  You need to spend hours upon hours researching and not just take something you read or seen for what it is.

When it comes to people saying the effectivity of the vaccine is dropping, you have to ask against what?  Is it against infection or severe disease and death?  These virologist talk about it and why the messaging from the beginning was wrong and which case people like Jeremey tend to think that way. Staring from about 7:45.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67glg_GYz1Y&t=708s

They would also tell you that we aren't 100% sure vaccinated people can transmit.  Most studies are epidemiological which study social behaviors and they have to be taken with a grain of salt.  Example is that a husband and wife (both vaxxed) living together and the man gets infected first and then his wife tests positive a few days later.  You can't say the husband 100% transmitted it to the woman.  They could have gone out together somewhere, got exposed at the same time and the incubation periods for them were different.  Real studies need to be done in labs where they haven't been done properly yet.

There was, however,  a study out of Singapore of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals who got infected in which they took PCR tests of both of them daily.  In vaxxed people the rna loads went down a significantly quicker than unvaxxed.  So that in itself should tell us something .  There still could be a chance vaxxed people can transmit, but still less then unvaxxed.  It is also worth noting that PCR tests check for rna which means it doesn't check to see if the virus is actually active or not. 

[T-Funke]

So if omicron has only been found in vaccinated so far, how can a claim be made that unvaccinated caused the variant? I don’t understand that.

My reading on Fauci saying that vaccinated have as much virus in their nasopharynx as unvaccinated would support Jeremy’s opinion that both are equally able to spread covid.

[Loki700]

(A lot of nice words, good points, and a good source)

Thanks man, it’s partially due to my being an engineer and having a large part of my work be experimental validation, and even more due to my wife having a PhD in biochemistry.  She’s helped me make sense of a lot of this because biology and chemistry have always been areas I’m weak in.

So if omicron has only been found in vaccinated so far, how can a claim be made that unvaccinated caused the variant? I don’t understand that.

You’ve misunderstood, it hasn’t only been found in vaccinated people, that is just the first place it was found.  That’s a bit like saying if AIDS was first found in 4 people that had tattoos, that tattoos caused it or only people with tattoos could get it.  Omicron existed before those 4 people were infected, and has been found in both vaccinated and unvaccinated people since.

To understand how unvaccinated people led to omicron, I’ll try to briefly explain evolution.  I’ll likely get some details slightly wrong, but the overall idea will be there.

Replicating DNA/RNA is hard and is usually not done perfectly.  As such, every time that replication happens, so conception/birth of a human, or transmission of a virus, there is potential for the errors in replicating DNA/RNA to cause mutations.  The more replications (generations), the more mutations happen.  This is how evolution takes place, by the accumulation of these mutations.

Now the shorter the life span of an organism, the more replications take place, the more mutations happen.  This is a bit of an oversimplification, but since viruses have a short life, they have a lot of replications compared to humans.  They also rely on our cells to reproduce, which makes mutation even more likely, and means they can change that much quicker.

Now the reason this is important is because the more times a virus is transmitted, the more it mutates.  This causes variants.  With the previous studies I linked to, which I suggest you read, it is clear that transmission of far more likely to happen among unvaccinated people than vaccinated people.

Basically if you took the same virus and introduced it to a population that was vaccinated and a population that was unvaccinated, then came back in a month, the virus among the unvaccinated population would be vastly more mutated than the virus among the vaccinated population because it will have been transmitted many more times.  That means that the virus in the vaccinated group would be very close to the original virus, but the one from the unvaccinated group would be different, and would be a variant.

That is how Delta and Omicron formed, by Covid infecting populations that had a very low vaccination rate, so it was transmitted a lot.

My reading on Fauci saying that vaccinated have as much virus in their nasopharynx as unvaccinated would support Jeremy’s opinion that both are equally able to spread covid.

There was one study that showed that the viral loads when first infected were similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated people, and this is what Fauci was referencing.

However, as the links I posted previously show, the viral load in vaccinated people drops far quicker than it does in unvaccinated people.  This means that vaccinated people are infected, and thus contagious, for a far shorter period of time than unvaccinated people.  That’s key, because if you see 10 people per day, and your infection lasts for 7 days less than an unvaccinated person, that’s 70 chances to transmit the virus that don’t exist.  So that alone means that vaccinated people are less likely to transmit the virus.

However, the other links also showed that vaccinated people shed fewer infectious particles than unvaccinated people, and the particles they do shed are less infectious.

All of this combines to make the chance of transmission far far lower for vaccinated people than unvaccinated people.  This is actually pretty normal for vaccines.

[T-Funke]

Thanks Loki, that info on virus replication and mutation is helpful for understanding what’s going on.

I still have some issues with the conclusion that unvaccinated populations are definitively the source of the mutants.

If mutations can occur in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, and vaccinated can spread the virus but are more likely to be asymptomatic, couldn’t we also make an assumption that their behavior would lead them to be less cautious than a unvaccinated individual who is symptomatic, and hence be more likely to spread it despite being contagious for a smaller window of time?

Additionally, it appears that Omicron was circulating in European countries with high vaccination rates before the discovery of this variant in South Africa.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/12/01/world/coronavirus-newsletter-intl-01-12-21/index.html

Dutch health officials said Tuesday that Omicron was present in the Netherlands a week before two flights arrived from South Africa carrying the virus.

Nine cases of Omicron were linked to a private event on November 20 in Scotland, days before South Africa announced the existence of the variant. First Minister Nicola Sturgeon told Scottish Parliament Tuesday that none of the individuals had a recent travel history or known links to others who had traveled from southern Africa.

My other big question would be about antibody dependent enhancement.

Fauci talked about this last year (3:05-3:48 in the clip).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrWAqpPGAxQ&t=185s

Something that I want to make sure the American public understand. It's not only safety when you inject somebody and they get maybe an idiosyncratic reaction, or an allergic reaction, or pain. There's safety associated; does the vaccine make you worse? And there are diseases in which you vaccinate someone, they get infected with what you're trying to protect them with and you actually enhance the infection. You can get a good feel for that in animal models. So that's going to be interspersed at the same time that we're testing. We're going to try to make sure we don't have enhancement. It's the worst possible thing you could do, is vaccinate somebody to prevent infection and actually make them worse.

This also seems to be addressed on the nih website
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33113270/

Patient comprehension is a critical part of meeting medical ethics standards of informed consent in study designs. The aim of the study was to determine if sufficient literature exists to require clinicians to disclose the specific risk that COVID-19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus.

Results of the study

COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

Conclusions drawn from the study and clinical implications

The specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.

To my layperson understanding, the fact that so many states and countries with very high vaccination rates are also experiencing some of the highest case numbers would line up with antibody dependent enhancement. Anecdotally, I have a number of friends who got covid immediately following their vaccination.

[edit to fix YouTube embed issue, apparently it requires a full “http://www” in the url]

[T-Funke]

These virologist talk about it and why the messaging from the beginning was wrong and which case people like Jeremey tend to think that way. Staring from about 7:45.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67glg_GYz1Y&t=708s

They would also tell you that we aren't 100% sure vaccinated people can transmit.

I just tried watching a bit of these two, and I know we’re not supposed to judge a book by it’s cover, but wow are they unhealthy low energy looking weirdos. Sorry Decreed, if you’re getting good info from them then more power to you, but I found their energy/presentation very difficult to get past.
 
The virologist’s appearance/delivery plus the opinion that vaccinated can’t spread the virus makes me pretty wary of their info. I was under the impression that the issue of vaccinated individuals being able to spread the virus has become accepted knowledge at this point.

Speaking of sources of info, Loki, I’d like to address this point.

As for the media pushing the vaccine hard, it's because if we don't vaccinate then the virus will mutate and more people will die.  That's how Delta and Omicron came about like I mentioned in PMs.  Vaccines have been pushed hard in the past, like inoculations for smallpox and the polio vaccine.  It's actually a pretty standard response for vaccines to be pushed hard during an epidemic/pandemic because they're the only way to truly deal with the illness.  This is just the first pandemic of this scale to exist in a society where media is so prevalent.

I appreciate your interpretation that these media outlets are doing this solely for altruistic reasons, but I can’t help but notice that pharmaceutical companies have a MASSIVE financial incentive for profit off of this whole thing. I don’t believe they pay money to all of these tv shows for no reason. It’s like how corporations donate money to politicians. I assume they expect something in return.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlL5_kKyLA0

It's actually a pretty standard response for vaccines to be pushed hard during an epidemic/pandemic because they're the only way to truly deal with the illness.

Are they the only way? Fauci was talking about treatments in that video from last year, and my understanding is that there was a decent amount of literature available that ivermectin (a ton of studies available here https://ivmmeta.com/) and hydroxychloroquine along with azithromycin was proving effective in the treatment of covid from very early on.

[Frank and Fred]

Just here to give props to those of you having a healthy conversation on such a controversial issue. It gives me hope.

[cky enthusiast]

if big pharma standing to gain is what’s causing
your hesitancy to accept a vaccine

1. why did cuba, under embargo, manufacture their own vaccine

2. do you feel this way about them hiking up the prices for insulin and other lifesaving medications or has your concern only arisen after someone told you to go get a free shot so you don’t transmit covid

“covid isn’t that bad” look at how bad our world got rocked lol it doesn’t matter how sick it makes you when supply chains are grinding to a hault doofus

[Loki700]

Expand Quote

Thanks Loki, that info on virus replication and mutation is helpful for understanding what’s going on.

I still have some issues with the conclusion that unvaccinated populations are definitively the source of the mutants.

If mutations can occur in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, and vaccinated can spread the virus but are more likely to be asymptomatic, couldn’t we also make an assumption that their behavior would lead them to be less cautious than a unvaccinated individual who is symptomatic, and hence be more likely to spread it despite being contagious for a smaller window of time?

Additionally, it appears that Omicron was circulating in European countries with high vaccination rates before the discovery of this variant in South Africa.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/12/01/world/coronavirus-newsletter-intl-01-12-21/index.html

Expand Quote

Dutch health officials said Tuesday that Omicron was present in the Netherlands a week before two flights arrived from South Africa carrying the virus.

Nine cases of Omicron were linked to a private event on November 20 in Scotland, days before South Africa announced the existence of the variant. First Minister Nicola Sturgeon told Scottish Parliament Tuesday that none of the individuals had a recent travel history or known links to others who had traveled from southern Africa.

[close]

My other big question would be about antibody dependent enhancement.

Fauci talked about this last year (3:05-3:48 in the clip).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrWAqpPGAxQ&t=185s

Expand Quote

Something that I want to make sure the American public understand. It's not only safety when you inject somebody and they get maybe an idiosyncratic reaction, or an allergic reaction, or pain. There's safety associated; does the vaccine make you worse? And there are diseases in which you vaccinate someone, they get infected with what you're trying to protect them with and you actually enhance the infection. You can get a good feel for that in animal models. So that's going to be interspersed at the same time that we're testing. We're going to try to make sure we don't have enhancement. It's the worst possible thing you could do, is vaccinate somebody to prevent infection and actually make them worse.

[close]

This also seems to be addressed on the nih website
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33113270/

Expand Quote

Patient comprehension is a critical part of meeting medical ethics standards of informed consent in study designs. The aim of the study was to determine if sufficient literature exists to require clinicians to disclose the specific risk that COVID-19 vaccines could worsen disease upon exposure to challenge or circulating virus.

[close]

Results of the study

Expand Quote

COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

[close]

Conclusions drawn from the study and clinical implications

Expand Quote

The specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.

[close]

To my layperson understanding, the fact that so many states and countries with very high vaccination rates are also experiencing some of the highest case numbers would line up with antibody dependent enhancement. Anecdotally, I have a number of friends who got covid immediately following their vaccination.

[edit to fix YouTube embed issue, apparently it requires a full “http://www” in the url]

[close]

------------------------------------------------

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

These virologist talk about it and why the messaging from the beginning was wrong and which case people like Jeremey tend to think that way. Staring from about 7:45.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67glg_GYz1Y&t=708s

They would also tell you that we aren't 100% sure vaccinated people can transmit.

[close]

I just tried watching a bit of these two, and I know we’re not supposed to judge a book by it’s cover, but wow are they unhealthy low energy looking weirdos. Sorry Decreed, if you’re getting good info from them then more power to you, but I found their energy/presentation very difficult to get past.
 
The virologist’s appearance/delivery plus the opinion that vaccinated can’t spread the virus makes me pretty wary of their info. I was under the impression that the issue of vaccinated individuals being able to spread the virus has become accepted knowledge at this point.

Speaking of sources of info, Loki, I’d like to address this point.

Expand Quote

As for the media pushing the vaccine hard, it's because if we don't vaccinate then the virus will mutate and more people will die.  That's how Delta and Omicron came about like I mentioned in PMs.  Vaccines have been pushed hard in the past, like inoculations for smallpox and the polio vaccine.  It's actually a pretty standard response for vaccines to be pushed hard during an epidemic/pandemic because they're the only way to truly deal with the illness.  This is just the first pandemic of this scale to exist in a society where media is so prevalent.

[close]

I appreciate your interpretation that these media outlets are doing this solely for altruistic reasons, but I can’t help but notice that pharmaceutical companies have a MASSIVE financial incentive for profit off of this whole thing. I don’t believe they pay money to all of these tv shows for no reason. It’s like how corporations donate money to politicians. I assume they expect something in return.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlL5_kKyLA0

Expand Quote

It's actually a pretty standard response for vaccines to be pushed hard during an epidemic/pandemic because they're the only way to truly deal with the illness.

[close]

Are they the only way? Fauci was talking about treatments in that video from last year, and my understanding is that there was a decent amount of literature available that ivermectin (a ton of studies available here https://ivmmeta.com/) and hydroxychloroquine along with azithromycin was proving effective in the treatment of covid from very early on.

[close]

T-Funke, I’ll try answering this with headings rather than quoting it all out because it will hopefully be easier to follow.

Mutations
Mutations are small, if they happen at all.  This is why we can’t really observe evolution in anything other than viruses and single celled organisms, because the timeline for noticeable evolution is too long.

Take chickens for example.  The classic question, “which came first, the chicken or the egg” actually kind of has an answer.  The egg did, as long as you specify that this specific DNA sequence defines a chicken, then nothing before that would truly be a chicken.

But it’s not that simple actually.  There is no real delineation between when the animal stopped being a Red Jungle Fowl and started being a Chicken.  It’s more of a spectrum over a very long period of time, and the animal that produced the animal with the DNA sequence you would define as “Chicken” would be virtually identical to the Chicken in every way, and you would have to look at the DNA to tell them apart.

The reason I bring this up is important.  Variants don’t appear after a single person is infected.  Let’s put an arbitrary number on it.  Let’s say it takes 1000 infections for Covid to accumulate enough mutations to become the Omicron variant.  That means there needs to be a chain of 1000 people infecting each other in a line for the variant to appear.  This is how variants appear and is well documented and understood, and it’s known that it’s not possible for a variant to appear after just a few replications.

As I have previously illustrated, vaccinated people are far less likely to contract the virus, which means that the rate of transmission is already greatly decreased because there are few people to spread it, but that even if they do contract it, they are contagious for a far shorter period of time, and they are less contagious than unvaccinated people.  This means it will take a lot longer to reach those 1000 people, if it even does reach 1000 people, and thus will take longer and be much less likely to produce a variant, or may not even produce a variant at all if that lineage is successfully broken.

This doesn't show that the Omicron variant definitively came from unvaccinated people, but it does show the odds are astronomically against the variant having come from a vaccinated population.

Also, just for posterity, I will state again that the 1000 people I chose was just to illustrate the point.  I don't know how many different people it would actually take other than it being at least hundreds and could be as high as tens of thousands.  I was just seeking to make the concept less abstract and thus easier to understand.

Risk Taking
It's hard to say that vaccinated people will inherently take more risks than unvaccinated people.  I am vaccinated and I still wear a mask and limit my interactions, and most other people I know personally who are vaccinated are the same.

Conversely, I know a lot of unvaccinated people who aren't as careful and don't take as many precautions.  I have also seen the inverse of both of these.

Now what we can do is take two people and look at the probability of spreading the virus.  I'll refer to them as A and B again, and assume the other people near them are not wearing masks. 

Person A is fully vaccinated and decides they don't need to wear a mask and that they can be around a decent number of people without issue.  They decide to socialize in a group with 10 other people.  Given this situation, their risk factor is 3.6.

Person B on the other hand decides to wear a mask and meet with fewer people, say 3 people that aren't wearing masks.  Their risk factor is 6.5, which is still 81% higher than the vaccinated risk.

Even if vaccinated people do take more risks, they are still less likely to spread the virus.

Omicron found in Europe
The first four people found with Omicron, like I said before, are not necessarily the first 4 to have contracted it.  Like I had stated before, there's not a clear delineation where the original Covid stops and Omicron begins.  Omicron, as we discovered it, in all likelihood probably existed for around a month, and it's very possible for it to spread to Europe from other people, who would then infect other people, etc.

The likeliest origin of Omicron is the location with the greatest density of cases, which is South Africa; of note is that the UK is the next most dense, and there is a lot of travel that happens between these two countries as SA used to be a British colony.  South Africa also has a vaccination rate of 24%, much like how India, which was the origin of the Delta variant, had only about 12% fully vaccinated at the time Delta was found.

This is like trying to say that because AIDS was discovered in LA, that it must have originated from LA, or at least the US, when all signs point to that not being the case.

Antibody-Dependent Enhancement
That video of Fauci is, as you said, from last year.  He was explaining how and why we needed to go through the clinical trials.  Antibody-Dependent Enhancement is extremely, extremely rare, and Phase III trials are specifically designed to uncover this issue, and if it is found, it is removed from use.  Also, there's no way that this is the case with the Covid vaccines as all of the studies show you are better protected and extremely unlikely to spread the virus.  If the vaccine caused ADE, vaccinated people would have worse symptoms and higher death rates.  There is no evidence to support any claim that Covid vaccines cause ADE.

Your Understanding
Your understanding is wrong, and based on false data.  Countries with high vaccination rates are not experiencing higher instances of infection.  Some of the countries have higher overall numbers, but they are also more populous.

DeCreed Bratton's Video
The virologist spoke in absolutes which wasn't wise, but is pretty common when speaking to laymen.

Literally every single vaccine in history has never been 100% effective.  There has always been a chance to transmit the disease if you are vaccinated.  However, that chance is severely reduced and has been shown time and again; just look at Polio.  There was still a slight chance you could transmit Polio to someone unvaccinated, but the likelihood was astronomically low.  If you compare that to no vaccine, where you are almost certainly going to spread it, the benefit should be clear.

Big Pharma
I will admit that pharmaceutical companies profiting off of this pandemic is disgusting.  However, your argument that they're only pushing to have everyone vaccinated so that they can maximize their profits falls apart when you look at countries that can't afford to buy their vaccines at the market price, so they have provided them at cost or have donated them.  The main reason they are being pushed as hard as they are is so that we can prevent the spread, and thus variants, and return to a sense of normalcy so fewer people die.

Is this the only way?
No.  We could let the virus run its course and cull the population until there aren't enough people to transmit it and have it mutate effectively, thus stopping its propagation.  That's what happened with the black death.  Most people find this to be a rather poor solution though.

The only way to stop a disease is severely limit its transmission.  The only way to limit its transmission is to vaccinate.  That's why literally every epidemic/pandemic we've had has either wiped out vast swaths of people, or have only been stopped when around 80% or more of people have been vaccinated.

Summary
It looks like you're looking for reasons to support vaccine hesitancy and ignoring the vast amount of data showing that the vaccines work and are safe.  The fact that you went back to statements Fauci made before any vaccine was even approved makes me think that you're trying to support your conclusion that they aren't safe/necessary rather than letting the data inform your conclusion.

[tuesday]

Hey @Loki700, thank  you for the great posts! Don't worry. This guy's goal is to eventually come up with a question that is so absurd that you can't answer it, so that he can strike a pose and anounce that this is proof that you are incompetent and everything you posted is wrong. Which of course would imply in return that he is right. Buuut of course he's only asking questions... and that can never be false or malign.

[T-Funke]

T-Funke, I’ll try answering this with headings rather than quoting it all out because it will hopefully be easier to follow.

Appreciate it, I’ll do the same.

Mutations

Thank you for conceding that the variant did not definitively originate from unvaccinated populations. Words like "extremely likely" have been used and definitive statements have been made about the origins of variants, but without conclusive proof this remains an assumption.

Risk Taking

Again, "less likely" but not definitively.

Antibody-Dependent Enhancement

If statements made last year are going to be impugned, I will point out the substack article used to support your argument is from January when the vaccines weren't even around.

Your Understanding

High, not higher. This is either a misreading or straw man.

Big Pharma

I never used the word "only." Again, either a misreading or straw man. If you think that manufacturers sponsoring shows doesn’t have an impact on how their products are covered I don't know what to tell you.

Is this the only way?

You're going to compare a disease that had a mortality rate of 50-75% with one that has 4% at most? I don't think that works. Also no consideration for targeted treatment and risk mitigation for populations that are most vulnerable with therapeutics that have been proven to diminish symptoms? Vaccines are the only form of mitigation? Additionally at this point it appears that covid will in fact become endemic.

[lemonchicken91]

damn breh wtf you want lol

vaccine better than no vaccine its not rocket science

[T-Funke]

I was looking for more info, a better understanding, and a robust conversation. Loki and I had exchanged some PMs about the Rittenhouse trial and his responses were considered, detailed and civil and I assumed he’d be able to do the same on this topic. And he totally did. So, no tuesday, I was not trying to come up with an absurd unanswerable question. The majority of people that I’ve spoken to seem to parrot back media talking points and I wanted to hear from someone who was clearly knowledgeable.

I am admittedly hesitant af on this thing and remain so. I have an inherent distrust of the government, media and big pharma, and I think summarily dismissing the vaers information is foolish. But that’s my opinion, and we’re all entitled to one.

It seems clear there’s not much to be gained from continuing this conversation, so shalom to everyone and stay safe 🤙

[excitableboy]

No such thing as 'definitively' in science, Tobias. I understand being wary but if you're going to brush aside overwhelming likelihood because it's not 'definitive', you're not being reasonable.

Looks like we're headed for actual mandates over here. Austria considering 7200 euro fines.

[Loki700]

Mutations

I mean if you really want to split hairs like this, then sure.  If I drop a ball, it won't "definitively" drop to the ground, but it's "extremely likely".  Nothing can be proven definitively, but we've shown as close to definitively as possible that Delta originated from unvaccinated populations in India, and as definitively as possible that Omicron originated from unvaccinated populations in South Africa.  If you're unwilling to accept that then it's essentially the same thought process as a conspiracy theorist, where no amount of data is ever enough to convince them.

Risk Taking

Again, as close to definitively as possible.  All of the data shows this is the case.  If an unvaccinated person has a 17.5% chance of spreading the virus and a vaccinated person has a 3% chance, that is also "less likely", but focusing on that wording and not the fact that the chance is astronomically smaller is a bad faith argument.  Funnily enough, both people not wearing masks and around 10 people not wearing masks?  The unvaccinated person is 5.8 times as likely (21 vs 3.6 risk factor) to spread the virus, which matches those percentages exactly.

Antibody-Dependent Enhancement

It's more so that you're taking it out of context and to mean that it would definitely cause ADE, or was very likely to.  He was saying that we have to check to make sure that's not the case, like we do with every new vaccine.

The vaccines actually had completed their phase 3 trials in December, so it was already known by January 25th that they didn't cause ADE. 

Your Understanding

You said that they "are also experiencing some of the highest case numbers" which isn't true.  I said "higher" because your implication was that the rates were higher than unvaccinated countries, which simply isn't true.

Big Pharma

You said "I don’t believe they pay money to all of these tv shows for no reason...I assume they expect something in return."
The implication from that is pretty clear; the pharmaceutical companies are sponsoring the media so that they will endorse their vaccine, and the reason pharmaceutical companies are doing this is to make more money.  Period.

They are also doing it to increase the vaccination rates, and have done so in countries they aren't making any money.  What are they "getting in return" from this?

Is this the only way?

Now this, this is a straw man.  I never said they were comparable, I used the Black Death as an example because it is the most widely known pandemic before vaccination existed. 

What I did say was that viruses like this cull the population until it reaches a point that it can't mutate and thus propagate anymore.  For the black death, that number was gigantic.  It would of course be smaller for Covid.  But is it acceptable for millions of people to die when their deaths could have been prevented by vaccination simply because it's smaller than billions?

Diminishing symptoms won't stop the spread of the actual disease.  They help alleviate the suffering and improve the survival rate, but the virus will still be transmitted then.  As I have gone over, this leads to mutations, which makes it harder to fight and more dangerous, which leads to more death that is preventable because people don't want to admit that the data shows that vaccines are extremely safe.

Also, Covid has already spread to every single continent.  In what way will it "become endemic"?  Where are you getting that from?

Unless you mean that it's going to be a persistent thing, in which case, I would agree, which makes vaccines all the more important.  Without vaccinations, even more people would die every year.  If you truly find that acceptable, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Like you, I distrust the government and I don't believe that pharmaceutical companies want what's best for me.  However science doesn't have an agenda.  The scientific method is proven and extremely robust.  There are still systemic issues within the scientific community where people are mistreated, but it gives us an accurate model for the world around us and helps us make sense of how things work.  The science overwhelmingly shows that vaccines are safe and are the only effective way to truly stop an epidemic/pandemic, because without them there's nothing stopping the virus from propagating.

I also think it's worth pointing out that from a business standpoint, it doesn't make sense for pharmaceutical companies to push vaccines as a way to make money.  They aren't and have never been a big money maker for these companies.  The big money makers are the maintenance medications that people have to take.  To give you an idea, just one of the medications that I have to take daily?  If all of the people with the same condition in the US took this medication, that's $4.7 billion per year for them.  That's just one medication!  Granted not every single person like me takes the medication, but that is where the true money is.

It is in the pharmaceutical companies' best interest to keep as many people alive as possible so they can continue to make that sweet sweet maintenance medication money.  That's the reason I think they are trying to push the vaccine, not for altruistic reasons, but because it helps their bottom line.  That's why they took the gamble of trying to develop a vaccine and get it approved, because if it didn't show it was effective, or worse, actively hurt people, they would lose out on the millions spent developing the vaccine.  Sure some of the people involved probably want to help people, but keeping us alive is just in their best interest.

Anyway, I truly hope you reconsider and get the vaccine.  It really is the only way to stop the virus, and also the only way to protect the immunocompromised people who can't get the vaccine and are even more at risk if they contract the virus.  I can't make you do it, and all I can do is clarify things for you and explain them, because they aren't always clear and often lead to misconceptions.

I'll also admit that I've gotten frustrated at times during this back and forth, and probably was civil than I should have been, and for that I truly apologize.

[lemonchicken91]

Sorry t funk, I was on one earlier

[sometimeperhaps]

I appreciate the discussion here, and the mutual respect back and forth. So weird to see online, but refreshing.

Loki, thanks for writing all that and making it comprehendible for a layman. Helps me understand so much more about the topic.

[Loki700]

I appreciate the discussion here, and the mutual respect back and forth. So weird to see online, but refreshing.

Loki, thanks for writing all that and making it comprehendible for a layman. Helps me understand so much more about the topic.

Sure thing, I’m glad I was able to make it understandable.  Sometimes I tend to struggle with that.

Got my booster yesterday.  Got Moderna the first time around, got Pfizer this time because my wife found some data suggesting that if you get the other vaccine as a booster you get a bit more protection and are a bit less likely to spread it.

I also got the HPV vaccine, which they extended the age for.  They recommended against it if you were over 18 last time I heard about it, but they now recommend it for up to 45 years I think?  Anyway, if you haven’t gotten it already I’d recommend it.

[Bunk Moreland]

“I don’t trust the government, we need to take the vaers data seriously. The data compiled by the government and reported on a government website.”

[IUTSM]

Expand Quote

I appreciate the discussion here, and the mutual respect back and forth. So weird to see online, but refreshing.

Loki, thanks for writing all that and making it comprehendible for a layman. Helps me understand so much more about the topic.

[close]

Sure thing, I’m glad I was able to make it understandable.  Sometimes I tend to struggle with that.

Got my booster yesterday.  Got Moderna the first time around, got Pfizer this time because my wife found some data suggesting that if you get the other vaccine as a booster you get a bit more protection and are a bit less likely to spread it.

I also got the HPV vaccine, which they extended the age for.  They recommended against it if you were over 18 last time I heard about it, but they now recommend it for up to 45 years I think?  Anyway, if you haven’t gotten it already I’d recommend it.

Can you say more about why you recommend the HPV vaccine? My partner has gotten the HPV shot and I'm not with anyone else. Thanks!

[Loki700]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

I appreciate the discussion here, and the mutual respect back and forth. So weird to see online, but refreshing.

Loki, thanks for writing all that and making it comprehendible for a layman. Helps me understand so much more about the topic.

[close]

Sure thing, I’m glad I was able to make it understandable.  Sometimes I tend to struggle with that.

Got my booster yesterday.  Got Moderna the first time around, got Pfizer this time because my wife found some data suggesting that if you get the other vaccine as a booster you get a bit more protection and are a bit less likely to spread it.

I also got the HPV vaccine, which they extended the age for.  They recommended against it if you were over 18 last time I heard about it, but they now recommend it for up to 45 years I think?  Anyway, if you haven’t gotten it already I’d recommend it.

[close]

Can you say more about why you recommend the HPV vaccine? My partner has gotten the HPV shot and I'm not with anyone else. Thanks!

Mainly just additional protection more than anything, for her and you because it can affect men from what I understand.  I don’t know a ton on the topic, but I was recommended to get it even though me and my wife are monogamous.

[IUTSM]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

I appreciate the discussion here, and the mutual respect back and forth. So weird to see online, but refreshing.

Loki, thanks for writing all that and making it comprehendible for a layman. Helps me understand so much more about the topic.

[close]

Sure thing, I’m glad I was able to make it understandable.  Sometimes I tend to struggle with that.

Got my booster yesterday.  Got Moderna the first time around, got Pfizer this time because my wife found some data suggesting that if you get the other vaccine as a booster you get a bit more protection and are a bit less likely to spread it.

I also got the HPV vaccine, which they extended the age for.  They recommended against it if you were over 18 last time I heard about it, but they now recommend it for up to 45 years I think?  Anyway, if you haven’t gotten it already I’d recommend it.

[close]

Can you say more about why you recommend the HPV vaccine? My partner has gotten the HPV shot and I'm not with anyone else. Thanks!

[close]

Mainly just additional protection more than anything, for her and you because it can affect men from what I understand.  I don’t know a ton on the topic, but I was recommended to get it even though me and my wife are monogamous.

right on. I'm not sure how HPV can be transmitted outside sexual intimacy.

[Loki700]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

I appreciate the discussion here, and the mutual respect back and forth. So weird to see online, but refreshing.

Loki, thanks for writing all that and making it comprehendible for a layman. Helps me understand so much more about the topic.

[close]

Sure thing, I’m glad I was able to make it understandable.  Sometimes I tend to struggle with that.

Got my booster yesterday.  Got Moderna the first time around, got Pfizer this time because my wife found some data suggesting that if you get the other vaccine as a booster you get a bit more protection and are a bit less likely to spread it.

I also got the HPV vaccine, which they extended the age for.  They recommended against it if you were over 18 last time I heard about it, but they now recommend it for up to 45 years I think?  Anyway, if you haven’t gotten it already I’d recommend it.

[close]

Can you say more about why you recommend the HPV vaccine? My partner has gotten the HPV shot and I'm not with anyone else. Thanks!

[close]

Mainly just additional protection more than anything, for her and you because it can affect men from what I understand.  I don’t know a ton on the topic, but I was recommended to get it even though me and my wife are monogamous.

[close]

right on. I'm not sure how HPV can be transmitted outside sexual intimacy.

That is the main way, but standard disinfectants don’t work on the virus, and so even though it’s rare, it could potentially spread through inanimate objects.  It also isn’t just cervical cancer it increases the risk of, that’s just the one that is raised the most.

I guess most people wind up contracting the virus at some point in their lives?  Getting the vaccine later in life isn’t as effective as if you got it before any sexual contact, but it’s still not a bad idea.

Also there’s always a chance that a monogamous couple could slip a bit, and I figure it’s better to be protected.

[biaherl]

Got my booster and the flu shot today. Can't wait to see what happens

[skunty]

Hey Loki, how important is the Booster? Like say what's the % chance of contracting/spreading covid comparing an unvaxed/already had it/vaxed/boosted? I got my moderna in February. From what I understand the vaccine had like 5% chance of breakthrough, and after 8 months its like 6% or 7% chance (or in scarier terms, 37% more likely). If what I said is accurate, the zeal with which people are pushing the booster does not seem warranted. I don't know shit about virology and I am opposed to learning about it, but those stats are easy for anyone to understand. Am I way off?

[Loki700]

Hey Loki, how important is the Booster? Like say what's the % chance of contracting/spreading covid comparing an unvaxed/already had it/vaxed/boosted? I got my moderna in February. From what I understand the vaccine had like 5% chance of breakthrough, and after 8 months its like 6% or 7% chance (or in scarier terms, 37% more likely). If what I said is accurate, the zeal with which people are pushing the booster does not seem warranted. I don't know shit about virology and I am opposed to learning about it, but those stats are easy for anyone to understand. Am I way off?

We're getting into territory that my knowledge is a bit lacking and I'd be harder pressed to tell you the percent chance, but from what I've been able to find the booster is definitely warranted.  With the new variants and the decrease in antibodies, the efficacy of the vaccine 5-8 months after getting your second dose is significantly lower.

Basically, at 14-60 days following the second dose, the efficacy of the vaccine was 95%.  151-180 days (5.5-6.5 months) after the second dose, the efficacy was found to have dropped to about 79%.

Another study showed that efficacy dropped from 88% to 47% after 5 months.  It also found that overall the efficacy was a bit lower for Delta both right after the 2nd dose and 5 months after; basically it was around a 4% difference for a freshly vaccinated person compared to a 14% difference at 5 months, meaning you're even more exposed to Delta and probably Omicron (it wasn't included in the study due to the recent discovery) with greater time.

To cap this all off, in Israel they saw a rise from about 1% positive tests in the middle of July to 7.5% at the beginning of September, when they started boosters.  Following the booster shots, the percentage dropped back to 2.6% at the beginning of October.

What's important to note about Israel, is that the percentage is all tests, not just vaccinated people.  The unvaccinated population benefitted from the boosters as well, due to the herd immunity.  Starting from the point of the new boosters, the vaccinated group's new severe cases per day dropped right away, while the unvaccinated group plateaued for a little under a month, then their cases fell as well, much more quickly due to the fewer instances of people with the virus thanks to the vaccinated group not being able to spread it.

This shows that not only does the vaccine work, but that you need to have a large majority (Israel is at 80% of the population being vaccinated) vaccinated to actually see the benefits, and it really is the only way to stop the disease for both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.  Anything else is an insufficient band aid.

TL:DR - Get the booster, it's worth it.  Your protection drops enough against Covid, and even more against Delta after 5-6 months, and the booster brings you up to where you were or better.

[skunty]

Expand Quote

Hey Loki, how important is the Booster? Like say what's the % chance of contracting/spreading covid comparing an unvaxed/already had it/vaxed/boosted? I got my moderna in February. From what I understand the vaccine had like 5% chance of breakthrough, and after 8 months its like 6% or 7% chance (or in scarier terms, 37% more likely). If what I said is accurate, the zeal with which people are pushing the booster does not seem warranted. I don't know shit about virology and I am opposed to learning about it, but those stats are easy for anyone to understand. Am I way off?

[close]

We're getting into territory that my knowledge is a bit lacking and I'd be harder pressed to tell you the percent chance, but from what I've been able to find the booster is definitely warranted.  With the new variants and the decrease in antibodies, the efficacy of the vaccine 5-8 months after getting your second dose is significantly lower.

Basically, at 14-60 days following the second dose, the efficacy of the vaccine was 95%.  151-180 days (5.5-6.5 months) after the second dose, the efficacy was found to have dropped to about 79%.

Another study showed that efficacy dropped from 88% to 47% after 5 months.  It also found that overall the efficacy was a bit lower for Delta both right after the 2nd dose and 5 months after; basically it was around a 4% difference for a freshly vaccinated person compared to a 14% difference at 5 months, meaning you're even more exposed to Delta and probably Omicron (it wasn't included in the study due to the recent discovery) with greater time.

To cap this all off, in Israel they saw a rise from about 1% positive tests in the middle of July to 7.5% at the beginning of September, when they started boosters.  Following the booster shots, the percentage dropped back to 2.6% at the beginning of October.

What's important to note about Israel, is that the percentage is all tests, not just vaccinated people.  The unvaccinated population benefitted from the boosters as well, due to the herd immunity.  Starting from the point of the new boosters, the vaccinated group's new severe cases per day dropped right away, while the unvaccinated group plateaued for a little under a month, then their cases fell as well, much more quickly due to the fewer instances of people with the virus thanks to the vaccinated group not being able to spread it.

This shows that not only does the vaccine work, but that you need to have a large majority (Israel is at 80% of the population being vaccinated) vaccinated to actually see the benefits, and it really is the only way to stop the disease for both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.  Anything else is an insufficient band aid.

TL:DR - Get the booster, it's worth it.  Your protection drops enough against Covid, and even more against Delta after 5-6 months, and the booster brings you up to where you were or better.

thanks G, those numbers were different than the ones I had previously read, but I was so unwilling to go wading in the shit soup of misinformation myself, so I truly thank you for doing the leg work for me, and now the only thing that's holding me back from getting it is laziness. just playin i think im gonna sign up to get it monday so i dont feel shitty thorughout the weekend

[IUTSM]

Let it be known that my last account was banned for posting an opinion in here that differs from that of the moderator.

I did not say one thing that goes against the user agreement, and was labeled an “antivaxxer” without saying anything remotely “antivaxx.”

Good luck to all of you and remember that there is nothing wrong with listening to both sides of an argument.

Edit: I do not mind in the slightest if anyone chooses to get a COVID shot, therefore I am not “antivaxx.”

I just believe that we are all entitled to our own opinions, but if the moderators want to quell those whos’ differ from theirs, then that is a serious issue.

HERE YE HERE YE.

nobody gives a fuck until your opinions can kill someone

[IUTSM]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Let it be known that my last account was banned for posting an opinion in here that differs from that of the moderator.

I did not say one thing that goes against the user agreement, and was labeled an “antivaxxer” without saying anything remotely “antivaxx.”

Good luck to all of you and remember that there is nothing wrong with listening to both sides of an argument.

Edit: I do not mind in the slightest if anyone chooses to get a COVID shot, therefore I am not “antivaxx.”

I just believe that we are all entitled to our own opinions, but if the moderators want to quell those whos’ differ from theirs, then that is a serious issue.

[close]

HERE YE HERE YE.

nobody gives a fuck until your opinions can kill someone

[close]

 
You’ve really been kept in the dark about vaccine injuries, huh?

https://openvaers.com/covid-data

And mods, the data on this site is straight from the CDC’s VAERS reporting system — this is not false information, although media outlets funded by Pfizer will sweep it under the rug, smearing the reporting system. Again, I’m just stating facts, and not breaking any rules in my user agreement.

HERE YE HERE YE

NOBODY GIVES A FUCK ABOUT YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE USER AGREEMENT NOR DO THEY ABOUT YOUR INTERPRETATION OF ANYTHING TO DO WITH A DEADLY PANDEMIC RESPONSE

[jorge sprauve]

did anyone hear about enlarged balls like nikki's cousin's bf? has anyone had any/heard of any harsh reactions? i've read about myocarditis and seen some soccer plays drop dead but the latter isn't proven to be shot related. i see a lot of 'sore arm, slightly sick for a day' reactions but did anyone or anyone you're buddies w/ have harsher reactions? sorry if i'm overstepping the rules by asking, seems like men have been blocked for less. would highspeed slap allow someone to post their harsh reactions if true or would that be grounds for block?