看過藥廠就冠狀病毒的説明沒有?在這一刻他們並沒有關於疫苗對傳播效用的數據

 看過藥廠就冠狀病毒的説明沒有?在這一刻他們並沒有關於疫苗對傳播效用的數據,他們說在給人們接種疫苗後他們便會有更多數據。

奇怪的是,無法接種一般疫苗的人通常包括癌症患者、接受移植的人和倚頼免疫抑製劑的人等。但是疾病或治療引起的免疫抑制説明書已表明疫苗可能無效,而第三幀擷圖似乎卻説這幾個類别的人將是緊隨長者之後會被接種疫苗的人。

因此，通常我們不給這些人注射疫苗，但是這次我們卻以一種非常新、非常倉卒、未完成測試的疫苗來接種他們？ 🤔

第3張擷圖:

潛在健康狀況

有充分證據表明某些潛在健康狀況會增加冠狀病毒的發病率和死亡率。與沒有潛在健康狀況的人相比，具有潛在健康狀況的人的絕對增加風險要比65歲以上人群的增加風險要低（臨床上最脆弱的人群除外）。

委員會建議為65歲以上的人群提供疫苗接種，繼後為16歲以上有臨床風險的群組提供疫苗接種。

委員會確定的風險類別如下：

•慢性呼吸系統疾病，包括慢性阻塞性肺疾病（COPD），囊性纖維化和嚴重哮喘

•慢性心髒病（和血管疾病）

• 慢性腎病

•慢性肝病

•慢性神經病，包括癲癇病

• 唐氏綜合症

•嚴重而深刻的學習障礙

•糖尿病

•實體器官，骨髓和乾細胞移植受者

•患有特定癌症的人

•由於疾病或治療引起的免疫抑制

•脾虛和脾功能障礙

• 病態肥胖

•嚴重的精神疾病

I have a lot of questions about what is in this document.

At this time there is no data on the effect of the vaccines on transmission? Wow. I recall at the start of the pandemic there were a few doctors that were against the idea of masks and mask mandates because of the false sense of security it would foster in many people, especially with the likelihood of misuse. Isn't this similar and worse? I see this often with the pertussis vaccine - it doesn't not prevent the spread of the disease but most people, including the parents of young kids getting this vaccine, seem oblivious to that. It's an extremely important piece of information. So when we read in headlines over and over again that these new vaccines are whatever percentage effective it seems some (many? most?) people are assuming this has something to do with preventing transmission. But does this just mean they're whatever percentage effective at... lessening severity of the disease? Stopping the viral infection from transitioning into the disease? Or what? I admit I haven't looked into the details of what they're supposed to be effective at doing. 

In the next screenshot... this leads me to believe they're saying we don't have much data right now but we'll have more after we start vaccinating people. Well yes of course this is true, with more use comes more data, but... that just doesn't sit right when the next couple of words are safety and effectiveness. We'll see how safe and effective this is for people at low risk of mortality from the disease after we vaccinate people that are at high risk...?

And correct me if I'm wrong here but I'm used to people against vaccine choice and for mandatory vaccines saying we all must be vaccinated to protect our most vulnerable, the people that cannot be vaccinated. Typically the list includes those with cancer, transplant recipients, people on immunosuppressents, etc. but the third screenshot seems to say these are the people that will be getting the vaccines first. So normally we don't vaccinate them but this time we are... with a very new, very hastily made, very untested vaccine? 🤔

What do you think?

https://www.facebook.com/100011920245152/posts/923973101343356/