FDA have approved only one , the main one is still Emergency use.

If you look at the MSN release that the vaccine is now approved. The fact is that they have approved the one you can't get the main one is still for emergency use only. This is convenient as emergency use has caveats we seem to be looking at a spin job, but the FDA is covering its assets. .

a reply to: anonentity

Yes they're also telling us that cases are the same as people who are actually infected! Still using PCR which is 95% inaccurate!

This whole thing has been one lie after another after another.

Hey, vaccinated people of ATS do me a solid would ya. Go and get a D-Dimer test and come post your results please. You'll be doing us all a huge favor, put up or shut up.

Sick and tired of the sarcastic, asinine nuts on ATS telling us that these are 'safe' and 'proven' vaccine and then saying stupid things like "millions of doctors would be complicit"...... Then appealing to strictly MSM sources and talking heads.

Time to prove yourselves. Go demand that D-dimer! And marvel at your own micro clotting.

www.israelnationalnews.com...

Take a look at that study. Antibodies are more effective than the shots.

Page 11 section Y through page 12 section Z
www.fda.gov...

The msm says the FDA has fully approved the Pfizer vax but is that true? Maybe let’s see what the FDA actually wrote.
Canada is going ahead with vax ports now in Ontario and Manitoba because of the “approval”.
a reply to: anonentity

a reply to: Athetos

If you go along with the Vid, under none of the adverse effects does it say that women's periods may be disrupted? How many women would take it if they were menopausal and their periods start again?

Also if you look on the CDC website under the FAQ, they say a person that has antibodies can CATCH covid again but VERY RARELY.

But they still recommend getting the vaccine, it's ridiculous

a reply to: rowdyrich
Here's another study.

These findings suggest that among persons with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, full vaccination provides additional protection against reinfection. Among previously infected Kentucky residents, those who were not vaccinated were more than twice as likely to be reinfected compared with those with full vaccination. All eligible persons should be offered vaccination, including those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, to reduce their risk for future infection.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

originally posted by: Athetos
Page 11 section Y through page 12 section Z
www.fda.gov...

The msm says the FDA has fully approved the Pfizer vax but is that true? Maybe let’s see what the FDA actually wrote.
Canada is going ahead with vax ports now in Ontario and Manitoba because of the “approval”.
a reply to: anonentity

According to that link, the Pfizer covid vaccine is still only under emergency use authorization and is NOT licensed or approved by the FDA. Why is everyone reporting that it's been "approved" if Pfizer is saying it hasn't been?

a reply to: Phage

childrenshealthdefense.org...

That study is saying how vaccinated people are super spreaders. So it's more of a whatever you choose type thing at this point.

a reply to: rowdyrich

Also it's like a .0007 percent chance of getting sick again if you have the antibodies which last longer and you don't have to continuously get the booster.

a reply to: rowdyrich

That study is saying how vaccinated people are super spreaders.

No it isn't. Your source misrepresents the actual study.

The study says that viral loads from Delta are greater than old strains. We know this. There is no comparison to unvaccinated vs vaccinated with Delta in the study and there is no claim that vaccinated are super spreaders.

Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020

source

originally posted by: Joneselius
a reply to: anonentity

Yes they're also telling us that cases are the same as people who are actually infected! Still using PCR which is 95% inaccurate!

This whole thing has been one lie after another after another.

Hey, vaccinated people of ATS do me a solid would ya. Go and get a D-Dimer test and come post your results please. You'll be doing us all a huge favor, put up or shut up.

Sick and tired of the sarcastic, asinine nuts on ATS telling us that these are 'safe' and 'proven' vaccine and then saying stupid things like "millions of doctors would be complicit"...... Then appealing to strictly MSM sources and talking heads.

Time to prove yourselves. Go demand that D-dimer! And marvel at your own micro clotting.

As I understand it, D-Dimer tests are by prescription only. That means you have to have some kind of condition that would persuade a doctor to prescribe one. The vast majority of vaccinated people such as myself have experienced no such conditions. Not sure how this would work.

a reply to: Phage

That article says it's just vaccinated people are getting each other sick...gotcha

Exactly I could be wrong but from my understanding of the arrangement of those words nothing about the status of vaccine has changed.
a reply to: FamCore

a reply to: FamCore

It is approved, you're just not reading it right. It's approved for 16 and up, 12-15 is still in emergency use

I did the exact same thing the first time I read it

So section AA states is approved but it must conform to all labeling laid out in previous section which includes the label of none licence?

Honestly trying to understand.

Also curious how you can approve anything without a control group? Has a treatment ever been approved before without a intact control group?
a reply to: rowdyrich

a reply to: rowdyrich

So how does it go if you die from a vaccine reaction, which isn't fully approved by the FDA, I bet your insurance won't payout. Is this the reason for the Emergency use to close that loophole? My bet it is.

a reply to: Phage

You cannot be reinfected if the infection never completely leaves your body, as you are still infected, so technically they may be correct.

a reply to: rowdyrich

Yeah I feel the whole thing is pretty sketchy and the control group is the people getting the vaccinations.

And I believe that by the FDA approving it, it relinquishes the governments responsibility and puts it on the company. But that's just my thoughts about it.

I'm just trying to find studies that has proof of the aantibodies being just as effective or better that the vaccines. I've had covid but not the vaccine. I'm not trying to push any narrative, just think everyone should see the whole picture before making their choice.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: rowdyrich
Here's another study.

These findings suggest that among persons with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, full vaccination provides additional protection against reinfection. Among previously infected Kentucky residents, those who were not vaccinated were more than twice as likely to be reinfected compared with those with full vaccination. All eligible persons should be offered vaccination, including those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, to reduce their risk for future infection.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Did you note this from the study you referenced:

Overall, 246 case-patients met eligibility requirements and were successfully matched by age, sex, and date of initial infection with 492 controls.

Seemed the statistical percentage was a little to tight to infer that much especially considering the sample size.

As opposed to the study referenced by rowdyrich:

The study followed 52,238 employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System, monitoring infections among vaccinated and unvaccinated workers, and the incidents of reinfection among both vaccinated and unvaccinated workers.


Of the 52,238 employees tracked in the study, 2,579 had previously tested positive for the coronavirus, while 49,659 had never been confirmed as carrying the virus.

Fifty-three percent of the 2,579 employees who had been infected with the virus previously remained unvaccinated (1,359 people), compared to 41% (22,777) of the employees who were never diagnosed with the virus.

Zero previously infected employees were reported to have become infected again with the virus, regardless of their vaccination status.

Here's that direct link.

Necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected individuals

Admittedly, I just scanned each and haven't nitpicked, And let's don't forget Israel's information that seems to suggest some of the same.

Do any research/studies about C-19 interest you other than those that glorify mRNA vaccines for everyone?