Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » BNT162b2 Vaccine and COVID-19 Ambulatory Visits in US Children
  1. Results 31 to 60 of 81
  2. Page 2 of 3
  3. First
  5. 1
  6. 2
  7. 3
  9. Last

Thread: BNT162b2 Vaccine and COVID-19 Ambulatory Visits in US Children

post 1690209763 09-17-2023, 10:13 AM
-
#31
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  3. Join Date: Jul 2003
  4. Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
  5. Posts: 68,360
  6. Subscribers: 2
  7. Rep Power: 698737
Yeah so anyway OP, you gonna tell us how many transfusions you've had of your hot, delicious Fauci Fluid?
Originally Posted By Dave22reborn⏩
Is there a reason that people should be alarmed?Are you gonna take a test every time you come down with something? Is that how you're gonna live your life? Not to mention getting numerous jabs a every year?
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
That's the narrative
...
Originally Posted By Bushmaster⏩
Acting stupid still.

How many covid vaccine injections have you had so far?
Originally Posted By Bushmaster⏩
What about psychological dependence?

How many have you had?
Originally Posted By Bushmaster⏩
Well? How many?
Originally Posted By Bushmaster⏩
So how many?
"That's the narrative" you said right?

So with that were you implying that you haven't had.... any?
It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife: the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sunup. Sleep tight mates, in your quilted chambray night shirts.
post 1690210893 09-17-2023, 10:39 AM
-
#32
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By jtaylor2010⏩
A paper that indicates the claims you shared are bullsh!t, as evidenced by the numbers.
Well no.

I'd suggest reading it for yourself rather than relying on a journalist's take
post 1690211323 09-17-2023, 10:51 AM
-
#33
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  3. Join Date: Jul 2003
  4. Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
  5. Posts: 68,360
  6. Subscribers: 2
  7. Rep Power: 698737
It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife: the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sunup. Sleep tight mates, in your quilted chambray night shirts.
post 1690211693 09-17-2023, 11:03 AM
-
#34
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By Dave22reborn⏩
Interesting how OP has a tendacy to leave out certain information.......
Shared the article.

The criticisms offered by new scientists are funny.
post 1690211863 09-17-2023, 11:07 AM
-
#35
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  3. Join Date: Jul 2003
  4. Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
  5. Posts: 68,360
  6. Subscribers: 2
  7. Rep Power: 698737
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Shared the article.

The criticisms offered by new scientists are funny.
Why?

Are we not "trusting the science" any longer?
It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife: the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sunup. Sleep tight mates, in your quilted chambray night shirts.
post 1690211963 09-17-2023, 11:10 AM
-
#36
  1. Polaris
  1. Polaris
  3. Join Date: Feb 2003
  4. Posts: 63,700
  5. Rep Power: 567256
Originally Posted By Bushmaster⏩
Why?

Are we not "trusting the science" any longer?
Not THAT Science.
post 1690212123 09-17-2023, 11:14 AM
-
#37
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By Bushmaster⏩
Why?

Are we not "trusting the science" any longer?
That's always been a silly phrase. I was referring to the new scientists ITT
post 1690212323 09-17-2023, 11:19 AM
-
#38
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  3. Join Date: Jul 2003
  4. Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
  5. Posts: 68,360
  6. Subscribers: 2
  7. Rep Power: 698737
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
That's always been a silly phrase. I was referring to the new scientists ITT
Either or.

Certainly no worse than you and Benny.
It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife: the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sunup. Sleep tight mates, in your quilted chambray night shirts.
post 1690212483 09-17-2023, 11:22 AM
-
#39
  1. Pterodactyl314
  2. See you tomorrow
  1. Pterodactyl314
  2. See you tomorrow
  3. Join Date: Apr 2015
  4. Location: Dirty South
  5. Posts: 19,745
  6. Rep Power: 163712
See you tomorrow
post 1690212633 09-17-2023, 11:25 AM
-
#40
  1. gachase21
  1. gachase21
  3. Join Date: Dec 2010
  4. Location: Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 31,767
  6. Subscribers: 4
  7. Rep Power: 389233
Op - there is more studies one of the Pfizer doc brahs in your op study was involved in you may want to read.

Very positive results from the Pfizer vaccine




post 1690212643 09-17-2023, 11:26 AM
-
#41
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By gachase21⏩
Interesting team
Why ignore the first 3 authors?

"Author Contributions: Mr Frankland and Mr Slezak had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis."
post 1690212713 09-17-2023, 11:27 AM
-
#42
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By gachase21⏩
Op - there is more studies one of the Pfizer doc brahs in your op study was involved in you may want to read.

Very positive results from the Pfizer vaccine
It's almost as if vaccines work

Why ignore the primary authors?

Ever published with a sponsor?
post 1690212863 09-17-2023, 11:30 AM
-
#43
  1. dabbmw2002
  2. Trolling the trolls.....
  1. dabbmw2002
  2. Trolling the trolls.....
  3. Join Date: Jan 2007
  4. Location: Maryland, United States
  5. Posts: 73,334
  6. Rep Power: 713784
Post deleted by user
Original Ruckus
post 1690213073 09-17-2023, 11:34 AM
-
#44
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
"Receiving at least 2 doses of wild-type BNT162b2 vaccine was associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19 ED or UC and outpatient visits in children younger than 5 years. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 encounters appeared lower for those with 2 vs 3 doses of BNT162b2, albeit with wide CIs, which is likely due to more immune-evasive Omicron sublineages (eg, BQ.1-related and XBB-related strains) becoming dominant by the time young children received their third dose5 and longer median time since dose 3 compared with dose 2. The OR of 0.67 is equivalent to vaccine effectiveness (1 minus the OR) of 33%, which is lower than the approximately 70% efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 seen in a clinical trial when BA.2 sublineages were predominant.6 Study limitations include the potential for unmeasured confounding, potential misclassification of prior infection or whether ARI encounters were truly related to COVID-19, and the restriction to only 1 mRNA product."
post 1690213283 09-17-2023, 11:37 AM
-
#45
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  1. Bushmaster
  2. Masculine Toxicity
  3. Join Date: Jul 2003
  4. Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
  5. Posts: 68,360
  6. Subscribers: 2
  7. Rep Power: 698737
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
"Receiving at least 2 doses of wild-type BNT162b2 vaccine was associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19 ED or UC and outpatient visits in children younger than 5 years. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 encounters appeared lower for those with 2 vs 3 doses of BNT162b2, albeit with wide CIs, which is likely due to more immune-evasive Omicron sublineages (eg, BQ.1-related and XBB-related strains) becoming dominant by the time young children received their third dose5 and longer median time since dose 3 compared with dose 2. The OR of 0.67 is equivalent to vaccine effectiveness (1 minus the OR) of 33%, which is lower than the approximately 70% efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 seen in a clinical trial when BA.2 sublineages were predominant.6 Study limitations include the potential for unmeasured confounding, potential misclassification of prior infection or whether ARI encounters were truly related to COVID-19, and the restriction to only 1 mRNA product."
It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife: the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sunup. Sleep tight mates, in your quilted chambray night shirts.
post 1690215063 09-17-2023, 12:10 PM
-
#46
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  3. Join Date: Jan 2005
  4. Location: Ill.
  5. Posts: 120,479
  6. Rep Power: 316531
Rest of the world isn't recommending boosters for those under 55, and for those who are healthy.

And that causes RainMan to short circuit, and for Backtracking Benny to accuse us of bullying......
post 1690215143 09-17-2023, 12:12 PM
-
#47
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By Dave22reborn⏩
Rest of the world isn't recommending boosters for those under 55, and for those who are healthy.

And that causes RainMan to short circuit, and for Backtracking Benny to accuse us of bullying......
No. Doesn't bother me at all

I think governments are weighing several components in the recommendations.
post 1690215833 09-17-2023, 12:29 PM
-
#48
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  3. Join Date: Jan 2005
  4. Location: Ill.
  5. Posts: 120,479
  6. Rep Power: 316531
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
No. Doesn't bother me at all

I think governments are weighing several components in the recommendations.
You're recommending for everyone to get a booster, rest of the world disagrees with you.

What do you know that they don't?
post 1690216193 09-17-2023, 12:35 PM
-
#49
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By Dave22reborn⏩
You're recommending for everyone to get a booster, rest of the world disagrees with you.

What do you know that they don't?
Where or when did I recommend anyone get a booster?
post 1690216233 09-17-2023, 12:36 PM
-
#50
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  3. Join Date: Jan 2005
  4. Location: Ill.
  5. Posts: 120,479
  6. Rep Power: 316531
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Where or when did I recommend anyone get a booster?
So children shouldn't get the booster?
post 1690216313 09-17-2023, 12:37 PM
-
#51
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By Dave22reborn⏩
So children shouldn't get the booster?
Should they?
post 1690220913 09-17-2023, 02:29 PM
-
#52
  1. jtaylor2010
  1. jtaylor2010
  3. Join Date: Mar 2010
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 33,185
  6. Rep Power: 441422
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Should they?
The vast majority of kids shouldn’t get the boosters. Do you disagree?
post 1690221093 09-17-2023, 02:32 PM
-
#53
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By jtaylor2010⏩
The vast majority of kids shouldn’t get the boosters. Do you disagree?
I think it's an individual decision.

Ideally made with guidance or input from someone with knowledge, training, and experience.

Some folks are okay with (repeated) infection, others aren't. Everybody's different
post 1690221763 09-17-2023, 02:46 PM
-
#54
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  3. Join Date: Jan 2005
  4. Location: Ill.
  5. Posts: 120,479
  6. Rep Power: 316531
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
I think it's an individual decision.

Ideally made with guidance or input from someone with knowledge, training, and experience.

Some folks are okay with (repeated) infection, others aren't. Everybody's different
The booster doesn't prevent repeated infection. Rainman gonna Rainman......
post 1690221803 09-17-2023, 02:47 PM
-
#55
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By Dave22reborn⏩
The booster doesn't prevent repeated infection. Rainman gonna Rainman......
Reduces the chance tho
post 1690222153 09-17-2023, 02:54 PM
-
#56
  1. jtaylor2010
  1. jtaylor2010
  3. Join Date: Mar 2010
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 33,185
  6. Rep Power: 441422
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
I think it's an individual decision.

Ideally made with guidance or input from someone with knowledge, training, and experience.

Some folks are okay with (repeated) infection, others aren't. Everybody's different
I think it’s an individual decision as well.

That being said, I think that the vast majority of kids are better off NOT getting a booster. Do you disagree?


The boosters don’t prevent repeated infections in any meaningful way.



Now, many countries no longer have a boosters-for-all policy (see ‘Another autumn, another COVID booster’). The United Kingdom announced in August that autumn boosters would be offered only to the most-vulnerable individuals, such as adults aged 65 and older and health-care workers. France does not recommend an autumn booster for people not in vulnerable groups. Germany is not mounting a booster campaign at all, although it does advise an annual booster for people in high-risk groups.

For people at low risk, the booster “is not necessarily protecting them against severe disease because they don’t have that risk to begin with”, says Amesh Adalja, an infectious-disease specialist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in Baltimore, Maryland.
post 1690222443 09-17-2023, 03:00 PM
-
#57
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By jtaylor2010⏩
I think it’s an individual decision as well.

That being said, I think that the vast majority of kids are better off NOT getting a booster. Do you disagree?


The boosters don’t prevent repeated infections in any meaningful way.



Now, many countries no longer have a boosters-for-all policy (see ‘Another autumn, another COVID booster’). The United Kingdom announced in August that autumn boosters would be offered only to the most-vulnerable individuals, such as adults aged 65 and older and health-care workers. France does not recommend an autumn booster for people not in vulnerable groups. Germany is not mounting a booster campaign at all, although it does advise an annual booster for people in high-risk groups.

For people at low risk, the booster “is not necessarily protecting them against severe disease because they don’t have that risk to begin with”, says Amesh Adalja, an infectious-disease specialist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in Baltimore, Maryland.
I disagree with your/Berenson's take.
post 1690222853 09-17-2023, 03:11 PM
-
#58
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  1. Dave22reborn
  2. Cold Hearted SOB
  3. Join Date: Jan 2005
  4. Location: Ill.
  5. Posts: 120,479
  6. Rep Power: 316531
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
I disagree with your/Berenson's take.
Numerous countries throughout the world disagree with you.
post 1690222963 09-17-2023, 03:12 PM
-
#59
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  1. J.L.C.
  2. Wat
  3. Join Date: Apr 2005
  4. Posts: 33,220
  5. Rep Power: 37920
Originally Posted By Dave22reborn⏩
Numerous countries throughout the world disagree with you.
Not really
post 1690223943 09-17-2023, 03:29 PM
-
#60
  1. katya422
  1. katya422
  3. Join Date: Dec 2011
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 34,673
  6. Rep Power: 372543
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Lower hospitalization rates tho.
I don't have the old post handy w/estimated hospitalizations for children under 5. I know that they said in their own documentation that there would be a lot more children hospitalized w/myocarditis vs. "saved from covid hospitalization".






This one is sort of new in case you haven't seen it.
Among 44 276 704 individuals with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccination, the incidence and clinical courses of VRM cases confirmed by the Expert Adjudication Committee of the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency were analyzed. COVID-19 VRM was confirmed in 480 cases (1.08 cases per 100 000 persons). Vaccination-related myocarditis incidence was significantly higher in men than in women (1.35 vs. 0.82 per 100 000 persons, P < 0.001) and in mRNA vaccines than in other vaccines (1.46 vs. 0.14 per 100 000 persons, P < 0.001). Vaccination-related myocarditis incidence was highest in males between the ages of 12 and 17 years (5.29 cases per 100 000 persons) and lowest in females over 70 years (0.16 cases per 100 000 persons). Severe VRM was identified in 95 cases (19.8% of total VRM, 0.22 per 100 000 vaccinated persons), 85 intensive care unit admission (17.7%)
https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/a...47?login=false

5.29 per 100,000 in males between 12 and 17.
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts