The global covid vaccination of the population is useless against death (except to promote the creation of variants?)

[Janic]

yes, it's the waltz of the billions given to the BP, given to the economically injured (240 Billion for the moment) plus what will follow with the non recovery of the economy following the vaccines and passes, a global disaster for the wealthy countries and the jackpot for a few wealthy profiteers of the windfall.

[Christophe]

unfounded assertion of the "reassuranceists"

Ah yes ? And what is Nature? So alarmists?

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95025-3.pdf

Why a high vaccination rate can paradoxically favor the emergence of resistant variants?

The more the number of people vaccinated, the more the competitive advantage of resistant strains increases. According to a new study, the maximum risk is reached with a vaccination rate of 60%, which is precisely the threshold that we are reaching in France.

Everyone hopes that mass vaccination will help eradicate the Covid epidemic. It is also necessary that a variant resistant to the vaccine does not call everything into question. Paradoxically, the risk of emergence of a resistant strain is maximum when a large part of the population is vaccinated, but not enough to ensure group immunity, shows a new study published in the journal Nature Scientific Reports: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95025-3

The researchers simulated the probability that a resistant strain will emerge in a population of 10 million inhabitants within three years, taking into account the level of the vaccinated population, the rate of mutation of the virus and its speed. transmission, or the successive "waves" with a surge in contamination followed by a drop in new cases after the introduction of restrictions (confinements, closures, etc.). Not surprisingly, they conclude that rapid vaccination and a low level of circulation reduce the risk of emergence of a resistant variant. But the study also shows that this risk is greatest when a large part of the population is vaccinated, but not enough to ensure group immunity.

Selective pressure increases with vaccination rate

“When a major part of the population is vaccinated, in particular the high-risk fraction of the population (the elderly and those with underlying pathologies), decision-makers and individuals are tempted revert to pre-pandemic guidelines and behaviors conducive to a high rate of virus transmission » (especially true with a vaccine that does not protect against contamination !!), warn the authors. However, this is precisely the most favorable time for the emergence of resistant variants, due to the phenomenon of "selection pressure": the more the number of people vaccinated increases, the more the competitive advantage of vaccine-resistant strains. increases. This is also what is happening with the Delta variant: faced with an increasingly large number of immunized people, it had to increase its transmission capacity tenfold to continue to spread at the same rate.

Glass ceiling

The peak probability is therefore around 60%, i.e. the vaccination rate observed in England or Spain (the rate is 50% in France, 60% of the population received at least one dose of vaccine on July 27 and 50% received their two doses). However, the famous collective immunity threshold is rather around 90% of the vaccinated population, according to the Haute Autorité de santé. (70% 1 year ago, 90% today = they don't know!)

The problem is that this rate of 60% seems to be precisely that of the famous "glass ceiling" that we see in most countries. No country in the world has yet managed to reach this famous collective immunity threshold of 80% (if the micro state like Gibraltar), and even severe incentive measures such as the health pass in France will find it difficult to meet this objective. "If unfortunately the coronavirus epidemic remains present at a high level and with insufficient group immunity, it may be necessary to resort to compulsory vaccination", admitted Alain Fischer, Chairman of the strategy board. vaccine, on RTL on August 2.But of course !! Shit Bozo !!

The virus continues to circulate even among a vaccinated population

But will this be enough? Last Friday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) warned that while the vaccine prevented the risk of severe form, it did not completely block the risk of transmission, "because the immunity engendered is not predominantly mucosal ”(it does not prevent the virus from developing in the nose). The CDC therefore recommended that the mask be worn indoors, including for people who have been vaccinated. "It would be a utopia to believe that only vaccination would pull us out of this pandemic", confirms Antoine Flahault, epidemiologist and director of the Institute for Global Health at the University of Geneva. A tough pill to swallow for anyone who believed that vaccination would get them back to a normal life.

https://www.futura-sciences.com/sante/a ... nts-92812/

[Rajqawee]

Christophe, the herd immunity rate is linked to the R of the virus. The delta variant being more contagious (a priori), the rate of collective immunity rises.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nombre_de ... on_de_base

to compare with

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunit%C ... C3%A9gaire

Basically, at the start of the pandemic, the R is 2 to 4, so herd immunity is probably around 70%. On the delta variant, we would go to more than 7, and therefore, the rate is close to 90%.

But I was also wondering about it, before reading these two pages.

[Obamot]

We were led to believe that the “R” was between 2 and 3,8 but that was not true.

I challenge anyone to find scientific proof for this.

[sicetaitsimple]

We were led to believe that the “R” was between 2 and 3,8 but that was not true.

I challenge anyone to find scientific proof for this.

how much was it then, scientifically?

[Obamot]

I was just asking you the question myself a moment ago.

[sicetaitsimple]

I was just asking you the question myself a moment ago.

If you say that "it was not true", it is necessarily that you have other figures sourced ....

[Obamot]

Blah-blah-blah

I say and repeat that no one can provide scientific proof.

And you ask me to bring this scientific proof when I make it clear that it does not exist!

If someone claims, or quotes, the range of an R = 0 “between 2 and 4 ” I understand that he provides proof of this.

(And it's not directed at Rajqaweem, or anyone here, it's just a loose question, you're just a little pain in the ass doing his job(the)eg, I ask for a “Access denied” against you, you have fully proven its justification ...)

[Christophe]

Christophe, the herd immunity rate is linked to the R of the virus. The delta variant being more contagious (a priori), the rate of collective immunity rises.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nombre_de ... on_de_base

to compare with

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunit%C ... C3%A9gaire

Basically, at the start of the pandemic, the R is 2 to 4, so herd immunity is probably around 70%. On the delta variant, we would go to more than 7, and therefore, the rate is close to 90%.

But I was also wondering about it, before reading these two pages.

Ah yes thank you sorry, we had already talked about it I zapped ... I correct ...

Well, there are other things they suddenly don't know!

[Christophe]

Blah-blah-blah

I say and repeat that no one can provide scientific proof.
(...)

The question you are being asked is legitimate ... if you don't believe in official R0, what is it for you and on what scientific basis?

If nobody can provide scientific proof of an R0 of X how could you prove that it is false ????