What I Don’t Get About Vaccine

[NoleSince1961]

Everyone here is having a very civil discussion. You on the other hand have made your stance very clear and you seem to get off on the fact you fired 4 people.

Btw, science is the constant challenging of data and known principles. What you call as science is nowhere close. If it was, it would consider all the studies that people have talked about above that don’t correlate any protection towards catching or giving it. It would take into account the very real study by Oxford that showed that vaccinated people carry a viral load nearly 250 times higher than non vaccinated people. This coincided with the side effects that Dr Malone warned everyone about over a year ago. Media and people like you have tried to discredit any free thinking or scientific challenging to your narrative (much like your stance toward your former employees)

The very nature of a vaccine and a mask is a personal protection, or PPE for you mr osha. Somehow, your science has turned them into a requirement to participate in society.

No. Full stop. Please be more careful about researching the accuracy of the info you consume and spread. Not doing so can be lethal.

Whether intentional or not, your citing that “very real study by Oxford” and completely misreporting its findings is a very telling representation of why some information consumers’ “feelings” about Covid, vaccines and other mitigation efforts are so much more helpful or dangerous than others when it comes to minimizing the ravages of this pandemic.

It is our personal responsibility as thoughtful members of a very interdependent society, especially during any health crisis, to make sure we aren’t relying upon and spreading misinformation.

The Oxford study you cite does not at all support your allegation, and it’s undeniably harmful to everybody who reads and might be influenced by your spreading such falsehoods.

It’s unfortunate that such a large swath of our fellow citizens believes almost anything they read or hear as long as it satisfies their confirmation bias.

Facebook memes somehow sway more minds than does the advice of actual epidemiologists.
Widely discredited whacks like Malone aren’t challenged as long as they can accurately claim to be a doctor and say what the Covid/vax minimizers want to hear.
Good luck to us all.

Fact Check-Study did not find vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load of those who were unvaccinated

Social media users are sharing articles that discuss a study examining the transmission of the Delta variant of COVID-19 and falsely claiming the study found that fully vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load compared of those who are unvaccinated.

mobile.reuters.com

 

[Odel4Pres]

No. Full stop. Please be more careful about researching the accuracy of the info you consume and spread. Not doing so can be lethal.

Whether intentional or not, your citing that “very real study by Oxford” and completely misreporting its findings is a very telling representation of why some information consumers’ “feelings” about Covid, vaccines and other mitigation efforts are so much more helpful or dangerous than others when it comes to minimizing the ravages of this pandemic.

It is our personal responsibility as thoughtful members of a very interdependent society, especially during any health crisis, to make sure we aren’t relying upon and spreading misinformation.

The Oxford study you cite does not at all support your allegation, and it’s undeniably harmful to everybody who reads and might be influenced by your spreading such falsehoods.

It’s unfortunate that such a large swath of our fellow citizens believes almost anything they read or hear as long as it satisfies their confirmation bias.

Facebook memes somehow sway more minds than does the advice of actual epidemiologists.
Widely discredited whacks like Malone aren’t challenged as long as they can accurately claim to be a doctor and say what the Covid/vax minimizers want to hear.
Good luck to us all.

Fact Check-Study did not find vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load of those who were unvaccinated

Social media users are sharing articles that discuss a study examining the transmission of the Delta variant of COVID-19 and falsely claiming the study found that fully vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load compared of those who are unvaccinated.

mobile.reuters.com

How did I misreport its findings? Did they not show evidence of higher viral loads in the nostrils in vaccinated persons?

Interesting you claim Dr Malone is a "widely discredited crack" when he is one who developed the technology that we are all talking about. His allegations from the beginning seem to be coming true in regards to developing antibody enhanced variants and the lack of effectiveness in stopping the spread of this virus.

Awfully hypocritical that you claim to have "personal responsiblity as a thoughtful member of a very interdependent society." Where is your professional integrity to your scientific field to not disregard evidence that doesn't fall in line with your pre determined theories? How about your ethical responsibility to guide people not as trained as you in your field of expertise? Science IS challenging everything.

Every single day in physics classes across America, Newton's laws of gravity are tested with balls and stop watches. That IS science. I don't need reuters to tell me what a fair interpretation or mischaracterization of a data set is.

Good luck to us all indeed.

 

[NoleSince1961]

How did I misreport its findings? Did they not show evidence of higher viral loads in the nostrils in vaccinated persons?

Interesting you claim Dr Malone is a "widely discredited crack" when he is one who developed the technology that we are all talking about. His allegations from the beginning seem to be coming true in regards to developing antibody enhanced variants and the lack of effectiveness in stopping the spread of this virus.

Awfully hypocritical that you claim to have "personal responsiblity as a thoughtful member of a very interdependent society." Where is your professional integrity to your scientific field to not disregard evidence that doesn't fall in line with your pre determined theories? How about your ethical responsibility to guide people not as trained as you in your field of expertise? Science IS challenging everything.

Every single day in physics classes across America, Newton's laws of gravity are tested with balls and stop watches. That IS science. I don't need reuters to tell me what a fair interpretation or mischaracterization of a data set is.

Good luck to us all indeed.

I already linked to the Reuters very clear explanation of why the study does NOT show 250x higher viral load in vaccinated vs unvaccinated noses.
Can you explain how you aren’t understanding something so basic as this, or you just didn’t bother clicking on the link and reading it?
If you question Reuters’ diligently earned and widely acknowledged credibility, please explain why. (Other credible fact checkers also have corrected your misinterpretation of the Oxford study findings, and you can read the cited study as well to see it does NOT say what you claim it does.)

Fact Check-Study did not find vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load of those who were unvaccinated

Social media users are sharing articles that discuss a study examining the transmission of the Delta variant of COVID-19 and falsely claiming the study found that fully vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load compared of those who are unvaccinated.

www.reuters.com

 

[NoleSince1961]

How did I misreport its findings? Did they not show evidence of higher viral loads in the nostrils in vaccinated persons?

Interesting you claim Dr Malone is a "widely discredited crack" when he is one who developed the technology that we are all talking about. His allegations from the beginning seem to be coming true in regards to developing antibody enhanced variants and the lack of effectiveness in stopping the spread of this virus.

Awfully hypocritical that you claim to have "personal responsiblity as a thoughtful member of a very interdependent society." Where is your professional integrity to your scientific field to not disregard evidence that doesn't fall in line with your pre determined theories? How about your ethical responsibility to guide people not as trained as you in your field of expertise? Science IS challenging everything.

Every single day in physics classes across America, Newton's laws of gravity are tested with balls and stop watches. That IS science. I don't need reuters to tell me what a fair interpretation or mischaracterization of a data set is.

Good luck to us all indeed.

and regarding Malone, it’s baffling to me that you and so many of my fellow citizens latch onto outliers like this (and Dr Stella Immanuel the demon sex astrologer and similar Covid/vax minimizers) while dismissing the 90%+ of legit medical doctors, epidemiologists and other credible scientists who advocate for the wisdom of masks, vaccines, etc. — especially considering the super costly, too often deadly consequences of choosing incorrectly.
And for what purpose… personal convenience, contrarianism, anti-academia, political partisanship cloaked in “freedom fighting”?

The Vaccine Scientist Spreading Vaccine Misinformation

Robert Malone claims to have invented mRNA technology. Why is he trying so hard to undermine its use?

amp.theatlantic.com

 

[QuaZ2002]

I already linked to the Reuters very clear explanation of why the study does NOT show 250x higher viral load in vaccinated vs unvaccinated noses.
Can you explain how you aren’t understanding something so basic as this, or you just didn’t bother clicking on the link and reading it?
If you question Reuters’ diligently earned and widely acknowledged credibility, please explain why. (Other credible fact checkers also have corrected your misinterpretation of the Oxford study findings, and you can read the cited study as well to see it does NOT say what you claim it does.)

Fact Check-Study did not find vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load of those who were unvaccinated

Social media users are sharing articles that discuss a study examining the transmission of the Delta variant of COVID-19 and falsely claiming the study found that fully vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load compared of those who are unvaccinated.

www.reuters.com

This looks like a checkmate.

 

[GeddyLee09]

So far it has killed as many people as Alec Baldwin or Ted Kennedy.

But put all that aside and cancel everything, put on you masks and hide at home. Next we will be tracking community transmission of the common cold.

 

[Odel4Pres]

I already linked to the Reuters very clear explanation of why the study does NOT show 250x higher viral load in vaccinated vs unvaccinated noses.
Can you explain how you aren’t understanding something so basic as this, or you just didn’t bother clicking on the link and reading it?
If you question Reuters’ diligently earned and widely acknowledged credibility, please explain why. (Other credible fact checkers also have corrected your misinterpretation of the Oxford study findings, and you can read the cited study as well to see it does NOT say what you claim it does.)

Fact Check-Study did not find vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load of those who were unvaccinated

Social media users are sharing articles that discuss a study examining the transmission of the Delta variant of COVID-19 and falsely claiming the study found that fully vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load compared of those who are unvaccinated.

www.reuters.com

Well I'm gonna link to the actual study and I would point you to note that the study was conducted on vaccinated healthcare workers.

link

Note the part that says "Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020"

Then note the fact that the comparison between workers in the study and samples from older strains from March-April 2020 (pre vaccine)

How is what I stated a complete misreporting of the findings?

 

[NoleSince1961]

But put all that aside and cancel everything, put on you masks and hide at home. Next we will be tracking community transmission of the common cold.

Who said to “cancel everything, put on your masks and hide at home”?

Why even type such nonsense in a conversation about a serious pandemic that has killed many hundreds of thousands of our and our fellow Americans’ family members, relatives, friends, coworkers, etc, seriously injured millions more and maxed out our health care resources, as we continue to (hopefully) try to balance keeping each other healthy while living our day-to-day lives, even if (gasp) we sometimes need to wear a mask, get a jab in our arm, care about people other than ourselves.

Btw, Google strawman fallacy… that might be helpful.

 

[NoleSince1961]

Well I'm gonna link to the actual study and I would point you to note that the study was conducted on vaccinated healthcare workers.

link

Note the part that says "Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020"

Then note the fact that the comparison between workers in the study and samples from older strains from March-April 2020 (pre vaccine)

How is what I stated a complete misreporting of the findings?

Because if that one paragraph fully explained the study, its methodology and its findings, there would be no need for all the other information about that study that you also need to take into account, but which you conveniently dismiss to satisfy your preferred conclusion.
I'm sorry that it can't all be boiled down into a meme for easier consumption.

Please read and carefully process all of this (here I'm excerpting Reuters again):
"The paper examines breakthrough infections in healthcare workers in Vietnam, all of whom contracted the Delta variant after receiving the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

The paper does not conclude that fully vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load of the virus compared to unvaccinated healthcare workers. Rather, it concludes that “viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020.”

It adds that it found no correlation between vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody levels, and viral loads or developing symptoms.

On page 2 of the paper, the authors say that breakthrough infections of the Delta variant “are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies,” which helps explain the transmission between those who are vaccinated.

Chi Ngo, senior communications officer for the Centre for Tropical Medicine at the Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, told Reuters via email that it does not support any statement shared by the Children’s Health Defense website.

“We support vaccination and believe that vaccination is highly effective against hospitalisation and death from COVID-19,” Ngo said. “This article states that with the Delta variant, safety measures (mask-wearing, hand-washing, social distancing) are still advised to reduce transmission (even if you have been fully vaccinated).”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) explains on its website here that the Delta variant is more than twice as contagious as previous variants and that vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections of the variant appear to produce the same amount of virus load as those who are unvaccinated.

The viral load does decrease faster in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated individual, meaning that the vaccinated are thought to be contagious for a shorter period of time, according to the CDC.

“This study is about the Delta variant and explaining ‘breakthrough cases’ among vaccinated healthcare workers because of the Delta variant,” Ngo said. “There is no focus on unvaccinated versus the vaccinated cases.”

 

[Odel4Pres]

Because if that one paragraph fully explained the study, its methodology and its findings, there would be no need for all the other information about that study that you also need to take into account, but which you conveniently dismiss to satisfy your preferred conclusion.
I'm sorry that it can't all be boiled down into a meme for easier consumption.

Please read and carefully process all of this (here I'm excerpting Reuters again):
"The paper examines breakthrough infections in healthcare workers in Vietnam, all of whom contracted the Delta variant after receiving the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

The paper does not conclude that fully vaccinated healthcare workers carry 251 times the viral load of the virus compared to unvaccinated healthcare workers. Rather, it concludes that “viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020.”

It adds that it found no correlation between vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody levels, and viral loads or developing symptoms.

On page 2 of the paper, the authors say that breakthrough infections of the Delta variant “are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies,” which helps explain the transmission between those who are vaccinated.

Chi Ngo, senior communications officer for the Centre for Tropical Medicine at the Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, told Reuters via email that it does not support any statement shared by the Children’s Health Defense website.

“We support vaccination and believe that vaccination is highly effective against hospitalisation and death from COVID-19,” Ngo said. “This article states that with the Delta variant, safety measures (mask-wearing, hand-washing, social distancing) are still advised to reduce transmission (even if you have been fully vaccinated).”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) explains on its website here that the Delta variant is more than twice as contagious as previous variants and that vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections of the variant appear to produce the same amount of virus load as those who are unvaccinated.

The viral load does decrease faster in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated individual, meaning that the vaccinated are thought to be contagious for a shorter period of time, according to the CDC.

“This study is about the Delta variant and explaining ‘breakthrough cases’ among vaccinated healthcare workers because of the Delta variant,” Ngo said. “There is no focus on unvaccinated versus the vaccinated cases.”

So you just quoted something from the study that does infer a correlation between the viral load of a vaccinated person to one that is unvaccinated. Then you quoted Reuters. I’m not arguing with you. This is as clear cut as it can be, yet you choose to ignore it and dismiss it and quote something that was written to support your argument. This is what I was stating in my original post, it is the opposite of what science should be.

 

[GeddyLee09]

Who said to “cancel everything, put on your masks and hide at home”?

Why even type such nonsense in a conversation about a serious pandemic that has killed many hundreds of thousands of our and our fellow Americans’ family members, relatives, friends, coworkers, etc, seriously injured millions more and maxed out our health care resources, as we continue to (hopefully) try to balance keeping each other healthy while living our day-to-day lives, even if (gasp) we sometimes need to wear a mask, get a jab in our arm, care about people other than ourselves.

Btw, Google strawman fallacy… that might be helpful.

Dramatize much. Maxed out healthcare resources? Seriously injured millions? Balance keeping each other healthy? Seriously? Don't look up cause I think the sky is truly falling.

 

[NoleSince1961]

So you just quoted something from the study that does infer a correlation between the viral load of a vaccinated person to one that is unvaccinated. Then you quoted Reuters. I’m not arguing with you. This is as clear cut as it can be, yet you choose to ignore it and dismiss it and quote something that was written to support your argument. This is what I was stating in my original post, it is the opposite of what science should be.

If you genuinely care about understanding what you have misinterpreted and are now parroting from whatever other Covid-is-overhyped/anti-vax source you got that 250x nugget from (as you or your source has re-written it rather than as the study authors did), you'll take the time to scroll down beneath the study you linked (the pre-peer review version) and carefully read through all the comments explaining why you cannot draw any vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated conclusions from it...
the focus was on the transmissibility and other characteristics of Delta in comparison to earlier strains, not an apples to apples comparison of the same Covid variant in vaccinated vs unvaccinated populations.
If your conclusion (as you have presented it) were actually among the study findings, then certainly that would have been identified by the actual authors in their discussion of the results, but that is not what they have written.

As you say, that's as "clear cut as it can be, yet you choose to ignore it and dismiss it."
Not going to spend more time explaining to you why what you have presented here is misleading. Hopefully that's sufficient.

 

[NoleSince1961]

Dramatize much. Maxed out healthcare resources? Seriously injured millions? Balance keeping each other healthy? Seriously? Don't look up cause I think the sky is truly falling.

Doesn't sound like you're big on data and statistics, but just in case...

Topic: Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the U.S.

Stay up to date with the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, providing a national overview of statistics and analyzing state-level data.

www.statista.com

The most recent credible studies of Covid severity indicate that:
-- Severe disease (eg, with dyspnea, hypoxia, or >50 percent lung involvement on imaging within 24 to 48 hours) was reported in 14 percent.
-- Critical disease (eg, with respiratory failure, shock, or multiorgan dysfunction) was reported in 5 percent.
That's 19%, x 51 million reported US Covid cases to date = 9.7 million severe to critical cases, and if you take out the 800K+ who have died, that still leaves 8.9 million severe to critical case survivors, so "seriously injured millions" is indeed accurate (even if you were to cut the 8.9 million assumption down by 75% to account for whatever data conspiracy of the day you subscribe to.)
I didn't just pull "millions" out of nowhere, and I'm not into hyperbole when it comes to a serious life and death pandemic.

I have no idea from where you get your news, but it's impossible that you've totally missed the impact Covid has had on health care resources all around our country (and abroad).
-- https://www.healthcaredive.com/news...em-will-stretch-for-decades-fitch-say/604125/
-- https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7046a5.htm
-- https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-per...equal-financial-hit-during-covid-studies-show
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_on_hospitals

And --
Have a great day, and thanks in advance for being thoughtful of your fellow Americans so that we can all keep each other as healthy as possible.

 

[Odel4Pres]

If you genuinely care about understanding what you have misinterpreted and are now parroting from whatever other Covid-is-overhyped/anti-vax source you got that 250x nugget from (as you or your source has re-written it rather than as the study authors did), you'll take the time to scroll down beneath the study you linked (the pre-peer review version) and carefully read through all the comments explaining why you cannot draw any vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated conclusions from it...
the focus was on the transmissibility and other characteristics of Delta in comparison to earlier strains, not an apples to apples comparison of the same Covid variant in vaccinated vs unvaccinated populations.
If your conclusion (as you have presented it) were actually among the study findings, then certainly that would have been identified by the actual authors in their discussion of the results, but that is not what they have written.

As you say, that's as "clear cut as it can be, yet you choose to ignore it and dismiss it."
Not going to spend more time explaining to you why what you have presented here is misleading. Hopefully that's sufficient.

Carry on; I wish you nothing but the best and I hope you realize you are what you accuse others of being. We are all Noles here (hopefully) and can agree to disagree.

You literally continue to rely on others to interpret findings for you and refuse to critically think about things for yourself it seems. The study clearly states that it saw a higher viral load in the two data sets. If you refuse to acknowledge that then I don’t know how to have a conversation with you.

All the best.

 

[NoleSince1961]

Carry on; I wish you nothing but the best and I hope you realize you are what you accuse others of being. We are all Noles here (hopefully) and can agree to disagree.

You literally continue to rely on others to interpret findings for you and refuse to critically think about things for yourself it seems. The study clearly states that it saw a higher viral load in the two data sets. If you refuse to acknowledge that then I don’t know how to have a conversation with you.

All the best.

Please don't misstate what I've pushed back on to try to make dismissing my challenge easier. That's super weak.

Your original commentary in which you attempted to downplay the efficacy of vaccines, included this "It would take into account the very real study by Oxford that showed that vaccinated people carry a viral load nearly 250 times higher than non vaccinated people. This coincided with the side effects that Dr Malone warned everyone about over a year ago."

That's a complete mischaracterization of the Oxford-Vietnamese study and the authors' findings, since your commentary doesn't even mention the Delta variant (i.e. the actual subject of the study, NOT vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations). Furthermore, Delta didn't show up in Vietnam (the location of the Oxford study) until April of 2021, so it wasn't even around a year ago when your discredited Dr. Malone "warned everyone" about anything at all, so no, nothing about the Delta variant "coincided" with Malone's side effect warnings.

The "two data sets" you reference are not the apples to apples data sets that would be required to compare vaccinated to unvaccinated populations, since one group was infected with the much more virulent Delta strain and earlier group infected by less potent pre-Delta strains. It's unfortunate if you don't understand how that makes your conclusion invalid, but I won't invest more time attempting to explain it.

Have a good one.

 

[Odel4Pres]

Please don't misstate what I've pushed back on to try to make dismissing my challenge easier. That's super weak.

Your original commentary in which you attempted to downplay the efficacy of vaccines, included this "It would take into account the very real study by Oxford that showed that vaccinated people carry a viral load nearly 250 times higher than non vaccinated people. This coincided with the side effects that Dr Malone warned everyone about over a year ago."

That's a complete mischaracterization of the Oxford-Vietnamese study and the authors' findings, since your commentary doesn't even mention the Delta variant (i.e. the actual subject of the study, NOT vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations). Furthermore, Delta didn't show up in Vietnam (the location of the Oxford study) until April of 2021, so it wasn't even around a year ago when your discredited Dr. Malone "warned everyone" about anything at all, so no, nothing about the Delta variant "coincided" with Malone's side effect warnings.

The "two data sets" you reference are not the apples to apples data sets that would be required to compare vaccinated to unvaccinated populations, since one group was infected with the much more virulent Delta strain and earlier group infected by less potent pre-Delta strains. It's unfortunate if you don't understand how that makes your conclusion invalid, but I won't invest more time attempting to explain it.

Have a good one.

Were the patients who’s data showed a higher viral load vaccinated? Yes.

did the data set from the first group consist of all non vaccinated patients? Yes.

my statement is correct and not a complete mis characterization. It also 100% substantiates that wacko’s initial stance that this would make people walking Petri dishes.

funny you discount the evidence and the scientist who proposed the theories it substantiates.

 

[Odel4Pres]

Please don't misstate what I've pushed back on to try to make dismissing my challenge easier. That's super weak.

Your original commentary in which you attempted to downplay the efficacy of vaccines, included this "It would take into account the very real study by Oxford that showed that vaccinated people carry a viral load nearly 250 times higher than non vaccinated people. This coincided with the side effects that Dr Malone warned everyone about over a year ago."

That's a complete mischaracterization of the Oxford-Vietnamese study and the authors' findings, since your commentary doesn't even mention the Delta variant (i.e. the actual subject of the study, NOT vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations). Furthermore, Delta didn't show up in Vietnam (the location of the Oxford study) until April of 2021, so it wasn't even around a year ago when your discredited Dr. Malone "warned everyone" about anything at all, so no, nothing about the Delta variant "coincided" with Malone's side effect warnings.

The "two data sets" you reference are not the apples to apples data sets that would be required to compare vaccinated to unvaccinated populations, since one group was infected with the much more virulent Delta strain and earlier group infected by less potent pre-Delta strains. It's unfortunate if you don't understand how that makes your conclusion invalid, but I won't invest more time attempting to explain it.

Have a good one.

Curios, what are your thoughts on the overall covid numbers being higher in the same period of 2021 than they were in 2020? Just a coincidence that once people started getting vaccinated we saw more cases?

 

[NoleSince1961]

Were the patients who’s data showed a higher viral load vaccinated? Yes.

did the data set from the first group consist of all non vaccinated patients? Yes.

my statement is correct and not a complete mis characterization. It also 100% substantiates that wacko’s initial stance that this would make people walking Petri dishes.

funny you discount the evidence and the scientist who proposed the theories it substantiates.

I give up. You interpret the findings any way you wish, even to the detriment of yourself and your and others' loved ones, no matter how many times Reuters and every other reputable fact checker and knowledgable scientists clearly refute your (mis)interpretation of the study findings. Good luck with that.

 

[NoleSince1961]

Curios, what are your thoughts on the overall covid numbers being higher in the same period of 2021 than they were in 2020? Just a coincidence that once people started getting vaccinated we saw more cases?

Thanks for being curious, but some of this you're going to have to figure out on your own, or with a tutor other than me.
Here's some help to get you started on this one...

Correlation vs Causation

Seeing two variables moving together does not mean we can say that one variable causes the other to occur. This is why we commonly say “correlation does not imply causation.”

www.jmp.com

 

[Odel4Pres]

I give up. You interpret the findings any way you wish, even to the detriment of yourself and your and others' loved ones, no matter how many times Reuters and every other reputable fact checker and knowledgable scientists clearly refute your (mis)interpretation of the study findings. Good luck with that.

do vaccines only work if everyone gets them too?

 

[Odel4Pres]

Thanks for being curious, but some of this you're going to have to figure out on your own, or with a tutor other than me.
Here's some help to get you started on this one...

Correlation vs Causation

Seeing two variables moving together does not mean we can say that one variable causes the other to occur. This is why we commonly say “correlation does not imply causation.”

www.jmp.com

Is it hard to climb to such a moral high ground?

 

[NoleSince1961]

Is it hard to climb to such a moral high ground?

I don't consider being genuinely thoughtful of the health and well-being of my fellow humans and making a real effort to be well informed via the most credible sources as occupying any kind of "moral high ground".
But yes, today's middle-finger version of populism is a curious animal... I am aware that many of those who are more contrarian and focused on their individual "rights" when it comes to public health prefer to mock thoughtfulness as some kind of elitist moral high ground.
So you do you.

 

[NoleSince1961]

do vaccines only work if everyone gets them too?

Of course not. Very few things in life are binary like that. Hopefully you knew that.

Herd immunity and COVID-19: What you need to know

To protect groups of people over time, it helps to know what level of recovery or vaccination in a population makes it hard for a germ to spread.

www.mayoclinic.org

 

[Odel4Pres]

I don't consider being genuinely thoughtful of the health and well-being of my fellow humans and making a real effort to be well informed via the most credible sources as occupying any kind of "moral high ground".
But yes, today's middle-finger version of populism is a curious animal... I am aware that many of those who are more contrarian and focused on their individual "rights" when it comes to public health prefer to mock thoughtfulness as some kind of elitist moral high ground.
So you do you.

Thats just it. So because someone disagrees with you they don’t care about other human beings? That’s pompous and smug and makes you what we call now a “virtue signaler”. I care greatly about everyone except for Travis Hunter this week, but even that will wear off when I forgive him for being a liar and a hypocrite.

Dont dismiss people for disagreeing with you. Every point I have brought up with you has legs and needs to be more considered, but besides the current culture of being a virtue signaler, we can’t even have discussions anymore about our differences. I apologize for getting snippy with you. Have a great night.

 

[NoleSince1961]

Thats just it. So because someone disagrees with you they don’t care about other human beings? That’s pompous and smug and makes you what we call now a “virtue signaler”. I care greatly about everyone except for Travis Hunter this week, but even that will wear off when I forgive him for being a liar and a hypocrite.

Dont dismiss people for disagreeing with you. Every point I have brought up with you has legs and needs to be more considered, but besides the current culture of being a virtue signaler, we can’t even have discussions anymore about our differences. I apologize for getting snippy with you. Have a great night.

Sorry if my exasperated tone is off-putting but it’s super hard to go along with the jokiness and mocking of actual science when I’ve lost family members and friends to this “over-hyped” hoax/flu and seen others I care about severely damaged (long haulers), some of whom I’m still helping to recover and will be for some time.

Misinformation and contrarian defiance of mainstream medicine (very different from normal healthy skepticism) definitely delay and otherwise handicap our ability to put this plague in the rear-view mirror sooner vs later.

It’s not just some fun FB debate to me and many others, especially those in the health care field. I can’t imagine being an ICU nurse having to read some of the way too prevalent mocking/continued questioning of just how serious Covid really is, how useful masks and vaccines are, etc., nearly two years in and 800,000+ US humans dead already.

Good night.

 

[Odel4Pres]

Sorry if my exasperated tone is off-putting but it’s super hard to go along with the jokiness and mocking of actual science when I’ve lost family members and friends to this “over-hyped” hoax/flu and seen others I care about severely damaged (long haulers), some of whom I’m still helping to recover and will be for some time.

Misinformation and contrarian defiance of mainstream medicine (very different from normal healthy skepticism) definitely delay and otherwise handicap our ability to put this plague in the rear-view mirror sooner vs later.

It’s not just some fun FB debate to me and many others, especially those in the health care field. I can’t imagine being an ICU nurse having to read some of the way too prevalent mocking/continued questioning of just how serious Covid really is, how useful masks and vaccines are, etc., nearly two years in and 800,000+ US humans dead already.

Good night.

I think there should be a very real discussion about how effective these vaccines are. My only point in regards to the covid pandemic continues to be about treatment vs vaccination. These were billed as the drug that would allow you to live your life like normal again, then it turned into ok, but you still need to wear masks and be safely distanced, now it seems to be everyone loses their jobs without a jab.

There are very real treatments in my anecdotal experience that have allowed some very unhealthy people in my life to dodge any serious effects from this. The entire vaccine push reminds me of some Orwellian government over reach that is probably lining a lot of pockets.

best of luck helping others and to you and yours.

 

[GeddyLee09]

Doesn't sound like you're big on data and statistics, but just in case...

Topic: Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the U.S.

Stay up to date with the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, providing a national overview of statistics and analyzing state-level data.

www.statista.com

The most recent credible studies of Covid severity indicate that:
-- Severe disease (eg, with dyspnea, hypoxia, or >50 percent lung involvement on imaging within 24 to 48 hours) was reported in 14 percent.
-- Critical disease (eg, with respiratory failure, shock, or multiorgan dysfunction) was reported in 5 percent.
That's 19%, x 51 million reported US Covid cases to date = 9.7 million severe to critical cases, and if you take out the 800K+ who have died, that still leaves 8.9 million severe to critical case survivors, so "seriously injured millions" is indeed accurate (even if you were to cut the 8.9 million assumption down by 75% to account for whatever data conspiracy of the day you subscribe to.)
I didn't just pull "millions" out of nowhere, and I'm not into hyperbole when it comes to a serious life and death pandemic.

I have no idea from where you get your news, but it's impossible that you've totally missed the impact Covid has had on health care resources all around our country (and abroad).
-- https://www.healthcaredive.com/news...em-will-stretch-for-decades-fitch-say/604125/
-- https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7046a5.htm
-- https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-per...equal-financial-hit-during-covid-studies-show
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_on_hospitals

And --

View embedded media

Have a great day, and thanks in advance for being thoughtful of your fellow Americans so that we can all keep each other as healthy as possible.

First off I'm not going to click on a facebook link so we can discount that one. For every story, study or opinion you post (even credible ones from Wikipedia) I can post other studys, stories or opinion to the contrary. It all depends on what you choose to believe. That's the great thing about statistics, you can use them in what ever manner fits your narrative.

In Bay County FL there has been 10 new admissions in the last 7 days so thats 2.41 per 100 beds. % beds used for covid is 1.46 and ICU usage is a 2.1%. The numbers are rising but hardly over run.

For the severe part if 8.9 million had severe injury from covid that's 2.6% of the population from the 14% that actually caught it per CDC numbers. 800,000 deaths from a 339M population is about .23% of the population. If we cut the number just in half to compensate for inflation or conspiracies that's 1.3% had a severe case, .12% died and 2.3% actually caught covid. The numbers can be interpreted many ways.

To be clear I think the numbers of people who have contracted covid are far higher than we know maybe 3 or 4 times but the death rate is probably inflated due to co morbidities ect... 3 or 4 times perhaps not but its not as high as reported. Factor in those who would have died anyway for other issues and the number is even lower. I'm not trying to say covid doesn't exist but I do think its been over hyped to an extent for a variety of reasons (politics and money to name a few). Covid is a virus and its going to spread how it wants when it wants, nothing we do is going to change the final outcome. We might slow the spread in some cases but in the end its going to do what it does. Vermont is the most vaccinated state in the US and they have 418 cases per 100,000 people vs Florida with 108. Germany once lauded as a beacon for covid management has 73k cases per day now after staying relatively low for 2 years.

I haven't missed the impact at all as we have health care and first responders in our immediate family. All of which have had covid and been vaccinated with boosters. This has impacted many people in many ways but it has also impacted people in ways that could have been prevented (financial, jobs, supply chain ect). This was managed poorly from the start and has continued to be that way, once you politicize a health care threat you have lost the battle.

This new threat seems to be more transmittable but less severe which is actually good news for this to move into the endemic stage.

I see that you have personal experience with this and if its effected you personally I am truly sorry. A loss is a loss and is sad to happen to anyone.

Have a good one and lets get back to bagging on Deion and Travis Hunter.

 

[NoleSince1961]

First off I'm not going to click on a facebook link so we can discount that one. For every story, study or opinion you post (even credible ones from Wikipedia) I can post other studys, stories or opinion to the contrary. It all depends on what you choose to believe. That's the great thing about statistics, you can use them in what ever manner fits your narrative.

In Bay County FL there has been 10 new admissions in the last 7 days so thats 2.41 per 100 beds. % beds used for covid is 1.46 and ICU usage is a 2.1%. The numbers are rising but hardly over run.

For the severe part if 8.9 million had severe injury from covid that's 2.6% of the population from the 14% that actually caught it per CDC numbers. 800,000 deaths from a 339M population is about .23% of the population. If we cut the number just in half to compensate for inflation or conspiracies that's 1.3% had a severe case, .12% died and 2.3% actually caught covid. The numbers can be interpreted many ways.

To be clear I think the numbers of people who have contracted covid are far higher than we know maybe 3 or 4 times but the death rate is probably inflated due to co morbidities ect... 3 or 4 times perhaps not but its not as high as reported. Factor in those who would have died anyway for other issues and the number is even lower. I'm not trying to say covid doesn't exist but I do think its been over hyped to an extent for a variety of reasons (politics and money to name a few). Covid is a virus and its going to spread how it wants when it wants, nothing we do is going to change the final outcome. We might slow the spread in some cases but in the end its going to do what it does. Vermont is the most vaccinated state in the US and they have 418 cases per 100,000 people vs Florida with 108. Germany once lauded as a beacon for covid management has 73k cases per day now after staying relatively low for 2 years.

I haven't missed the impact at all as we have health care and first responders in our immediate family. All of which have had covid and been vaccinated with boosters. This has impacted many people in many ways but it has also impacted people in ways that could have been prevented (financial, jobs, supply chain ect). This was managed poorly from the start and has continued to be that way, once you politicize a health care threat you have lost the battle.

This new threat seems to be more transmittable but less severe which is actually good news for this to move into the endemic stage.

I see that you have personal experience with this and if its effected you personally I am truly sorry. A loss is a loss and is sad to happen to anyone.

Have a good one and lets get back to bagging on Deion and Travis Hunter.

Wow. Did you seriously just attempt to refute Covid's devastating impact on many hospitals and other health care resources around the country since this pandemic first hit hard in Spring of 2020, citing one recent week in Bay County? Really?
Bay County is 1 of over 3,000 counties in America... that's 3/100ths of 1%, and it's not a demographic proxy for the average anything across America.

That's like arguing that drug abuse has been overblown and hasn't really taxed health care and judicial systems in FL because it hasn't been an issue in your own household.

And Covid has been seriously taxing health care resources around the country for well over 80 weeks now, so why just cherrypick 1 of those?

No offense to Bay County, it's a beautiful place, and I'm sure important stuff happened in Bay County and elsewhere in that one week you selected, but that's an incredibly myopic and distorted view of the nationwide impact of anything.

Might make more sense to listen to the thousands of hospital administrators and health care professionals around the US who have been very vocal about Covid maxing out their facilities, staffing and other limited resources, obviously not every single week and in every town in America, but since this pandemic began hitting pockets of the US hard and spreading wider, until today everywhere that it hasn't been brought under anything resembling control.

Again, good luck to us all, but minimizing the scourges of Covid and the value of mitigation efforts recommended by the overwhelming majority of qualified professionals certainly is not helping anybody, other than whatever personal satisfaction and convenience someone gets from choosing self over community.
Take care.

 

[Dhersh]

So far it has killed as many people as Alec Baldwin or Ted Kennedy.

But put all that aside and cancel everything, put on you masks and hide at home. Next we will be tracking community transmission of the common cold.

From what I understand, Delta is surging again and this is occuring at the same time as the initial Omicron surge in the US. While Omicron may be less virulent, Delta was still the dominant variant in the US last I heard, and we all know how many deaths and hospitalizations that has caused.

For scientists, what makes this dual surge so concerning isn't simply the number of cases, regardless of how severe they are. They are saying Omicron is so contagious that it is probably out pacing our ability to track its spread. For example, much smaller countries are seeing more cases per day than the US can sequence, so who knows what variant ratio is here with a larger population. And that is before taking into account asymptomatic/undetected cases.

I believe that as long as we are in a pandemic, the "powers that be" will see it as more responsible to promote those simple and effective mitigation efforts. It's a very minor deal.

 

[GeddyLee09]

From what I understand, Delta is surging again and this is occuring at the same time as the initial Omicron surge in the US. While Omicron may be less virulent, Delta was still the dominant variant in the US last I heard, and we all know how many deaths and hospitalizations that has caused.

For scientists, what makes this dual surge so concerning isn't simply the number of cases, regardless of how severe they are. They are saying Omicron is so contagious that it is probably out pacing our ability to track its spread. For example, much smaller countries are seeing more cases per day than the US can sequence, so who knows what variant ratio is here with a larger population. And that is before taking into account asymptomatic/undetected cases.

I believe that as long as we are in a pandemic, the "powers that be" will see it as more responsible to promote those simple and effective mitigation efforts. It's a very minor deal.

But why track community spread or infection numbers in the first place? It should be about deaths and severe cases. Hospitalizations can be misleading as many are in the hospital but could be at home.

Maybe they cancel each other out as they vie for supremacy.

 

[GeddyLee09]

From what I understand, Delta is surging again and this is occuring at the same time as the initial Omicron surge in the US. While Omicron may be less virulent, Delta was still the dominant variant in the US last I heard, and we all know how many deaths and hospitalizations that has caused.

For scientists, what makes this dual surge so concerning isn't simply the number of cases, regardless of how severe they are. They are saying Omicron is so contagious that it is probably out pacing our ability to track its spread. For example, much smaller countries are seeing more cases per day than the US can sequence, so who knows what variant ratio is here with a larger population. And that is before taking into account asymptomatic/undetected cases.

I believe that as long as we are in a pandemic, the "powers that be" will see it as more responsible to promote those simple and effective mitigation efforts. It's a very minor deal.

The mitigation efforts will only be instituted in certain states as we saw in the summer. The number of states pushing these efforts goes down with each wave.

 

[NoleSince1961]

The mitigation efforts will only be instituted in certain states as we saw in the summer. The number of states pushing these efforts goes down with each wave.

Fortunately the majority of Americans don’t have such a deep distrust of medical/scientific expertise and don’t need to have any mitigation efforts mandated in order to see what’s been happening around the US and the globe, and to understand and appreciate that the risks of possibly being wrong by accepting and adhering to the prevailing medical advice are far less injurious and deadly than is the tiny personal inconvenience of doing the right thing for our family and community and thwarting further mutations and spread.
(rereading that long run-on sentence has me wondering if there’s a double negative in there that actually says the opposite of what I intended, but hopefully you get the intended concept about relative risks)

Unfortunately, mandates are still needed for the minority of stubborn resistors, whose numbers remain large enough to hinder reaching effective herd immunity in a timely way.

 

[Dhersh]

The mitigation efforts will only be instituted in certain states as we saw in the summer. The number of states pushing these efforts goes down with each wave.

Mitigation efforts occur at a personal level by each person. Frankly the government has little to do with it and that seems to be all that anyone focuses on.

 

[NoleSince1961]

But why track community spread or infection numbers in the first place? It should be about deaths and severe cases. Hospitalizations can be misleading as many are in the hospital but could be at home.

Maybe they cancel each other out as they vie for supremacy.

In case your “why track…?” question is genuine:
(and this explanation was from July 2020, so it skims over the value in understanding mutations and their relative profiles, virulence, risks, etc)

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

 

[Dhersh]

But why track community spread or infection numbers in the first place? It should be about deaths and severe cases. Hospitalizations can be misleading as many are in the hospital but could be at home.

It's not about tracking just those statistics. That's a small piece of the puzzle. That may be what you care about, but there are more reasons than I can list to track all aspects of the virus. Just because the average person isn't concerned with those reasons doesn't necessarily mean it isn't important to someone else. Health/safety reasons, science reasons, knowledge reasons, policy reasons, vaccine reasons, etc., etc. The list goes on.

 

[nolepaul23]

Well, I guess the vaccine mandates….everyone admits that the vaccine does not prevent you from getting Covid. All it does is help your chances if you do get it. So why force people to get it? If it stopped you from getting it or spreading it then I could see it but it doesn’t. So if someone catches Covid it is on them if they have it worse and they will have to live (or die) with their choice but I don’t get the purpose of mandates and firing people because it is not impacting your co-workers, just you, right? Am I missing something?

By the way I am vaccinated so I am not “anti vaccine” but I don’t understand the logic of the mandates when it does not stop the spread.

I have two words to say about any vaccine mandates..... Second Amendment.

 

[NoleSince1961]

I have two words to say about any vaccine mandates..... Second Amendment.

Polio says hello, tough guy.
(or it would but it’s not around in the US thanks to rational citizens and vaccine mandates)

 

[Dhersh]

I have two words to say about any vaccine mandates..... Second Amendment.

I have two words to begin to start making you look very foolish:

Go on

 

[GeddyLee09]

Fortunately the majority of Americans don’t have such a deep distrust of medical/scientific expertise and don’t need to have any mitigation efforts mandated in order to see what’s been happening around the US and the globe, and to understand and appreciate that the risks of possibly being wrong by accepting and adhering to the prevailing medical advice are far less injurious and deadly than is the tiny personal inconvenience of doing the right thing for our family and community and thwarting further mutations and spread.
(rereading that long run-on sentence has me wondering if there’s a double negative in there that actually says the opposite of what I intended, but hopefully you get the intended concept about relative risks)

Unfortunately, mandates are still needed for the minority of stubborn resistors, whose numbers remain large enough to hinder reaching effective herd immunity in a timely way.

Minority of stubborn resistors. That's a good one there. Like I said before you have your view I have mine. That's the beauty of living in a free society we can all have our own opinions.

 

[NoleSince1961]

Minority of stubborn resistors. That's a good one there. Like I said before you have your view I have mine. That's the beauty of living in a free society we can all have our own opinions.

Less than 20% of Americans surveyed refuse to get vaccinated. That's far less than required to satisfy the definition of a minority, no matter how large the margin of error in any properly designed survey.
Contrary to the "everybody's opinion is equally valid" and "we can just agree to disagree" brush-offs that have become far too prevalent in discussions of factual data, there is simply no debating that a minority of Americans refuse to get vaccinated. It is fact, supported by data.
Choose any credible survey or analysis of actual vaccination data... you and your fellow uber-skeptics are thankfully in the minority. Yes, you're welcome to your fears and opinions, but we all suffer the significant consequences.

The Share Of U.S. Adults Willing To Get Vaccinated Ticks Up, A New Poll Finds

The NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist survey finds 19% of adults say they won't get vaccinated. That's down 5 points from the month prior, coinciding with the delta surge and FDA approval of the Pfizer vaccine.

www.npr.org