Except that I DO understand the scientific basis of your "prognostication" and have discussed why it is not particularly plausible from a scientific standpoint and how there is no safety signal consistent with it after millions of doses of #CovidVaccine.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @JHowardBrainMD and
Fair enough. But you are not an immunologist and your self-proclaim label of "PRO-vaccine" come hell or high water does not make your disagreement credible. It is
@DrWoodcockFDA@US_FDA@pfizer's legal and ethical duty to look very carefully and urgently.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @gorskon and
How’d you fairly categorise yourself as an immunologist, Dr. N? Yes, you have coauthored a few dated publications in the transplantation area, etc but nothing in the ID field. You, sir, perhaps have dabbled in immunology but I don’t see evidence of an ‘immunologist’.
2 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @deralteGaukler @gorskon and
ID and Immunology are two distinct fields. Related but distinct. U R correct I am not an Infectious disease specialist. But I have done extensive work in cellular immunology and hold a PhD in that field from the University of Pennsylvania. Stop the mindlessness.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @gorskon and
Whether your preference to self-qualify yourself as an immunologist based on past ID-unrelated work is justified or not is moot. What's mindless, as has been pointed out, how you've chosen to communicated your unsubstantiated opinion in public given rising vax hesitancy.
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likes -
Replying to @deralteGaukler @gorskon and
Negative. Risk mitigation is essential in large scale public health efforts. Check yourself! What are your qualification? Are you a physician or an immunologist?
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @noorchashm @deralteGaukler and
I think if you had said “I have a concern that the vaccine may cause thrombosis in previously infected people and it should be studied” then no one would object.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @JHowardBrainMD @deralteGaukler and
I have a concern that the vaccine may cause thrombosis in previously infected people and it should be studied. And while it’s being studied, since we’ll B immunizing 200m in 6mos, we should
#ScreenB4Vaccine to avoid vaccine in the infected.@DrWoodcockFDA@US_FDA1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @deralteGaukler and
Ok. Leave it at that. You’ve gone a step beyond that saying it is dangerous in that population without evidence and discouraging people from getting the vaccine.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Yup, and he made his speculation sound a lot more certain than it was by repeatedly calling it definitive “immunological prognostication.”
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @JaiKanta22 and
Yes. It is a “definitive immunological prognostication”.....if you activate a T cell response to antigens that are present in the tissues of a person, those tissues will be targeted and damaged by the immune system. Please read Michael Oldstone’s work from The Scripps.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @gorskon and
If you were right, shouldn’t we expect to see widespread thrombosis in the vaccinated healthcare workers who had covid already? There must be hundreds of thousands or millions of such people already.
2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.