War Biden: Federal Vaccination Effort Will Go ‘Door to Door’ to Get People COVID-19 Shots - No, I'm not gonna get your stupid ass jab

  • Twórca wątku Twórca wątku tehpope
  • Data rozpoczęcia Data rozpoczęcia
President Joe Biden on Tuesday said that the federal government's vaccination efforts will shift from mass vaccination sites to "literally knocking on doors" in some instances to get people inoculated against the coronavirus.

"We are continuing to wind down the mass vaccination sites that did so much in the spring to rapidly vaccinate those eager to get their first shot and their second shot for that matter, if they needed a second," Biden said in the South Court Auditorium at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building near the White House. "Now we need to go to community by community, neighborhood by neighborhood, and oft times door to door – literally knocking on doors – to get help to the remaining people protected from the virus."

Biden's message came after he fell short of his July 4 vaccination goal to reach 70% of U.S. adults with at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. The figure currently stands at just over 67%.

The Biden administration hopes to address concerns causing vaccine hesitancy with its more targeted approach to communities. But it's unclear how the door-to-door strategy will be received – especially among the 10% of unvaccinated adults who cited conspiracy theories or misinformation about the vaccines, skepticism of drug companies or general anti-government or anti-vaccine sentiment in a Morning Consult poll that asked why they won't get the shot.

According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 55% of the entire U.S. population is at least partially vaccinated against the coronavirus.

But Biden urged more people to get the shot as the highly transmissible delta variant spreads. The variant makes up about 25% of new coronavirus cases in the U.S. and is expected to become the dominant strain in the coming weeks.

"Right now, as I speak to you, millions of Americans are still unvaccinated and unprotected," Biden said. "And because of that their communities are at risk, their friends are at risk, the people they care about are at risk. This is an even bigger concern because of the delta variant."

He said the variant should "cause everybody to think twice" but specifically the "young people who may have thought that they didn't have to be vaccinated."

Future federal efforts to get people vaccinated during the summer will put a focus on communities, including making the shots available at local pharmacies, family doctors' offices and worksites when possible, Biden said.



end of article.

=========================================================

Fuck around and find out Joe. I guess "My Body My Choice" only applies to babies in the womb.
 
No no. What type of friend would I be to deny you something you need? Especially since...
You're the one who is a retard who doesn't believe in science, so yeah, you need it more than I do, friend. I know new things and change scare you right-wingers, but nothing bad will happen if you take it. In fact, your conman cult leader is the one who push for it to get made and was recently tardraging that he wasn't getting credit for it. So, in order to honor the conman you worship, you should get it
 
I know new things and change scare you right-wingers,

Uh, no.

I'm not scared of "new" things.

I never doubted the claimed efficacy, or the semantics of what to call the Jab , I just said I don't want it.

Like, I have no reason to doubt the car on sale at the dealer does in fact have a 3.8L V6 capable of a manufacturer-stated 186 HP....I don't have to open the hood or get a dyno sheet to "prove" it. I trust it's all accurate.

I just said I'm not interested in buying a car, even with a cushy government-mandated car loan, and suddenly people are saying I doubt the laws of thermodynamics, think internal combustion is a conspiracy theory and if they had their way, they'd be able to send the salesman to my house and FORCE me to sign the title, for my own good because I clearly don't see the Deal of the Century right in front of my own face!

All I ever said was "no thanks"
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Serious question for you all: what is it that you fear? Why are you so against getting this vaccine?
Heart Inflammation.
Blood Clots.
Stroke.
Long term effects that weren't noted because there's been no long term trial.
Death at a rate that's higher than the virus.
80% miscarriage rates in certain studies.
Censoring inventors of technology that you use to force everyone under the thumb, for wrong think.
Censoring studies.
Refusing to acknowledge side effects because it may "turn people away from vaccine".
Refusal to acknowledge that the Spike Protein is the devastating part. Especially for the Vascular system.
Needed agreed indemnity against being sued before it would be released.
Being forced to take something because government says so is the most slippery of slippery slopes. See : Some dude named Hitler. CCP.

If you're O.K with all that, good for you. You take it. It will protect you, won't it? Or perhaps not.
There's sources for all the above, you'd have to be exceptionally ignorant to not have access to it at this stage.

Also it's not a vaccine, by their (companies) own admission. It doesn't stop you from getting it or spreading it, admitted by their own studies. It just supposedly lessens the symptoms.... when something like 89% of cases of Covid-19 were asymptomatic supposedly anyway.
But evidence coming out of Israel and the UK is to the contrary.

So to recap : Not a vaccine, doesn't stop the spread, the stress on hospital systems was less than the "start" (which was a lot of rubbish as evidenced by their own numbers and revisions), has a massive list of damaging outcomes, didn't make it through animal trials, is being forced by government with freebies, jackpots or just plain forced.

Serious question for you : What is it that you fear from people not taking this shot? Why are you so against people not getting it?
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
I’ll wait until the results of the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials are available to the public.
 
AIDs spread worse than COVID because faggots could not just stop bareback fucking in bath houses. It was more important than breathing to them.

If AIDs had hit in the current year of globohomo instead of the 80s we'd have millions of dead from it. Homosexuality being still taboo kept that shit from spreading beyond the bug hives.
That's the same misconception that caused the AIDS pandemic to spread. It doesn't matter how "safe" you think you are, you are likely to get HIV/AIDS from unprotected sex as any other person. People like to fuck with no regard. If you want to have sex, get tested.
 
You're the one who is a retard who doesn't believe in science, so yeah, you need it more than I do, friend. I know new things and change scare you right-wingers, but nothing bad will happen if you take it. In fact, your conman cult leader is the one who push for it to get made and was recently tardraging that he wasn't getting credit for it. So, in order to honor the conman you worship, you should get it
See, there you go proving me right that you need another shot. Don't worry buddy, I'll be sure to tell them that my friend Hollywood Hulk Hogan need it more than me.
 
Many of us refused to even WEAR masks, so here we are.

I imagine the AIDS pandemic would've spread similarly with that attitude.
There are three ways the virus transmits, fomite (infected surface), large droplet, and aerosol. A surgical mask is for reducing large droplet transmission (aka a sneeze to the face, this is also where the 6ft rule comes from) 1 of the 3 modes of transmission. For some reason public health has completely ignored the aerosol component of the virus. If you look at case studies on the diamond princess cruise ship Covid is spread by aerosol transmission to a large degree, this occurred even after confining everyone to their quarters on the ship, and even under well ventilated conditions. Aerosols are created just by breathing. However you feel about masks I think it's important to realize you're wearing almost nothing, because the virus is spread by aerosol. It's unfortunate that the most rabid mask wearing folk don't understand their t-shirt mask is doing nothing to reduce aerosol transmission, or protect them from it. Aerosol aka Airborne transmission was largely ignored by the mainstream media. If you look at some outdoor testing sites under tents, they even had various things to move air in specific ways. Also some news articles show covid wards, and on the doors a big sign stating"airborne precautions." That means a whole diff ballgame for PPE, eg rated respirators etc.

So in a way this is positive, because it's like you've been wearing nothing this whole time.
 
You know what the worst part is? It probably isn't something nefarious like that at all. This is probably being done purely out of wounded egotism on the Administration's part for not hitting that "100% vaccinated by July 4th" goal they were always talking about.
That still doesn't make any sense. Like I said in the Biden Megathread, no one is holding this farce of an administration to account when it comes to COVID. There is absolutely no point for them to keep telling people to get vaccinated. They could just as well move on to their next left-wing scheme.
 
See, there you go proving me right that you need another shot. Don't worry buddy, I'll be sure to tell them that my friend Hollywood Hulk Hogan need it more than me.
Sorry, but being an anti-vax right-wing retard that doesn't believe in science indeed makes one retarded. Having an anime profile picture only adds to it. Go get the shot, friend
 
No no. What type of friend would I be to deny you something you need? Especially since...
Untitled.png

The more jabs he gets, the more powerful he becomes. The god of vaxxmaxxing.
After all:
Mix-and-match COVID vaccines: the case is growing, but questions remain
Dyani Lewis
Full text:
d41586-021-01805-2_19314250.jpg

A pharmacy worker prepares a vaccine while sitting behind a shelf stacked with AstraZeneca and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine vials

A mixture of two COVID-19 vaccines could provide a similar immune response to two doses of a single vaccine.Credit: Canadian Press/Shutterstock

Mixing COVID-19 vaccines is emerging as a good way to get people the protection they need when faced with safety concerns and unpredictable supplies. Most vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 must be given in two doses, but multiple studies now back up the idea that mixing the Oxford–AstraZeneca jab and the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine triggers an immune response similar to — or even stronger than — two doses of either vaccine.

Results announced on Monday 1 by a UK group suggest that the combination sometimes outperforms two shots of the same vaccine, and a similar picture is emerging from German studies2,3.

People can now “feel a bit more comfortable” with the idea of mix-and-match, says immunologist Leif Erik Sander at Charité University Hospital in Berlin.

The results are also giving researchers confidence that combining other COVID-19 vaccines, that haven’t yet been tested together, might also work. But at least 16 vaccines have been approved for use in one or more countries, and mix-and-match studies so far have been small, so more extensive trials and long-term monitoring for side effects are sorely needed.
Immune system boost

Mix-and-match studies were prompted, in large part, by concerns over the safety of the vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca in Cambridge, both in the United Kingdom. The jab has been associated with rare instances of a blood-clotting condition known as thrombosis with thrombocytopaenia — and in March, some European countries decided to halt its use in some groups of people. This left many people partially vaccinated, unless they switched to a different brand for their second dose.

In May, researchers at the Carlos III Health Institute in Madrid announced results4 from the CombiVacS trial. The study found a strong immune response in people who were dosed with the vaccine developed by pharmaceutical company Pfizer, based in New York City, and biotechnology firm BioNTech in Mainz, Germany, 8–12 weeks after receiving a dose of the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine.

There was no head-to-head comparison with people who received two doses of the same vaccine, but the authors found that in laboratory tests, those who received the combination produced 37 times more SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies and 4 times more SARS-CoV-2-specific immune cells, called T cells, than did people who had just one dose of the Oxford–AstraZeneca jab.

By the end of June, more results had emerged showing a similar effect.

Sander and his colleagues looked at 340 health-care workers who had received either two doses of the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine, or an initial shot of the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine followed by a dose of Pfizer–BioNTech. Both regimens triggered an immune response that included neutralizing antibodies and T cells2.

A third study, by researchers at Saarland University in Homburg, Germany, found3 that the mixed regimen was better at eliciting an immune responses than were two Oxford–AstraZeneca shots. It was also as good as or better than two shots of Pfizer–BioNTech.

And on 25 June, the team behind the UK trial — known as the Com-COV study — posted a preprint online1 showing that a good immune response resulted irrespective of the order in which the two vaccines were given.

However, the trials so far have been too small to test how effective combinations of vaccines are at preventing people from developing COVID-19. “As long as you don’t have any long-term or any follow-up studies with efficacy calculations, it’s hard to say” the level or duration of protection, says Martina Sester, an immunologist who led the Saarland study.

Another limitation of the work so far is that there’s no easy way to compare different combinations between studies. Large-scale efficacy studies are becoming more difficult, says Sester. That’s because, as infection rates decrease, the number of people in a study must increase to detect any difference in rates of infection and disease. Trials pitting mix-and-match vaccine sequences against a placebo control would also be unethical, she adds.

That’s one reason why efforts are under way to determine a ‘correlate of protection’ — a defined level of immune response that confers protection against infection and disease. “This is extremely urgent,” says Sander.
A nuanced picture

But a nuanced picture is emerging of the magnitude and types of immune response that mixing vaccines produces. And these differences could be exploited to provide the best protection.

The Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine uses a harmless virus called an adenovirus to carry genetic material from SARS-CoV-2 into cells. Vaccines using this technology have a good track record of inducing strong T-cell responses, says Sander, whereas vaccines using messenger RNA, such as Pfizer’s, have proved “exceptionally good” at inducing high levels of antibodies.

Five female health workers wearing pink and purple attend to an elderly man receiving a COVID-19 vaccine in rural India.

Combining vaccines could help ease supply problems in remote locations, such as rural areas of India.Credit: Dibyangshu Sarkar/AFP/Getty

Sester says that high levels of antibodies after the second shot are an indicator that the combination approach works. “Neutralizing antibodies are probably a good surrogate for predicting efficacy,” she says, because they help to prevent viral infection. But T cells, especially ‘killer’ T cells that carry a protein called CD8, protect against severe disease by killing cells that have already been infected.

In the Com-COV study, the highest antibody response was in people receiving the standard two shots of Pfizer–BioNTech, but the response was almost as high in the combination of Oxford–AstraZeneca followed by Pfizer–BioNTech. This combination also had the best T-cell response — more than twice as high as that from the two Pfizer–BioNTech doses.

Mixing an mRNA vaccine and an adenovirus-based one could therefore provide “the best of two worlds”, Sander explains.

Sester and her colleagues found subtle differences in T-cell populations depending on the vaccines given. She says that understanding these nuances could lead to individualized strategies. Combinations that provoke good T-cell responses might be better for people who have had organ transplants and are taking medication to suppress their immune systems, for instance, because their bodies will struggle to produce antibodies. “There are many ways of exploiting this knowledge in a strategic way,” she says.
Safety concerns remain

No mix-and-match trials have yet reported severe side effects. In the Com-COV study, mixing vaccines elicited more side effects than did administering two doses of the same vaccine, according to preliminary data released in May5. But this wasn’t the case in the Charité and Saarland studies or CombiVacS, where side effects were no worse than for two shots of the same vaccine.

That’s probably due to the interval between doses, says Sester. Com-COV participants discussed in the latest paper received their second shot four weeks after the initial dose, whereas participants in the German studies had at least nine weeks between shots. Some Com-COV participants did receive doses at a longer interval; their data are anticipated in July.

Some safety concerns remain, says Sander. “You’re combining two different vaccines, both of which might have their own profile of adverse events and effects,” he says, which could amplify any problems.

The studies so far have enrolled only a few hundred people. This means that they are too small to pick up rare events such as the clotting conditions, which according to current estimates occur in around one in 50,000 people after the first Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine dose and in less than 1 in 1.7 million after the second. The condition has also been associated with an adenovirus vaccine produced by pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

In small studies, “you do not pick up your one-in-1,000 side effect, let alone your one-in-50,000 side effect”, said Matthew Snape, an Oxford vaccine researcher who is leading the Com-COV study, at a press conference on 28 June.

d41586-021-01805-2_19314254.jpg

A health worker prepares a COVID-19 vaccine at a vaccination centre at a movie theatre in Manila, Philippines.
Seven COVID-19 vaccines have been approved in the Philippines, where a trial will test China’s CoronaVac in combination with the others.Credit: Ted Aljibe/AFP/Getty
The new norm?

The lingering possibility of rare side effects is one reason some researchers recommend that people stick to the standard two shots of a single vaccine for now. “To my mind, you are better defaulting to the ones where we know that they work and there’s a known quantity when it comes to their safety,” says Snape.

But as new variants of SARS-CoV-2 emerge, the results of mix-and-match trials could provide policymakers with the data they need to switch to more protective combinations. “It’s good to have that data in readiness,” says Fiona Russell, a vaccine researcher at the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute in Melbourne, Australia.

Mix-and-match vaccines could also be used to prevent roll-outs stalling because of supply issues. “If there’s a global shortage of one particular vaccine, then rather than stopping the vaccination programme, it can continue,” says Russell.

“If it’s an option of either getting a mixed schedule or no second dose, then certainly go for the mixed schedule,” says Snape.

The Com-COV study has already begun testing other vaccines in people who have received an initial Oxford-AstraZeneca or Pfizer–BioNTech shot. One combination includes the yet-to-be-approved protein-based vaccine developed by the pharmaceutical company Novavax in Gaithersburg, Maryland. Another uses the mRNA vaccine from Moderna in Cambridge, Massachusetts, which has been approved for use in several countries.

In the Philippines, a study combining the inactivated-virus vaccine CoronaVac, developed by the company Sinovac in Beijing, with the six other vaccines approved in the country will run until November 2022. And a study by AstraZeneca and the Gamaleya Research Institute in Moscow will test combinations of the Oxford–AstraZeneca jab and Gamaleya’s adenovirus-based Sputnik V shot.
 
AIDs spread worse than COVID because faggots could not just stop bareback fucking in bath houses. It was more important than breathing to them.

If AIDs had hit in the current year of globohomo instead of the 80s we'd have millions of dead from it. Homosexuality being still taboo kept that shit from spreading beyond the bug hives.
You have no proof of any of this.
Heart Inflammation.
Blood Clots.
Stroke.
Long term effects that weren't noted because there's been no long term trial.
Death at a rate that's higher than the virus.
80% miscarriage rates in certain studies.
Censoring inventors of technology that you use to force everyone under the thumb, for wrong think.
Censoring studies.
Refusing to acknowledge side effects because it may "turn people away from vaccine".
Being forced to take something because government says so.

If you're O.K with all that, good for you. You take it. It will protect you, won't it? Or perhaps not.
There's sources for all the above, you'd have to be exceptionally ignorant to not have access to it at this stage.
Proof of these claims please
 
That's the same misconception that caused the AIDS pandemic to spread. It doesn't matter how "safe" you think you are, you are likely to get HIV/AIDS from unprotected sex as any other person. People like to fuck with no regard. If you want to have sex, get tested.
What you posted does not refute the claim that HIV/AIDS spreads more easily from Male/Male anal sex then other forms of sex. Yes, people can get it other ways, but homosexuals who do the butt stuff are especially at risk. Condoms are protection against getting the disease in question first and foremost, tests can only tell you if you or your partner/potential partner has it or not, which is useful, but not a preventative.
 
Many of us refused to even WEAR masks, so here we are.

I imagine the AIDS pandemic would've spread similarly with that attitude.
There's a difference between "hedonistic recklessness in the face of an incurable, life-altering disease" and "not worrying about something that makes the last cold I had look like Ebola". More to the point, there's a serious question of why the virus is being made out to be the unholy fusion of the Grim Reaper and RNGesus, as well as why skepticism towards the threat it poses as conveyed by media and government and towards the responses to it thus far are treated like great heresies against science itself, and why the curve never flattens or the threat never diminishes no matter what.
 
That's the same misconception that caused the AIDS pandemic to spread. It doesn't matter how "safe" you think you are, you are likely to get HIV/AIDS from unprotected sex as any other person. People like to fuck with no regard. If you want to have sex, get tested.
Not sure if you are saying AIDs wasn't spread through gay sex or that these designer fag drugs for suppressing viral load doesn't mean you are 100% safe.

If its the latter then I agree. The virus will mutate due to these suppressants and then we get the real "gay plague" inshallah.
 
Serious question for you all: what is it that you fear? Why are you so against getting this vaccine?
I cannot trust my government on any level; Local -> County -> State -> Federal, as they have all shown to be a pack of sharks looking to loot what they can before being voted out.

I cannot trust my government who is in bed with friends of big money who operates above the law, when not writing the law and getting the legislators to pass it.

I cannot trust my government to operate honestly about my health, when one of the first things we heard about this disease is there is no legal recourse for people who take it.

I cannot trust my government whose leading man has been talking out of both sides of his mouth during this whole ordeal and then criticizing the skeptical as being anti-science.

I cannot trust my government who has a partial role in funding the development of this weaponized disease, and then tells me I'm in the wrong for not trusting their judgement.

I cannot trust my government who fails to even try to allay the fears of the skeptical and instead turns to demonizing them like they're a leper or apostate.

I cannot trust my government to do right by me, or anyone else, when there's plenty of "medical experiments" like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment that was operated by them.

I cannot trust my government who stood idly by, while social media sites censored and banned people with real credentials in proper fields from speaking their concerns about what's going on.

I cannot trust my "healthcare workers" who had time to do coreographered dances in the parking lot, staging themselves like Jesus and the Last Supper, or doing the shuck-and-jive pallbearers; while also going on social media and pretending to break down because this virus is so horrible, it's like nothing we've ever seen, and everyone is going to die... if they can't whip and nae-nae.

It's not fear, it's an issue of trust, and I haven't lost my fangs or survival sense to willingly step into the jaws of an alligator because my betters tell me to.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Wstecz
Top Na dole