Jump to content

Coronavirus_2020.01.28


Jaydee
 Share

Recommended Posts

Manitoba vaccine lead says mixing vaccines is part of pandemic's 'big human experiment'

OTTAWA -- Dr. Joss Reimer, medical lead for Manitoba’s Vaccine Implementation Task Force, says that new vaccine recommendations from the National Advisory Committee on Immunization on mixing mRNA vaccines will be a form of trial and error.

“Well in some ways, during a pandemic everything we do is a big human experiment,” she said in an interview with CTV’s Question Period airing Sunday. “Because we're all having to learn together at the same time, about what works the best.”

https://beta.ctvnews.ca/national/politics/2021/6/6/1_5457570.amp.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

5 hours ago, Jaydee said:

Manitoba vaccine lead says mixing vaccines is part of pandemic's 'big human experiment'

OTTAWA -- Dr. Joss Reimer, medical lead for Manitoba’s Vaccine Implementation Task Force, says that new vaccine recommendations from the National Advisory Committee on Immunization on mixing mRNA vaccines will be a form of trial and error.

“Well in some ways, during a pandemic everything we do is a big human experiment,”

Well, it's ALL just a big human experiment, isn't it? from 3 million years ago to the present...? Aren't there only two certainties?😁

Speaking of experiments, the point is worth making again: As a society threatened by, and managing this pandemic and as our leaders slowly gain knowledge and we slowly mature and choose patience over petulance when it comes to that leadership, two separate and distinct groups are emerging:

One group takes scientific methods seriously, and the other group is beginning to conduct a ritualized experiment on itself by choosing not to get vaccinated, just because, I suppose, because I haven't yet heard of one good reason why*.

We are free to choose not to vaccinate of course, but the decision comes with consequences. Let us look at them.

The first group which has seen/heard the vaccination data and who subsequently are vaccinated, will be free of COVID-19, will not transmit the virus and will gradually restart a somewhat-normal life. We know that they will be almost completely free from infection and risk of death, and cannot infect others with COVID-19.

The other group in this little thought experiment is the unvaccinated and so will continue to be at high-risk, but only to, and from other unvaccinated people. They will almost certainly continue with the same results we have seen for the past 15 months, repeated in hospitals, ICUs and morgues, although at inevitably decreasing rates, ironically achieving "herd immunity" the other way rather than scientifically.

In my view, THAT is the "experiment" which those choosing vaccine "hesitancy" are beginning to carry out.

The "hesitancy" group's experiment is flawed from the start. As millions choose vaccination and become about 95% immune to COVID-19 and its transmission, the experiment's outcome is a simple logic problem as shown above. Anti-vaxxers choose to ignore medical and science-based truths and statistical probabilities with huge population sampling. That is not a problem for the vaccinated, it is only a problem for the unvaccinated.

As these two groups diverge in levels of health and survival rates, proof of full vaccination will become an increasing requirment for travel, commerce, business activities, sports, (which is swiftly recognizing these very factors), family cohesion and even long-term birth rates.

To me, the border can open any time now, but not for the unvaccinated. A mere negative COVID-19 test a few days prior to entry may have been an early solution, but no longer, in my view. We have sacrificed far too much to risk a fourth wave. If you want in to visit family, friends and to shop or travel, vaccinate and wait the time for full effectiveness.

* I know that there are medical reasons and age-group reasons and pauses because there isn't sufficient data yet.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This could certainly be an entire thread on its own, the equation is not as simple to me as it may be to others.

Simply put, and in the interests of brevity, I have a (new found) concern that serious people with serious questions about safety, efficacy and risk factors (both long and short term) have largely been dismissed out of hand as Trumpers and conspiracy theorists. That was and continues to be a huge mistake IMO and it has resulted in a loss of trust by some and a wait and see” attitude in others that was unnecessary and counter productive. The true anti-vax folks are not the people I’m talking about here, they were always unreachable.

Putting aside some personal bad experiences with the medical system, my limited knowledge of basic biology suggests that the vaccine itself is not a true vaccine in the classic sense. mRNA enters your cells and basically orders them to construct a spike protein that precipitates antibodies that serve to reduce your reaction to Covid. This protein remains with you, it effectively modifies the cells.

Now, I’m not saying that’s a good or bad thing, the truth is I don’t know, it means I’m left with questions and those questions have nothing to do with being a Trumper. That's really the point here, at least for me.

In simple terms, if you are immune, you can be exposed to a disease and not be affected by it. There are clearly no guarantees in life but it appears this vaccine does not confer immunity, it doesn’t prevent you from becoming infected and it doesn’t prevent you from infecting others.

Credible scientists with credible concerns about the long term effects of vaccine vs disease mortality, vaccine vs immune efficacy, and vaccine vs potential long term prion disease potential have been jumped on in a manner that causes me the same level of concern as the initial dismissal of a possible lab leak as a causal or the initial notion border controls and masks are inherently ineffective.

The fact that governments and drug companies are held "immune" from responsibility for ill effects doesn't help with those people who may, for good or ill, have become less trusting and more cynical. Given that many of the current "issues of the day" give one pause to ponder the loss of cause/effect thinking in general, I don't think this issue (the level of distrust) stands as particularly surprising. 

 

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

From the linked article above:

One group takes scientific methods seriously, and the other group is beginning to conduct a ritualized experiment on itself by choosing not to get vaccinated

You see?  This is the problem.  Accepting the vaccine as proven "science" and thinking that refusing to get the vaccine is the experiment.  I'd just like to point out, since the MSM has been suppressing this, that these are the very first mRna "vaccines" ever, that they have been rushed out to the public without full testing. that they aren't really "vaccines" in the traditional and commonly accepted sense at all and that the first use of any new medical technology is often accompanied with new and unexpected side-effects.

I'm obviously not saying there will be unexpected side-effects but it does happen.  So, if anything, both those who choose to get vaccinated and those who don't are participating in different experiments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, seeker said:

I'm obviously not saying there will be unexpected side-effects but it does happen. 

Got my 1st Pfizer shot April 1st, no reactions or side effects…..2nd shot scheduled for this Thursday …we will see 🤞

Meanwhile my oldest son got an AstraZenaca shot and felt horrible for about a day, fever, chills etc, then felt exhausted for about a week.

My Daughter just a sore arm…same with the youngest

Every one reacts differently according to their age, DNA , diet and over all physical shape.

Definitely an experiment going on here, but as Don basically says…get on board or get left behind…no ones forcing you to do anything, but there are ramifications to each choice.

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Jaydee said:

Got my 1st Pfizer shot April 1st, no reactions or side effects…..2nd shot scheduled for this Thursday …we will see 🤞

Meanwhile my oldest son got an AstraZenaca shot and felt horrible for about a day, fever, chills etc, then felt exhausted for about a week.

My Daughter just a sore arm…same with the youngest

Every one reacts differently according to their age, DNA , diet and over all physical shape.

Definitely an experiment going on here, but as Don basically says…get on board or get left behind…no ones forcing you to do anything, but there are ramifications to each choice.

Yeah, not talking about sore arm type reactions.  It's just not clear to me that "getting on board" is the right choice.  What if next year they find out those who are vaccinated are 500% more likely to have an adverse auto-immune response to Covid-22?  Ooops, sorry, we didn't expect that!

Get onboard or get left behind.  Hmmm, how about this;  take an experimental, new technology, drug created by evil, soulless, legally protected off-shore corporations and pushed by incompetent, self-serving, Governments and agenda-driven NGOs with unknown longterm health implications to protect yourself against a 0.005% threat or get left behind.  Yup, tough choice alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

seeker, thank you for your responses and views.

I suspect that Uğur Şahin of BioNTech knew what he / they were doing when they envisioned an mRNA solution. Yes, mRNA itself is completely new technology but that it worked surprised no one there who understood their research history and past successes and what they were imagining. Now we have at least three other options, one of which has been treated appropriately given the medical effects on some people.

It's indeed, really all an experiment. It has always been the nature of things in which probabilities, studies, history, experimentation and the study of results have kept most of us safe in a technological environment.

We can't accept our daily intake of 'engineered' food on the table or the design of the aircraft you're flying, both of which are based upon "probabilities", but then assign a special "questionable" status for a vaccine the details of which we may not comprehend, because we aren't accustomed to it yet. It isn't as though the "back-end" work hasn't been done.

I suspect flu-season vaccination regime in subsequent years will include the present one. Yes, all COVID-19 vaccines were rushed but the term isn't pejorative and doesn't imply lack of care and oversight. Most opined that we'd just be looking at some form of vaccine by late this year or next but here we are. 

The 95% statistics are there, and yes there are exceptions & failures, just like food allergies, airplane design failures and everything else in which we create and build for all and in which we place our trust. Let me ask about something closer to home; does it make sense, using your "evil off-shore corporations and self-serving governments, etc." as the metric, to not "get on board" a MAX these days?

There will always be "devils on the walls" to invoke and stare at and make us afraid. Freedom is the ability to make up one's mind on one's own, with as much disclosure of facts as possible. That's why vaccination is, & should be, a personal decision.

That there are logistical & social consequences to vax or not is a function of the societal structure and values we dwell within. We can't change that, not, at least, without result, (lockdowns, anyone?). One can't fail to disclose and then knowingly infect others without consequence - we know this from the AIDS experience. I do not think that this is any different.

So there really will be only two groups - the members of one who can engage socially without undue risk, and one in which there is proven risk to oneself and to others. I'll take the very high value of protection against this "variant" of the 1918 H1N1 flu over the almost-guaranteed outcome of contracting COVID-19 if unvaccinated. The "0.005%" chances you quote won't be the first thing that comes to mind in a hospital bed or an ICU. There's no such thing as "statistics" when you're it.

If there's anything unreasonable or needs justification or if I've missed something, please tell me. I suspect everyone will carry on as before but I think the discussion is worth it, even if it just exercises the old Covid-brain!

 

Edited by Don Hudson
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don; 

Thanks, an excellent and thought-provoking post (as always).

I wrote a long post with personal anecdotes, justifications, clarifications and foot notes, then deleted it. 

Probably best not to get into it.  I appreciate the time you took to write your post and do take much from it so I hope you don't feel your time wasted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

seeker, the conversation's the thing...I'm always interested in "personal anecdotes, justifications, clarifications and foot notes", so send them on - I can pm my email. At my stage of life it's the discussion, not the conclusion!

best, etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not know how anyone will make a decent statistical analysis from the pandemic.

It still remains that the chance of any one individual getting the virus is very low to start with.

So getting an idea that doing one thing or another will change the outcome is worse than gambling at the slot machines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fido said:

I do not know how anyone will make a decent statistical analysis from the pandemic.

It still remains that the chance of any one individual getting the virus is very low to start with.

So getting an idea that doing one thing or another will change the outcome is worse than gambling at the slot machines.

There is however a reality, if you go unvaccinated or unmasked and contract the virus the odds are in favour of you spreading the infection to those you love and associate with.  So in my opinion the vaccination makes the odds more plus than - re prevention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE REAL PANDEMIC LEADER SAVES ALBERTA

Hinshaw has set standard for credibility, compassion, unlike unbalanced politicians

  • Calgary Herald
  • 9 Jun 2021
  • DAVID STAPLES dstaples@postmedia.com twitter.com/davidstaplesyeg
img?regionKey=R9AUaqKwr%2bwTBfNGWmbOcw%3d%3d  

Alberta's real pandemic leader is again coming to our rescue.

Dr. Deena Hinshaw is once more setting the example for how we might better behave during the pandemic: less fearful and partisan, more reasonable and balanced.

That said, I'm not here to argue that Hinshaw is some kind of hero. That title goes to the foreign scientists who developed vaccines, with a standing ovation for grocery store clerks, truck drivers, factory workers, restaurant staff, delivery and repair men, and teachers, nurses and doctors, all those who risked viral exposure when mass vaccination was still just a hope.

But when it comes to Alberta's provincial leaders, Hinshaw has set the standard for credibility and compassion. No other provincial leader has struck the right note almost every single day. In fact, our politicians have too often been angry and unbalanced, either overly judgmental or overly defensive, with Premier Jason Kenney's monumentally dunderheaded mistake around his outdoor gathering being the latest example.

It's fair to say the Sky Palace gathering was a minor violation of public health guidelines. Federal NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh made a similar mistake only last week, driving without a mask on with a party worker from outside his own household in the same car. But no one is calling for him to be fired or fined. That's partly because Singh isn't in power. But mostly it's because he quickly owned up to his small error.

Kenney's failure to quickly recognize the gargantuan and incendiary persuasive power of the Sky Palace photos was political incompetence of the highest order. If this face-plant contributes to his own party turfing him in the next year, how can he complain? He blew it.

Kenney finally apologized on Monday, but he would have done well to listen to some sage advice from Hinshaw four days earlier.

Asked if Kenney had set a bad example as a leader when it came to following and promoting the rules, Hinshaw noted that even as people try to follow the rules, they will sometimes make mistakes. But, she said, they can still set an example by owning their error.

The NDP has rightly hammered on the Sky Palace blunder. But they're now calling for the mass firing of UCP ministers. Is that a reasonable standard? It strikes me as overly harsh. I'd like to live in a world where we accept apologies for small mistakes around health guidelines, especially during a pandemic with endless and ever-changing rules.

I've made similar mistakes when it comes to social distancing outdoors. I'd be astonished if most folks haven't, or committed even riskier violations, like visiting indoors with friends or family.

Hinshaw's wise words on how to handle honest mistakes is another example of her sound overall approach. By now, she's been called every curse word in the book on social media by far right and far left zealots, but she's guided us well, always mindful of the harm of viral spread, but also of the ongoing harm that comes with lockdown measures.

As she put it recently: “The public health measures that have been needed over the past year are unprecedented in our lived experience and they come with significant public health impacts, as well. These interventions have never been taken lightly. It's my opinion that we need to be as mindful of recovering from the impacts that the last year has had on Albertans' mental health, well-being and determinants of health as we are of the direct impacts of COVID-19 infection.”

If I had heard this same level of concern about lockdown harms more often from the NDP, I'd rate their pandemic response ahead of Kenney's UCP. But I haven't, and it's fair to wonder if Alberta would have been locked down as long and as severely as Ontario if the NDP had been in power.

Alberta will be reopening far ahead of many other provinces, which means Hinshaw is coming through on her most important promise.

Months ago, she said that vaccines were the endgame of the pandemic. The UCP reopening plan — fully endorsed by Hinshaw — makes good on that commitment. We won't be locked down deep into summer.

We'll have a Stampede. We'll even have folk fest events. That's Hinshaw coming to our rescue yet again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Inside the risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

China emulated US techniques to construct novel coronaviruses in unsafe conditions.

 

In 2013, the American virologist Ralph Baric approached Zhengli Shi at a meeting. Baric was a top expert in coronaviruses, with hundreds of papers to his credit, and Shi, along with her team at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, had been discovering them by the fistful in bat caves. In one sample of bat guano, Shi had detected the genome of a new virus, called SHC014, that was one of the two closest relatives to the original SARS virus, but her team had not been able to culture it in the lab.

Baric had developed a way around that problem—a technique for “reverse genetics” in coronaviruses. Not only did it allow him to bring an actual virus to life from its genetic code, but he could mix and match parts of multiple viruses. He wanted to take the “spike” gene from SHC014 and move it into a genetic copy of the SARS virus he already had in his lab. The spike molecule is what lets a coronavirus open a cell and get inside it. The resulting chimera would demonstrate whether the spike of SHC014 would attach to human cells.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The latest:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good Afternoon All:

I found this article from the National Post authored by Conrad Black. Mr Black has been accused as being "wordy" but I have found him to write in a very thought provoking concise manner.  A rather nice viewpoint on Canadian attributes.

Cue the the scroll button critics but here it is in its entirety. 

Conrad Black: I stood in line for a vaccine. It was grand, just like Canada's ice cubes | National Post

Conrad Black: I stood in line for a vaccine. It was grand, just like Canada's ice cubes

Canada is quiet because it has a genius of its own: there is almost no political violence because the Canadian tradition has always been one of endless good-faith negotiations

Conrad Black

Publishing date:

Jun 19, 2021  •  June 19, 2021  

 

After weeks of bemoaning the desolate public policy landscape of Canada, I feel a compulsion to write something positive; Canada, after all, is still a good country and a place where pleasant surprises still occur. As a change of pace, I want to write in praise of those administering the COVID vaccine. My visit to St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto on Monday to receive my second COVID vaccination was an uplifting experience. I was advised by text that my previous appointment had been moved forward a month and arrived ahead of time, prepared for a lengthy wait and a certain amount of amiable confusion, as occurred at my previous appearance for my first vaccination. The line outside on Queen Street moved fairly steadily and was filled with people speaking a variety of languages that are not official in this country, through their masks, but all were in good humour.

Canadian queues are among the things, like ice cubes and hockey, that Canada does better than anyone else. (American and British ice cubes are irritatingly insubstantial). Americans don’t particularly like lining up for things and it is such a competitive and individualistic society that while queues are rarely disorderly, there is often a cautionary air of impatience and even a hint of jostling. The British queue is robotic and silent, but with an air of sanctimony, presumably derived from comparisons with what the British encounter when they queue in France, Italy or Spain. There is an unspoken competition in the British queues over who can be the most stoical and demonstratively patient, and who can be the first to remind someone that queue-jumping is, next to cruelty to animals, the most abominable offence in Britain. Queues are effective in Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia, but they are stultifying; people don’t speak much and there isn’t a great deal of variety among them. In the queue at St. Michael’s, people were of all ages, with a full range of apparel from quite stylish women to a hoary man in authentic blue overalls. The most intriguing person in our line was a lady in an automated wheelchair who every couple of minutes embarked on a broad circular reconnaissance movement that always brought her back to several places behind the position in the queue that she had vacated, and we all, without histrionics, moved back to ensure that she had not lost ground from her perambulation. To anyone who has experienced the physical and verbal combat of trying to advance fairly to the front of any notional line-up in Italy or even southern France, not to mention, drawing from my own experience, such places as Egypt, Israel, Senegal, Brazil, Spain or Indonesia, a Canadian queue can be a somewhat enhancing experience that incites national pride.

The supervisory personnel at St. Michael’s were exquisitely courteous and friendly and I was directed to a perfectly comfortable chair at exactly the time that I had been advised when my vaccination would occur. A couple of nearby people on the same mission happened to be readers of this column and I enjoyed very interesting conversations with them as we awaited our turn. Signage and public address references to the Cardinal Carter wing of the hospital put me in mind of my late, great friend, Gerald Emmett Cardinal Carter, a wonderful man whom I miss every day. When I last saw him, it was on his deathbed in the Cardinal Carter suite of the Cardinal Carter wing, for the construction of which I did a modest amount of fundraising. There was a little nostalgia, even in this mundane expedition. The little bay of chairs where I was sitting was managed by a most efficient and agreeable man who asked only sensible questions and soon administered the most painless penetration with a needle I have ever had. I’m not overly squeamish about these things but when he asked me to keep my finger on the little piece of gauze, I wasn’t sure if he had already inoculated me. He asked me to remain exactly where I was for 20 minutes in case any negative reaction might occur.

None did; I’ve never had a problem with any inoculation. As far as I know, I’m not really allergic to anything and I have been blessed with good health all these years. As I was on the ground floor beside quite tall windows, I had the opportunity as I waited to take in the cityscape. After a couple of minutes, I realized how astonishingly free of litter the busy street corner of Queen and Victoria streets is. (The street names are redolent of Toronto’s profoundly Anglo-colonial urban origins.) From my chair, I searched every corner of the panorama along all of the converging streets without seeing anything that would qualify as rubbish. Similarly, the passersby, while not flamboyant (English-speaking Canadians rarely are), were of all ages, races and about equally divided between the two discernible sexes, but none seemed angry, purposeless, down-at-the-heel or overly self-conscious. From that vantage point, Canadians, or at least Torontonians, came across as well-adjusted and passably contented people.

At the risk of being portentous, this is the Canadian condition: good, rather well-educated people, derived from every imaginable ethnic group, a low violent crime rate, politics relatively free of financial corruption, a general absence of racial or other inter-group tensions, a respectably good justice system, especially compared to America’s prosecutocracy and carceral state. Canadians generally enjoy a good quality of life. Canada is always among the leaders in international surveys of desirable places to live. What is missing is drama, which in national terms usually translates as current or historic violence and political upheaval. Monuments to, and reminders of, such violence litter the landscape in many countries. Some commemorate recent violence, like the 9/11 memorial in New York. Others historic, such as U.S. Civil War battlefields, the Tower of London, the Verdun and Normandie war cemeteries of France, the great boulevards and Napoleonic monuments of Paris, and the countless locations in Rome and throughout Italy; or the architectural evidence, grouped closely together like the rings of a tree of successive regimes, in Berlin.

Canada is quiet because it has a genius of its own: there is almost no political violence because the Canadian tradition has always been one of endless good-faith negotiations. That is not to say we don’t have our issues. Our prime minister has subscribed (falsely and with no plausible authorization) on behalf of all of us to the supposition that Canada committed the heinous crime of attempted cultural genocide against Indigenous people. The government of Quebec is purporting unilaterally to modify the Constitution Act, 1982, to which it has never officially subscribed, as it purports to abolish the use of the English language in federal government buildings and in the workplaces of federally chartered companies such as the CBC and the chartered banks. Yet these are things we will work out in our own fashion. We win the trade-off: no person of sound mind wants the sort of rampant crime and frequent rioting that besets the United States, or war that is commemorated in monuments across Europe, from the Valley Of the Fallen near Madrid to the Kremlin.

There is no excuse for the fact that every Canadian man, woman and child has a per capita income that’s $10,000 below that of Australians, and this is a country where I was fired from my weekly spot on a radio station for defending Canadians against the charge of “systemic racism.” We will pay a price if our admirably quiescent nature degenerates into complacency. But the view from the vaccination lounge of St. Michael’s Hospital last week was serene and placatory.

National Post

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Don Hudson said:

His writing always reminds me of another, superb writer, George Will, who, ironically, the Washington Post carries biweekly.

 

His article on Canada Day was very well done as well.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Don Hudson said:

His writing always reminds me of another, superb writer, George Will, who, ironically, the Washington Post carries biweekly.

 

Good afternoon Don:

By any chance have you read Mr. Blacks treatise on FDR?

Although 600 pages of detailed research it really shows what a major contribution FDR did for not only the USA but for the world. Of personal interest was the New Deal on the major construction projects to get the USA back on its feet especially the Tennessee Valley Authority. Without the TVA the USA would not been as efficient in powering the manufacturing side. That being said the best one in the New Deal was the G.I. Bill which assisted returning veterans with their university education which really made the USA the world economic leader in the 1950’s.

Although it was applied to all veteran’s segregation laws of the time prevented negro veterans from applying to the more prestigious university’s post war. That one should be left to the arbitrators of history to discuss in the future after review of data from late 1960’s onward.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good Afternoon All:

 

Nearly 27,000 COVID-19 vaccines administered at record-breaking Scotiabank Arena clinic!  

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/scotiabank-covid19-vaccine-clinic-north-american-record-1.6082606 

27,000 vaccines administered at Scotiabank Arena Sunday in what city calls new North American record

CBC News · Posted: Jun 28, 2021 7:03 AM ET | Last Updated: June 28 

Toronto sets vaccine records

Meanwhile, hundreds of volunteers administered nearly 27,000 COVID-19 vaccines at a mass clinic in Toronto's Scotiabank Arena on Sunday. The city said the total number of doses administered there is believed to be a new record for most COVID-19 vaccinations given at a single clinic on a single day. 

Those vaccines made up nearly half of the 62,897 doses administered in Toronto on Sunday, including 57,825 second doses and 5,072 first doses. It was the largest number of doses ever administered in Toronto on a single day, according to a Monday media release from the city. 

Tory was among the 26,771 people who received a vaccine at the "Our Winning Shot" event at the home arena of the Toronto Maple Leafs and Toronto Raptors. 

At about 5 p.m. ET Sunday, the "Our Winning Shot" clinic surpassed the North American record of 17,003 doses by one clinic in a single day. Previously, Texas held that record with 17,003 shots administered at a drive-thru clinic at the Texas Motor Speedway in Fort Worth on April 30, according to a media release from that city. 

Toronto's clinic ran late into the evening and offered walk-in appointments for the last several hours. 

Adults were given the Moderna vaccine, while adolescents aged 12-17 were given Pfizer. 

Tory said some 800 staff and volunteers helped make the day run smoothly.  

"I wasn't too hung up on whether we set records or not, but I just thought the notion of having thousands of vaccinations take place on a given day — at such an important stage with our battle against COVID-19 — very important," Tory said at a news conference Monday.  

40% of Torontonians now fully vaccinated

Toronto also announced Monday that more than 40 per cent of Toronto residents 18 and up have now been fully vaccinated. Some 77 per cent of adults have received their first dose of the vaccine.  

The city and its health-care partners are operating a total of 36 vaccine clinics Monday.  

Meanwhile, the city reported an additional 216 new COVID-19 cases in Toronto since Friday — a daily average of 72 new cases.  

To date, the city has seen 169,735 cases of the virus, and 3,522 deaths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re Toronto record, impressive as will be the overall, long-term benefits for people and the economy. It is something for the Australians and their government to chew on. But for India, Australia would be dead-last for vaccination rates*.

I haven't read FDR yet. Thank you, A330PilotCanada the recommendation is helpful. I'm reading, "Educated - a Memoir", by Tara Westover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One must remain vigilant, plenty of flawed information still out there.

https://gizmodo.com/journal-retracts-terrible-study-that-claimed-widespread-1847219596

Journal Retracts Terrible Study That Claimed Widespread Covid-19 Vaccine Deaths

The study, based on misrepresented safety data, argued that vaccines would kill two people for every three lives they saved.

A study looking at the impacts of covid-19 vaccination—condemned by other scientists as seriously flawed and irresponsible—has now sparked a mutiny of sorts. This past week, several well-respected researchers have resigned from their involvement in the journal that published the paper, which argued that vaccines are killing almost as many people as they’re saving from the pandemic. Today, the paper was retracted.

The study, titled “The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations—We Should Rethink the Policy,” was published on June 24 in the journal Vaccines and was authored by Harald Walach, Rainer J. Klement, and Wouter Aukema. Citing several sources of data, the authors argued that covid-19 vaccination was more dangerous than commonly believed, and that the benefits of inoculation only barely outweighed the risks caused by covid-19. Most egregiously, they claimed that for every “three deaths prevented by vaccination, we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination.”

The paper was uncritically shared by some on social media at first, including members of the anti-vaccination movement. But it was quickly criticized by many other scientists for its faulty assumptions, bad math, and outright misinformation.

 
 
 

One of the main pieces of evidence the authors presented to support their claim that the covid-19 shots are deadly, for instance, came from the Netherlands’ adverse event reporting system for their vaccines. But as Gizmodo has discussed before, these systems are designed to record any health incident, including death, that occurs after a person receives a new drug or vaccine. They don’t demonstrate that the incident occurred due to the drug—after all, a person may die for any number of unrelated reasons after receiving a vaccine—but instead are meant to flag possible signals of undiscovered side effects that could be linked to a new drug or vaccine, signals that then have to be studied further before any judgment can be made.

It wasn’t long before scientists associated with the journal Vaccines began to protest the study’s publication. Within days, prominent scientists such as Katie Ewer, a member of the Oxford University team who helped create their now widely used covid-19 vaccine, resigned from the journal’s editorial board. A day after her resignation, the journal placed an expression of concern on the paper, meant to alert readers of the many criticisms it had received, and announced it would investigate the matter. The announcement didn’t seem to stop the bleeding, though; at last count, according to the publication Science, at least six scientists in total have resigned from positions as associate or section editors with the journal.

 

Finally, just today, Vaccines’ remaining editors came back with their verdict, announcing that the paper would be retracted. In their notice, they pointed to “several errors that fundamentally affect the interpretation of the findings,” including the misrepresentation of the Netherlands’ vaccine safety data. The editors also noted that the authors were asked to respond to the criticisms made of their paper, but “were not able to do so satisfactorily.” The paper was then retracted under their protest.

Even with this decision, some scientists have questioned how the paper got through the peer-review process in the first place. Two of the three reviewers were anonymous, and none brought up any of the issues that resulted in the retraction. The current fiasco isn’t the only one to have involved MDPI, the publisher of Vaccines and many other open-access journals. In its past, some scientists have accused MDPI of being a predatory publisher, more eager about the quantity than the quality of the research it publishes—criticisms that were still being made this year before the latest retracted paper.

“We have established procedures for handling all complaints about published papers, which were followed,” Damaris Critchlow, head of publication ethics at MDPI, told Gizmodo in an email. “The Editor-in-Chief and the journal conducted an investigation of the scientific concerns raised, ultimately resulting in article retraction. Our Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board and the journal treated the investigation with utmost priority. We are in the process of consulting the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board to establish further ways to support our Academic Editors, who are responsible for manuscript acceptance decisions and for assessing the quality of the peer review reports.”

This debacle shouldn’t take away from the importance of confirming vaccine safety, though. We need to verify the data collected from clinical trials of any new medicine once it’s released to the public, even in the midst of a pandemic. But caution should be warranted if someone starts making extraordinary claims about safety or lack thereof—especially if those claims are based on adverse event reporting systems.

Oftentimes, adverse events aren’t related to the treatment at all, and it’s only when the risk of a particular event is plausible and higher than it would be in the general population that scientists begin to suspect a connection between the event and the drug. This has happened a few times with covid-19 vaccines, such as the now-established link between certain types of blood clots and adenovirus-based vaccines like the AstraZeneca/Oxford shots.

So far, all the risks associated with vaccination are either thought to be mild, short-lasting, or rare and manageable, and are clearly outweighed by the benefits they provide in preventing covid-19, a disease that has killed at least 4 million people worldwide in the past year and a half.

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...