Comment on Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories by Sean Pitman.
Well, I wouldn’t say that it’s “illegal” to know which variant one has, although it may be more difficult to find out – since the rules for labs are “confusing” and it might be somewhat impractical for the CDC to share this information with particular individuals since it takes some time to figure out. However, I’m not sure why this information is being held from public health officials? – at least according to NBC News back in February of 2021? I’m not sure if this situation has improved since then or not?
Federal rules around who can be told about the variant cases are so confusing that public health officials may merely know the county where a case has emerged but can’t do the kind of investigation and deliver the notifications needed to slow the spread, said Janet Hamilton, executive director of the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists. (Link).
Local health departments and the Centers for Disease Control can take those samples from your nose swab or saliva test and sequence its genome to figure out what variant of the virus you have. Sequencing can happen days or even weeks later, said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California San Francisco. They do this to study how quickly the virus is mutating and which variants are becoming dominant in different parts of the country. However, they’re not typically sharing this information with the people whose samples are sequenced, the New York Times reports. (Link)
Right now, at least, one can be pretty confident that if he/she gets sick, it’s with the Delta Variant.
As far as the rate of breakthrough infections and their cause, certainly, our knowledge is incomplete, but it’s also not that bad either. It’s not like the evidence that we currently have gives us no good direction as the basis for decision-making. The degree of breakthrough infections, as well as the relative rate of hospitalizations and deaths, can be determined with a pretty good degree of accuracy. Also, it seems pretty clear that the reason for the increased rate is largely due to the arrival of the Delta Variant, with its significantly increased rate of infection and viral load, along with some decrease in the effectiveness of vaccine-derived immunity over time (particularly beyond 8 months or so. However, the evidence showing a pretty high rate of efficacy against hospitalizations and deaths, for the vaccines, is still very encouraging.
Sean Pitman Also Commented
Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories
Fetal cell lines, originally produced decades ago, were used in the testing of the mRNA vaccines – as they were in the testing of Tylenol, Motrin, Robitussin, Aspirin, Sudafed, Tums, Lidocaine, and a host of other modern medications that most people use on a semiregular basis (Link).
Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories
I see no evidence that the published ingredient lists for the mRNA vaccines are not transparent and factual. There just is no credible evidence for “graphene” in these vaccines and fetal cell lines simply aren’t necessary to produce these types of vaccines.
Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories
The hospitalization/death rate is far less for the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated (Link). Note, in this line, that those states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest death rates per capita:
Florida is even higher than Mississippi https://t.co/BdRl2DmLo5 pic.twitter.com/uI0xKAZ6ji
— Eric Topol (@EricTopol) September 19, 2021
As far as natural immunity gain via a prior COVID-19 infection, it can actually be superior to the immunity gained via full vaccination. However, natural immunity is less predictable. Up to a third of people who were previously infected by COVID-19 don’t develop antibodies against it (Link). However, if one can demonstrate an adequate level of antibodies against COVID-19 it seems reasonable to me that such people should be considered to have adequate immunity.
As far as the immunity generated by vaccination, the type of immunity generated would not be so effective at preventing a mucosal nasopharyngeal infection since the types of antibodies produced (IgG and IgM) would preferentially be blood-based rather than tissue-based (IgA) type of immunity (Link). Because of this, naturally derived immunity might have an additional advantage in this regard as well.
Recent Comments by Sean Pitman
After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!
The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…
The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…
Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.
Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).
Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.
