Page 671 of 690 FirstFirst ... 171571621661669670671672673681 ... LastLast
Results 13,401 to 13,420 of 13787
  1. #13401
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA.
    Quote Originally Posted by aimo View Post
    Our epidemiology guru said the cell lines were from 1970. I am not trying to split hairs or anything, I was just wondering about the difference in dates referenced. Any idea?
    There was more then one fetus involved, and one was from earlier than the mid
    -80s.

  2. #13402
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by rsvman View Post
    There was more then one fetus involved, and one was from earlier than the mid
    -80s.
    Thank you. That's what I figured.

  3. #13403
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I know I am going to feel dumb/ignorant for asking this... but I'm asking anyway.

    So, my wife's arm was really sore and she got a red rash (called "Moderna arm") a few days after shot #1. She had a little bit of a headache too.

    My arm was a little sore the night after and the next day, nothing too bad... but I have not really had any bad symptoms. Does this mean my immune system isn't working as hard on fighting this? Or are the bad after effects that indicate a robust immune response mostly after shot #2?
    Anecdotally, #1 was sore arm and otherwise piece of cake for me, and then #2 kicked my [fanny].

  4. #13404
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    Jason, Jason

    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I know I am going to feel dumb/ignorant for asking this... but I'm asking anyway.

    So, my wife's arm was really sore and she got a red rash (called "Moderna arm") a few days after shot #1. She had a little bit of a headache too.

    My arm was a little sore the night after and the next day, nothing too bad... but I have not really had any bad symptoms. Does this mean my immune system isn't working as hard on fighting this? Or are the bad after effects that indicate a robust immune response mostly after shot #2?
    I hate to be the first one to tell you this, but:

    It’s over.

  5. #13405
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lynchburg, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by rsvman View Post
    I'm sure by now you have all also heard about the newly raised objections by some religions and religious spokespeople about the Johnson and Johnson vaccine because the adenovirus vector is grown in a cell line derived from an aborted fetus. (Of note, both Pfizer and Moderna also used the same cell line in some of their pre-clinical studies, but for some reason they don't have a problem with that?)

    Anyway, there seems to be a lot of misinformation out there, and this is likely not the forum that really needs this tiny bit of education, but just so I can feel like I didn't ignore what is becoming (apparently) a really important point about covid vaccines right now, I'll press on briefly.

    Cell lines are cells that grow very well outside the body and are used for medical research, medical diagnostics, and pharmaceutical product development (and probably for other things that I don't really know much about). They grow fairly rapidly and are continuously fed, maintained, and "split" so that they can continue to grow and be useful. Viruses cannot grow outside of cells, so cell lines are necessary for growing viruses. Since the J&J vaccine uses an adenovirus vector, it has to be grown. It so happens that this particular fetal cell line grows the virus efficiently.

    The cells were derived from an aborted fetus back in 1985 and the cells have been propagated ever since. They have also been used (and are still being used) in the development of other vaccines, including hepatitis A and varicella zoster vaccine, among others.

    Here's my take on this situation. The fetus was not aborted to get his/her cells. The fetus was aborted because its mother wanted an abortion. I get that some people see abortion as completely abhorrent and think that the mother in question should never have aborted her son. I understand that. But we can't go back in time and make the abortion not happen. Had the cells not been derived from the aborted fetus, the fetus would just have been thrown into an incinerator and burned. Instead, that aborted fetus has prevented human suffering and disease for decades.

    So do the opponents of abortion really think it would be better if the fetus had just been thrown away? I would understand their objection if the fetus had been sacrificed for the sole purpose of obtaining these cells to make this cell line, but that is not what happened. And we can't go back in time and have the baby not be aborted. So our choices are i) he/she gets aborted and gets thrown away and incinerated, or ii) he/she is aborted, but we harvest a few cells and turn them into a continuous cell line that has a myriad of uses, most of which have alleviated or prevented human suffering and death. Given those choices, can they really prefer choice number 1?

    Oh, and if they are that opposed to the use of the fetus-derived cells, why are they not also opposed to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines? I guess using the fetus-derived cell line "a little bit" is ok, but using the same cell line "a lot" is not ok? To me the whole thing is mind-boggling.

    Finally, to be clear, there are none of these cells in the vaccine itself. It is just used to produce the virus.


    To their credit, though, and for completeness's sake, the Vatican has said that if you don't have a choice as to what vaccine you are going to get, it is ok to get the J&J vaccine. Also, Holy Cross has agreed to get J&J vaccine distributed and administer it.
    I’m Protestant but have done a fair amount of reading on the Catholic Church’s position on vaccines prepared using cells from aborted fetuses. The Vatican offered guidance in this issue in response to questions about MMR and several other vaccines. It’s a complicated theological issue and one that’s hard to discuss in detail without wading in to PPB territory. Whatever one’s opinion about the Catholic position on medical research using aborted fetal cells, the logic of the Bishops’ statement on the J&J vaccine is consistent with this paper.

    In short, there’s a difference between formal and material cooperation with evil and when dealing with material cooperation, the degree of cooperation matters. The Catholic Church teaches that taking a vaccine is passive material cooperation with a high degree of remoteness from the initial evil act (the abortion). Again, I’m not offering my thoughts on the Catholic Church’s position on this issue, but it does explain how the Bishops concluded that taking the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines (efficacy confirmed using fetal cell lines) was morally preferable to J&J (developed using fetal cell lines) if a person is offered a choice. In situations where there’s no alternative, the moral benefit of saving a life/preventing illness/protecting your neighbor outweighs the remote passive material participation with the initial abortion.
    Last edited by mph; 03-05-2021 at 05:59 PM.

  6. #13406
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA.
    Quote Originally Posted by mph View Post
    I’m Protestant but have done a fair amount of reading on the Catholic Church’s position on vaccines prepared using cells from aborted fetuses. The Vatican offered guidance in this issue in response to questions about MMR and several other vaccines. It’s a complicated theological issue and one that’s hard to discuss in detail without wading in to PPB territory. Whatever one’s opinion about the Catholic position on medical research using aborted fetal cells, the logic of the Bishops’ statement on the J&J vaccine is consistent with this paper.

    In short, there’s a difference between formal and material cooperation with evil and when dealing with material cooperation, the degree of cooperation matters. The Catholic Church teaches that taking a vaccine is passive material cooperation with a high degree of remoteness from the initial evil act (the abortion). Again, I’m not offering my thoughts on the Catholic Church’s position on this issue, but it does explain how the Bishops concluded that taking the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines (efficacy confirmed using fetal cell lines) was morally preferable to J&J (developed using fetal cell lines) if a person is offered a choice. In situations where there’s no alternative, the moral benefit of saving a life/preventing illness/protecting your neighbor outweighs the remote passive material participation with the initial abortion.
    Interesting. I still don't understand it, but it is enlightening to hear others' points of view.

  7. #13407
    The Economist works on explaining the difference between the various vaccines. Article isn't paywalled, but you must be registered.

    New data show that leading covid-19 vaccines have similarly high efficacy

    Studies of millions of people, with the same place and time, provide fairer comparisons than clinical trials do

    "Fortunately, apples-to-apples comparisons are now possible, based on millions of people who got different vaccines in the same country at the same time."

    "Three studies show that single doses of the two jabs are similarly effective."

    "found that one dose of either jab is 80% protective against hospitalisation in people aged at least 80, starting 14 days after vaccination."

    "According to the latest data from Israel, two doses are about 90% protective against any form of covid-19, including asymptomatic infection."


    https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2021/03/06/new-data-show-that-leading-covid-19-vaccines-have-similarly-high-efficacy

  8. #13408
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Summerville ,S.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by YmoBeThere View Post
    The Economist works on explaining the difference between the various vaccines. Article isn't paywalled, but you must be registered.

    New data show that leading covid-19 vaccines have similarly high efficacy

    Studies of millions of people, with the same place and time, provide fairer comparisons than clinical trials do

    "Fortunately, apples-to-apples comparisons are now possible, based on millions of people who got different vaccines in the same country at the same time."

    "Three studies show that single doses of the two jabs are similarly effective."

    "found that one dose of either jab is 80% protective against hospitalisation in people aged at least 80, starting 14 days after vaccination."

    "According to the latest data from Israel, two doses are about 90% protective against any form of covid-19, including asymptomatic infection."


    https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2021/03/06/new-data-show-that-leading-covid-19-vaccines-have-similarly-high-efficacy
    Great article. I shared this with my daughter and her friends.

    She switched from pharmacy to legal .(thr cost on that in school is another story)but her pharmacist and young MD friends Were quite interested.

    They are all stressed over the covid
    Vaccine distribution system in our area.

    They are having extra doses that are going to waste. If they cant find people to vaccinate.
    Unofficially they call friends and such
    Get here now we will push you through.
    Get your first shot in.
    So they are doing the best they can.

  9. #13409
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Summerville ,S.C.
    This article i read the otherday states the uk is delaying second injections to 12 weeks to provide
    Some protection to many more to reduce the amount severest Cases .
    I was wondering if we shouldn't adopt this approach.
    That way we can synthesize the second doses to some variants .
    Thats my very uneducated guess about it.

    https://consumer.healthday.com/b-2-3...650280984.html

  10. #13410
    Quote Originally Posted by wavedukefan70s View Post
    This article i read the otherday states the uk is delaying second injections to 12 weeks to provide
    Some protection to many more to reduce the amount severest Cases .
    I was wondering if we shouldn't adopt this approach.
    That way we can synthesize the second doses to some variants .
    Thats my very uneducated guess about it.

    https://consumer.healthday.com/b-2-3...650280984.html
    It's an interesting option, but I wonder what the fallout rate would be with that long of a period between shots?

  11. #13411
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by wavedukefan70s View Post
    This article i read the otherday states the uk is delaying second injections to 12 weeks to provide
    Some protection to many more to reduce the amount severest Cases .
    I was wondering if we shouldn't adopt this approach.
    That way we can synthesize the second doses to some variants .
    Thats my very uneducated guess about it.

    https://consumer.healthday.com/b-2-3...650280984.html
    Your can't change course this far into the vaccination program. There would be tens of millions of people counting on a timely second dose who would be disappointed. "Take-aways" are difficult in government. Also, we are soon to experience a cornucopia of vaccines.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  12. #13412
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Your can't change course this far into the vaccination program. There would be tens of millions of people counting on a timely second dose who would be disappointed. "Take-aways" are difficult in government. Also, we are soon to experience a cornucopia of vaccines.
    Yeah, but it is still sad to note that we are just now dropping below the peak of last summer's wave.

    But then for something like that to work, people such as I need to stop whining about which vaccine we may be offered.

  13. #13413
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boston area, OK, Newton, right by Heartbreak Hill
    The US administered nearly 3 million doses yesterday, with 1 million of those receiving their second does. We will be at 90 million doses delivered by tomorrow at the latest. We will be at 20% of the population with one dose and 10% of the population fully vaccinated by Tuesday. We don't need to change course. We are dusting the rest of the world in this particular area.

    Worldwide fully vaccinated: 65.4 million (as of 2 days ago on the website I usually look at).
    USA fully vaccinated: 29.8 million (9% of population)

    A couple of examples for comparison:
    Canada fully vaccinated: 560k (1.5% of population)
    UK fully vaccinated: 1.1 million (~1.5% of population)
    Last edited by Bostondevil; 03-07-2021 at 01:19 PM.

  14. #13414
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Summerville ,S.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bostondevil View Post
    The US administered nearly 3 million doses yesterday, with 1 million of those receiving their second does. We will be at 90 million doses delivered by tomorrow at the latest. We will be at 20% of the population with one dose and 10% of the population fully vaccinated by Tuesday. We don't need to change course. We are dusting the rest of the world in this particular area.

    Worldwide fully vaccinated: 65.4 million (as of 2 days ago on the website I usually look at).
    USA fully vaccinated: 29.8 million (9% of population)

    A couple of examples for comparison:
    Canada fully vaccinated: 560k (1.5% of population)
    UK fully vaccinated: 1.1 million (~1.5% of population)
    I did not realize we had vaccinated that many . 3 million is a sizeable chunk.in two days of that mu state would br done and havr3 half a million extra .of one dose.

    That puts a different perspective.

    I couldn't imagine if we had trained troops and really blasted people through .
    I guess as bad as it is its still pretty dang good .

    That rush to get production and pre-purchase of vaccines .plus the adjustment by our medical communities dedication to get this done is something to be proud of.
    Ill have to treat a few i know to lunch.

  15. #13415
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boston area, OK, Newton, right by Heartbreak Hill
    Quote Originally Posted by wavedukefan70s View Post
    I did not realize we had vaccinated that many . 3 million is a sizeable chunk.in two days of that mu state would br done and havr3 half a million extra .of one dose.

    That puts a different perspective.

    I couldn't imagine if we had trained troops and really blasted people through .
    I guess as bad as it is its still pretty dang good .

    That rush to get production and pre-purchase of vaccines .plus the adjustment by our medical communities dedication to get this done is something to be proud of.
    Ill have to treat a few i know to lunch.
    You mean public health/infectious disease personnel. The public health folks already have the training and know how, they just lack the funding and the respect, so yeah, bringing in the military as back-ups is a good idea because they do have the funding.

  16. #13416
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Summerville ,S.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bostondevil View Post
    You mean public health/infectious disease personnel. The public health folks already have the training and know how, they just lack the funding and the respect, so yeah, bringing in the military as back-ups is a good idea because they do have the funding.
    Thats what i was thinking. If somewhere gets overwhelmed .deploy personnel as needed. They have to be paid anyway .
    Change thier mission temporarily to meet the needs . Thats a pin drop in the budget .

  17. #13417
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    very interesting and complex Covid article in the New Yorker march 1 issue, discussing why some countries (crowded and poor) have (seemingly) far fewer Covid cases(as in two orders of magnitude fewer)...a number of factors appear to be responsible...

  18. #13418
    Quote Originally Posted by budwom View Post
    very interesting and complex Covid article in the New Yorker march 1 issue, discussing why some countries (crowded and poor) have (seemingly) far fewer Covid cases(as in two orders of magnitude fewer)...a number of factors appear to be responsible...
    Haven’t read the article but I know that ‘crowded and poor’ countries also tend to have a much younger population than more developed countries. Young people are likely asymptomatic or barely symptomatic and, especially in a poor country with limited testing, unlikely to ever get counted as a ‘case.’

  19. #13419
    The Atlantic article on differences between the vaccines.


    The Differences Between the Vaccines Matter

    Yes, all of the COVID-19 vaccines are very good. No, they’re not all the same.
    HILDA BASTIAN11:28 AM ET


    "There’s a problem here. It’s certainly true that all three of the FDA-authorized vaccines are very good—amazing, even—at protecting people’s health. No one should refrain from seeking vaccination on the theory that any might be second-rate. But it’s also true that the COVID-19 vaccines aren’t all the same: Some are more effective than others at preventing illness, for example; some cause fewer adverse reactions; some are more convenient; some were made using more familiar methods and technologies. As for the claim that the vaccines have proved perfectly and equally effective at preventing hospitalization and death? It’s just not right."


    https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/618226/

  20. #13420
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by YmoBeThere View Post
    The Atlantic article on differences between the vaccines.


    The Differences Between the Vaccines Matter

    Yes, all of the COVID-19 vaccines are very good. No, they’re not all the same.
    HILDA BASTIAN11:28 AM ET


    "There’s a problem here. It’s certainly true that all three of the FDA-authorized vaccines are very good—amazing, even—at protecting people’s health. No one should refrain from seeking vaccination on the theory that any might be second-rate. But it’s also true that the COVID-19 vaccines aren’t all the same: Some are more effective than others at preventing illness, for example; some cause fewer adverse reactions; some are more convenient; some were made using more familiar methods and technologies. As for the claim that the vaccines have proved perfectly and equally effective at preventing hospitalization and death? It’s just not right."


    https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/618226/
    Are people really claiming that the vaccines are “perfectly and equally effective at preventing hospitalization and death?” Seems like a strawman to me.

Similar Threads

  1. Lacrosse: The 2020 Season
    By burnspbesq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 215
    Last Post: 04-15-2020, 12:13 AM
  2. 2020 Final Four
    By szstark in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-09-2020, 12:00 PM
  3. MLB 2020 HOF Election
    By Blue in the Face in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-24-2020, 12:28 PM
  4. FB: 2020 Schedule is out
    By nocilla in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 01-22-2020, 07:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •