Moderna defends its COVID-19 vaccine after seven European nations restrict or recommend against the

[mystery-ak]

Moderna defends its COVID-19 vaccine after seven European nations restrict or recommend against the shot's use in young people over concerns of rare heart inflammation

    Moderna officials defended the use of their company's COVID-19 vaccine in young people amid a string of European countries shelving it in young people
    Germany joined Denmark, Iceland, Finland, France, Norway and Sweden in recommending against or restricting the use of the Moderna jab in young people
    European countries are concerned about the increased risk young people face of developing heart inflammation after getting the shot
    The Moderna shot is still the most effective in the U.S., though, and a recent study finds it is 58% effective at preventing infection, higher than any other jab

By Mansur Shaheen U.S. Deputy Health Editor For Dailymail.Com

Published: 13:25 EST, 12 November 2021 | Updated: 13:25 EST, 12 November 2021



Moderna is standing by its COVID-19 vaccine in the wake of concerns being raised  around the world about the jab causing rare heart inflammation in young people.

Seven European nations have either restricted the use of the shot in adults under age 30 or have made a recommendation against its use, in recent weeks.

Data from Swedish public health officials found that young adults - particularly males - who received the shot were more likely to develop myocarditis than those that receive the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, spurring the decisions.

more
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10195701/Moderna-defends-COVID-19-vaccine-recent-rare-heart-inflammation-concerns.html

[jmyrlefuller]

    The Moderna shot is still the most effective in the U.S., though, and a recent study finds it is 58% effective at preventing infection, higher than any other jab

And the one with the strongest side effects, acknowledged by everyone—but even with that level of efficacy, the Moderna shot isn't enough to break the chain of infection for a virus with an R0 somewhere in the 5 range (which would require lasting efficacy somewhere around 80%).

Now we get into cost-benefit analysis. There seems to be a very strong correlation between severity of side effects and vaccine efficacy: meaning you can't actually protect against the virus unless you deliberately take a vaccine that is going to make you ill, and even then it's not going to last and you'll have to take it over and over and over and over because we can't seem to vaccinate everyone fast enough to have everyone immune at once. Which is exactly what I said would happen when they started this lockdown nonsense.

The CDC needs to answer for this. The NIAID and Anthony Fauci need to answer for this. They have no answers. They don't want to admit they failed, that they were wrong, that we don't have the power to end airborne pandemics through human behavior.