Interesting and balanced interview

[cc]

Dr Offit says if you have a vaccine that results in high levels of neutralizing antibodies, that's not a way to create variants,"

I understand his argument & it's theory, not fact based. The stuff is in no way like an antibiotic structurally



Yes, contrary to the initial claimant, what causes likelihood of variants is the infection spread. Each infection increases the chances of variants developing. The more cases the more likelihood.



Or put the other way, the less infections the less opportunity for variants



Most variants have  developed in high population / high case rate areas of the world .. this is logical & supports the above sentence 1 (India, S Africa for examples) and 2. the exceptions to that are  other areas (UK) when case rate is very high



keywords > "high local infection rates" > high changes of variants developing.



(Simply  look at from where and from when in time known variants developed)

[Frood]

:MG_216:

[cc]

Further to "high case rate in a dense population area is where variants are most likely to develop" ....



in addition to India &  S Africa,  at least 3 sub-variants of Delta  developed in packed UK cities during periods of very high infection rates



While there is a chance with every single infection, based on observed facts and not theory  the pattern for variant development "by chance" has so far been consistently where chance is highest

[Anonymous]

Dr Offit says if you have a vaccine that results in high levels of neutralizing antibodies, that's not a way to create variants,"

I understand his argument & it's theory, not fact based. The stuff is in no way like an antibiotic structurally



Yes, contrary to the initial claimant, what causes likelihood of variants is the infection spread. Each infection increases the chances of variants developing. The more cases the more likelihood.



Or put the other way, the less infections the less opportunity for variants



Most variants have  developed in high population / high case rate areas of the world .. this is logical & supports the above sentence 1 (India, S Africa for examples) and 2. the exceptions to that are  other areas (UK) when case rate is very high



keywords > "high local infection rates" > high changes of variants developing.



(Simply  look at from where and from when in time known variants developed)

I'll read more about his theory tonight.

[Frood]

:001_rolleyes:



Or you all could watch the video....................

[Anonymous]

Dink, watch this video.

[media]

[Anonymous]

Dink, watch this video.

[media]

[cc]

Well, at least it's 16 minutes, not what would seem like 1600 minutes    :43(2):

[Anonymous]

Geert Vanden Bossche has published a scant amount of work, and tellingly he chooses predatory publishers like Longdom, owner of the Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination..



His position about innate immunity has been demolished and declared nonsense and his arguments against vaccination are a regurgitation of what Andrew Wakefield once made for MMR..



I found this that debunked one of Geert Vanden Bossche's main concerns:



I have to point out that coronaviruses, in particular SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, do not mutate especially fast as RNA viruses go. This particular coronavirus happens to have a proofreading mechanism that results in a low mutation rate compared to that of a lot of other RNA viruses, such as, for example, the influenza virus. Seriously, as a "vaccine expert", how is it that Dr. Vanden Bossche does not know this? Even so, concern about immune escape is one reason why Pfizer, BioNTech, and Moderna used the entire SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, rather than specific segments of it that might serve as antigens, so that the polyclonal antibody immune response generated would be broad and unlikely to be "escaped" with single mutations—or even multiple mutations. A recent review article suggests that immune escape by variants of SARS-CoV-2 is a possibility, but one that hasn't been definitively observed or demonstrated yet:



Vanden Bossche's scientific argument in broad terms is that the current COVID-19 vaccines, through a mechanism analogous to antibiotic resistance, will create mutant variants of the virus that escape the protection of those vaccines. This problem will be exacerbated, he claims, because people who have been vaccinated (and/or social distancing and staying inside during the pandemic) will be less capable of fighting off those strains than someone who has not been vaccinated.



RNA viruses like SARS-CoV-2 do mutate. Several variations of the originally isolated strain have emerged since the start of the pandemic, and some of these variants are more infectious, contagious, or possibly deadly. While mutations to SARS-CoV-2 would be happening regardless of any human intervention, the notion that vaccination might apply evolutionary pressure toward variants that can escape current vaccines is not untenable.



Variants are "a thing to keep an eye on," Saad Omer, an epidemiologist who serves as director of the Yale Institute for Global Health, told us in a phone interview. But, he said, Vanden Bossche's arguments "take a little bit of truth and then add a whole lot of misrepresentation."



Vanden Bosche argues that widespread vaccination will put evolutionary pressure on the viruses to develop adaptations —  in this case changes to the spike protein that allows the virus to infect cells — in a way that will allow it to escape the vaccine's protection. He invokes the discovery of variants currently in circulation that have altered portions of the spike protein — the target of COVID-19 vaccine — implying that these observations lead credence to his hypothesis. They do not. All of these variants were discovered prior to any widespread vaccination program.



Vanden Bossche asserts that COVID-19 vaccines pose a unique risk of producing dangerous variants in part because people who are vaccinated will be spreading the mutations while asymptomatic. Mass vaccination programs, he claims, are "turning vaccinees into asymptomatic carriers" who can unknowingly spread these more dangerous strains by "shedding infectious variants." However, increasingly clear evidence exists that the current COVID-19 vaccines reduce transmission, as well as the amount of viral material available for shedding, even in asymptomatic cases. Evidence exists that they achieve this effect even against the variant strains of SARS-CoV-2.



"It is," Vanden Bossche asserted in one of his letters, "reasonable to assume that vaccination of young and healthy people will inevitably lead to long-lived suppression of their variant-nonspecific, innate immune defense." The mechanism he invokes is that vaccine-produced antibodies will "outcompete" the more general defenses of the innate immune system.



This makes no sense, Yale's Omer told us. The production of targeted antibodies obviously creates a different response than a natural infection because "you're producing antibodies against specific needs ... therefore you have a limited targeted immune response, not the whole response that you see after an infection." The notion that this is somehow a problem relies on the unsupported claim that a natural infection would be better equipped to kill SARS-CoV-2. "The underlying fallacy," Omer explained, is that a natural infection is better than a vaccine. "It isn't," he told us. "Natural infection kills."



There is lots of information about the Belgian veterinarian..



His theories are not backed by data and debunked by scientists.

[Anonymous]

Once again Freud posted a video without checking anything about the fool or his ideas.

[Bricktop]

Freud needs to learn about the virtue of credibility. It's one thing to quote a source...but do a little homework first.

[Frood]

Like perhaps watch the blooming video instead of instantly seek to discredit it because it possibly won't suit your prejudices.



Most of you are scared lil cowardly progressives on the covid/death jab issue.



It's funny to watch.... old people fearing their own mortality and being led down the garden path.   ac_toofunny

[Bricktop]

It's funny to watch.... old people fearing their own mortality

Wait till you hit 70, short pants.



The world is a vastly different place.



And please...by all means...tell us how it won't happen to you, it will be different... ac_toofunny

[Frood]

I doubt I'll make 70.... with any luck.



I hate tapioca pudding, recreation rooms, and haemorrhoids...

[Bricktop]

Hope you die before you get old, eh...



Not gonna happen, Freudy...only the good die young.