Well, you didn't make any promises, that was about others, but this post fits the first accusation:
"Go suck a covid then, the GQP certainly wants you to, you'll be easier to control that way.
Intelligence
Researchers said those who had been placed on a ventilator while ill showed the most substantial effects. On average, their score dropped 7 IQ points.
Mind that this is for those hard cases, those hard cases that you get 90% protection from with the booster.
Ill take that factor 10 improvement of my odds while I wait for the Omicron specific vaxx thank you.
But you do you Einsten, you do you.
At some point the "dumb" and "idiot" monikers is gonna be on the mark."
The odds of me or someone LIKE me ending up on a ventilator are virtually zero, but in the meantime you're calling me "Einstein", or at least trying to in the most ironic way.
That's exactly how science has been misused: by relatively SMART people to shut up those who they deem too dumb to understand pretty much anything. I mean, COME ON, it's exactly what you've done to me. It's what Fauci does ALL the time, and it has hurt science.
I just watched another exchange between Rand and Fauci. Now believe me, the former is not always right, I KNOW that, but Fauci was straight up lying, or at least, in what HE thought he could get away with, bending the truth. In MY opinion, he bent it too far and got of the truth. Anyway this is what it was about.
Rand was pressuring Fauci into showing him a study that shows significant reinfection rates with bad to deadly outcomes.
After a big of back and forth, Fauci said that research shows in South Africa, that previous infection gives, and I quote, "NO PROTECTION" from Omicron. Now, he meant protection from getting reinfected, but made it SOUND like he meant from serious disease, which is clearly not the case. What made it even MORE of a lie is that previous infection DOES give protection for a few months even against reinfection with Omicron, JUST like the vaccine, even though we're still using the recipe for the wild strain.
From what I've learned about all this is that, and YES even an arrogant prick like me will readily admit I don't know it all, the amazing things is that your immune system will make a RANGE of different antibodies when it encounters a new virus. Ones that fit exactly on the specific part of a specific protein, like the RBD on the Spike, but also a range that are ever so slightly different. As the infection progresses, the recipe is "refined" if you will; the more different from the "right" recipe they are, the lower the number of them. As the infection has cleared, and yes, I know there are MANY other parts of the immune response, antibodies start to wane, and in most people germinal centers will keep that recipe for a long time, ready to start producing again when the pathogen is recognized again. This is how boosters increase the titers, right?
Now, sometime later, Omicron comes around. The fact that boosters with the original recipe work in a sterilizing way at all means that the immune response is wide enough to generate even ABs against the mutations present in it! How miraculous really! As far as I understand, for a person to be uninfectable with Corona the AB titers have to be high enough. Research was done on Macaques which showed that after administering enough monoclonal NEUTRALIZING ABs of the right kind, they became impossible to infect.
Now, the word "protection" means SO many things that defining it whenever you're discussing anything important is essential. I believe we knew that immunity from common Corona viruses was sterilizing for 6 months for most. Right? I would love to find another source either confirming or denying that, but I've find two now that clearly show through empirical evidence over many years that yearly infection was the norm.
So did we REALLY expect a vaccine, based on ONLY the S protein to be better than that? Or did we know all along, but in order to get as many people the protection you DO get, which is probably a couple of years from serious disease or death, those expected limitations were carefully omitted?
Listen, I'm not looking for enemies, or personal arguments, I'm really not. Quite the contrary, I've argued FOR science and medicine for years against those people all you guys seem to have PTSD from.
I just want the truth, or, in the true spirit of science, our best hypothesis or theory. I WANT to read the studies, not just what the powers that be think the conclusion is. In the beginning of the pandemic, three months in, a study that showed robust ABs after 3 months, became articles that spouted that "science" says natural protection lasts ONLY three months. It was in the damn NY Times for goodness' sake!