Ok. Because we have a lot of people partially vaccinated, they will not have high levels of neutralising antibodies. This encourages variant emergence. Combine that with high prevalence (which means more partially vaccinated will catch it) and you have a recipe for disaster.
-
-
Replying to @SwaledaleMutton @thisisnothappen and
They do not distinguish between how many vaxx people have. If they felt the need for it, surely they would do it, being an advisory board. And even the reason you give is one of the reasons why GVB claims mass vaccination during a pandemic is likely to cause an adverse effect.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @M0onPing @SwaledaleMutton and
Added to the fact that this is not a sterilizing vaxx. So even double vaxxed will cause the same problem you mention. More pressure to immune escape. That is what SAGE is saying.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @M0onPing @SwaledaleMutton and
You understand SAGE are also recommending vaccinations, do you agree with that or do you only agree with little bits of what they say that you think agree with your position?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @thisisnothappen @SwaledaleMutton and
Does it matter to this discussion? What you and your buddies were claiming was false, and I proved it. End of conversation.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @M0onPing @thisisnothappen and
You have proved nothing, other than a terrible case of scientific illiteracy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SwaledaleMutton @thisisnothappen and
What I posted literally says that VOC are more likely to rise from high prevalence+high vacc. You are part of the problem in the scientific world. Science is discussion not certainties. Hide behind your scientific consensus and your bias and STFU.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @M0onPing @thisisnothappen and
No, not more likely. The highest chance of variants emerging is in an unvaccinated population where you have high transmission and high viral loads. Science is discussed, and making unsubstantiated claims (as you are doing) is not part of that.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SwaledaleMutton @thisisnothappen and
And that is why SAGE says the opposite of what you say. If
@GVDBossche cares to explain. If not you can read why on his tweets and re-read what SAGE wrote how many times you feel you need. Have a good day.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @M0onPing @thisisnothappen and
I would not read anything that fraud writes. Everything is made up. I would get more accurate science from the Beano.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Vanden Bossche? 

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/countering-geert-vanden-bossches-dubious-viral-open-letter-warning-against-mass-covid-19-vaccination/ …
-
-
This is another example of an ex-scientist cashing in on their PhD to rake in cash from the anti-vax cause by spreading misinformaton.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SwaledaleMutton @gorskon and
SAGE literally wrote what was his central argument. As I said earlier, compare the number of VOC pre-vaxx and after mass vaxxed started. There is a clear difference in number and frequency. There is an argument for causation. The theory exists and real word analysis shows it true
1 reply 0 retweets 0 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.