Let me cherry pick something from the Lancet article link you provided.

*Our data suggest waning of S-antibody levels in infection-naive individuals over a 3–10-week period after a second dose of either ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2. These data are consistent with the decline in Spike-antibody and neutralising antibody levels observed after infection.*

I assume you understand what this is saying?

As far as I'm aware the expectorant is doing nothing to the flu virus itself. It's just a way to help speed up the removal of that thick clingy mucus in the airways, which can lead to pneumonia and other breathing problems if left unchecked.

Most people can get the mucus up, and off their chests just by being active, but when you're sick you don't really feel like being 'active' and you tend to stay in bed being inactive instead. The same applies to the elderly who are more susceptible to pneumonia because they are less active as well as having weaker immune systems. Also hospital patients who are immobile and stuck in bed (say with their broken leg in traction) can be susceptible to pneumonia even if they don't have a cold/flu/cough etc. This is because they can build up fluid on their lungs due to being bed ridden. Healthcare workers will often go around and make the patients blow hard into a spirometer type device to prevent the build up of fluid.

Point 1. Until the majority of the populations are vaccinated (and by majority I mean greater than 90%) the virus will always be able to find suitable hosts to replicate & mutate. It's a supply and demand situation

Point 2. I never said anything about the mechanics (or method of action as it's correctly called) of the vaccine. I'm not denying the mRNA vaccines work differently, but they still stimulate the production of antibodies, so therefore they are vaccines.

Also not all vaccines last forever, in fact most don't. That's why it's recommended that you have periodic boosters for TDaP (Tetanus, Diptheria & Pertussis), Varicella (Shingles/Chicken Pox), Typhoid (every 2-5 yrs if you visit certain countries), Yellow Fever, to name a few.

Point 3. And you keep ignoring the facts. High vaccination rates have not been achieved, yet. What is critical is that you look at the data for deaths & hospitalizations of the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated. The purpose of the vaccine is to reduce the severity of the symptoms, but you just keep conveniently ignoring that, and start cherry picking information - case in point you cherry picked and misrepresented the data that was in that WP link you provided in another thread.

As far as listening to what the government and media said and promised, well you get reinforcement of what you want to hear depending on which side of the fence you sit. Personally, I would rather get my information from clinical data instead.

Thanks for posting that last informative link. That has some really interesting info on vaccine effectiveness (I'm being sincere). Shame you didn't also summarize the positives of what is reported such as the comparison of Disease, Hospitalization & Death Incidences between vaccinated & unvaccinated people.

And if you look on Page 7, it states that vaccinated cases have 40% lower mean viral load than unvaccinated cases. In my book 40% lower is not 'similar' as you wrote above.

Other than that, that is some of the most informative data I've seen recently. Thanks.

GIS mapping is what one of my kids studied at college. Really cool stuff, but getting a job in a fledgling area is proving very difficult

Not so sure. Tal will occasionally post about something other than politics, whereas Birdie & Topdude only ever post about their beloved political parties, or the other antichrist Party.

Sorry not a private page. At least my link can be reached, unlike yours. I assume you took your info from that Facebook blogger referred to in this article.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2…

Again debunked as misrepresentation of data.

Here's another one:
https://factcheck.afp.com/online-posts-…

I really find it frustrating that people are so gullible, and don't understand that they are being taken for a ride. Why not go to the ema eudra site yourself and look at the information. Critical thinking skills and the ability to disseminate between agenda driven information and real information, are as scarce as rocking horse $hit these days.

With the exception of intravenous administration, I'm not aware of any scientifically proven methods of stimulating additional Ascorbic acid uptake, in a single dose. Intravenous administration can bypass uptake control in the intestine, but then within a couple of hours renall excretion brings the level back down to normal.

Also, when your body breaks down (metabolizes), Vitamin C, one of the byproducts is Oxalic acid, which is a known culprit in the formation of kidney stones. There have been some inconclusive (I stress the word inconclusive) studies, that have linked the occurrence of kidney stones to high daily intake of Vitamin C.

Oh dear John you really think what you wrote is correct ?
Expectorants don't "attack the virus". What they do is increase the amount of water secretion, thus thinning out the thick phlegm in your airway, so that it comes up when you cough.

While I guess you're not totally incorrect on the cough suppressants, your statement is incorrect. Cough's don't have symptoms themselves, so a cough suppressant can't hide the symptoms of a cough. A cough is a symptom of an upper respiratory infection.
Cough suppressants like Dextromethorphan (DM), Diphenhydramine etc. (which incidentally are cousins of Codeine), work by blocking the cough reflex, that comes about when the nerve endings that line your throat become irritated or inflamed. They work the same way as antihistamines (such as Benadryl) do for skin rashes or bug bites.

I remember the very first two posts I ever made on this site were deleted