Paul Offit is serious, although he's just one of thousands of immunologists-- he happens to have a high media profile which is why you point to him and not others.And Paul Offit isn't serious either...
I don't have much faith in those clowns to accomplish anything. I think that if little gets done, much more likely it'll be due to Republican infighting rather than Democratic resistance.New letter from Democrat leader Jeffries, detailing 9 point plan counter Trump.
...
Oh no, they're going to wag their finger disapprovingly, maybe write some sternly worded letters too.
Or simple incompetence. But yeah, don't expect much from the Dems.I think that if little gets done, much more likely it'll be due to Republican infighting rather than Democratic resistance.
Yeah, I've heard Offit talk many times. Phoenixmgs had claimed Offit has said a LOT of things. I can't dismiss every claim Phoenixmgs had made, but at least 90%Paul Offit is serious, although he's just one of thousands of immunologists-- he happens to have a high media profile which is why you point to him and not others.
Paul Offit also doesn't say what you say. Your poor scientific comprehension doesn't reflect on him at all.
I've been told by other posters here that's what we are supposed to do it be effective somehowNew letter from Democrat leader Jeffries, detailing 9 point plan counter Trump.
View attachment 12764
View attachment 12765
Oh no, they're going to wag their finger disapprovingly, maybe write some sternly worded letters too.
I don't think Phoenixmgs is actually following Offit.Yeah, I've heard Offit talk many times. Phoenixmgs had claimed Offit has said a LOT of things. I can't dismiss every claim Phoenixmgs had made, but at least 90%
Well, the Reps have the trifecta, so it doesn't really matter what the Dems do.Or simple incompetence. But yeah, don't expect much from the Dems.
He's literally the top expert in the US, that's why I listen to him.Paul Offit is serious, although he's just one of thousands of immunologists-- he happens to have a high media profile which is why you point to him and not others.
Paul Offit also doesn't say what you say. Your poor scientific comprehension doesn't reflect on him at all.
Where is my claim about what he said wrong?Yeah, I've heard Offit talk many times. Phoenixmgs had claimed Offit has said a LOT of things. I can't dismiss every claim Phoenixmgs had made, but at least 90%
Misquoting Offit so many times must be a new Olympics sport or something.
There is no such thing as a single top "expert" on immunology. This is media gabble.He's literally the top expert in the US, that's why I listen to him.
I'm aware, I've read what he's written. However, unlike you, I've read what he's written quite broadly, rather than picking sections that in isolation could be used to bolster the anti-vax nonsense.Literally word for word what he said/wrote:
The CDC is now arguing that, given the continued evolution of SARS-CoV-2, we should offer a yearly Covid vaccine in a manner analogous to the influenza vaccine. SARS-CoV-2, however, isn’t influenza. Every year, FDA advisors pick strains to include in the yearly influenza vaccine. If they’re wrong, which has happened three times in the past twenty years, protective efficacy against severe disease can fall below 20 percent. In other words, pick the wrong influenza strain and you’re in trouble. That’s not true for SARS-CoV-2. Healthy young people who have been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 with the original vaccine remain protected against severe disease because the parts of these new variants that are recognized by T cells have remained relatively unchanged. T cells, which are long-lived and kill virus-infected cells, are critical in protecting against severe COVID. By likening SARS-CoV-2 to influenza, we have created the false perception that healthy young people who have already been vaccinated or naturally infected or both will be protected against severe disease only if they receive the updated vaccine.
He's about as top as you can get.There is no such thing as a single top "expert" on immunology. This is media gabble.
I'm aware, I've read what he's written. However, unlike you, I've read what he's written quite broadly, rather than picking sections that in isolation could be used to bolster the anti-vax nonsense.
So I know that he's also said: "Anybody over the age of 75, and anybody who has comorbidities, especially diabetes, heart disease, lung disease, obesity [note: Obesity would account for about 40% of America already]. I think anybody that's taking medicines that suppress the immune system. And I think pregnant people. But also people who live and work in nursing homes, people who are in the home of someone who is... or frankly anybody who just feels more comfortable getting this certainly should get it, I'm not saying you should discourage people".
So I know Paul Offit argues (quite reasonably often) against recommending boosters for everyone, supporting the targeted approach like we had here in Western Europe. But his issues aren't the issues you're citing, about it doing nothing or being harmful. He's essentially making an argument about diminishing returns and targeting.
That's not how science works. You DO NOT listen to one expert. You listen to heaps of experts and gain a consensusHe's about as top as you can get.
Saying not everyone needs a booster covid shot is not anti-vax nonsense... There are risk-benefit analyses of the booster shot (and initial vaccine shots too) being overall harmful for certain groups of people. Plus all the money you are putting into buying these shots can be better spent in other areas to make people healthier overall. Put that money towards reducing all those comorbidities like diabetes and obesity for example.
The CDC recommendation is not based in science, that was my whole point from the start.
You gonna admit eating fat is not a bad thing that makes people fat yet?
But you didn't merely say that "not everyone needs it". That's essentially what Offit argued, from a diminishing-returns/ targeting perspective. No, you insinuated the boosters didn't do anything for most people; that all the benefits were down to other factors (that you couldn't substantiate); and that the harms outweighed the benefit. All of which goes way beyond anything Offit said. All of which is anti-vax bollocks.Saying not everyone needs a booster covid shot is not anti-vax nonsense... There are risk-benefit analyses of the booster shot (and initial vaccine shots too) being overall harmful for certain groups of people. Plus all the money you are putting into buying these shots can be better spent in other areas to make people healthier overall. Put that money towards reducing all those comorbidities like diabetes and obesity for example.
Lol no, because you haven't made a case.You gonna admit eating fat is not a bad thing that makes people fat yet?