Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 86 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

No.. it actually got quite a few friends and family members vaccinated.

It's amazing what denial of access to social events or grandchildren has accomplished.

Yep, I've witnessed several "conversions" over the past few months. I recently officiated a wedding with a "No vaccination, no RSVP" policy that produced a happy mix of vaccinations and severed family ties.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

There are some good arguments out there for the idea that the new strains are as a direct result of the vaccines themselves. After all, there would be no need for the virus to mutate if there had been no vaccine and that is proven by the fact that the vaccines are not as effective on the delta strain. Same as antibiotic resistance.

Nope: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6304978/

Edited by Madelaine McMasters
  • Thanks 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

When someone who ascribes to a 2000 year old book (a christian) makes claims that counter that 2000 year old book, the 2000 year old book comes in handy.

I have, more than once, quoted Arielle as the source of claims to counter Arielle's claims. Molly had to do a bit more homework.

Quote

The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature
Proverbs: collection 2 + 6
Segment A

2.10 22-23. I am one whose fate has not been determined, confronted by a sickness demon. "I am one who knows wealth and possessions; let me take my position in front of you," he said to me.

2.28 46-47. (cf. 2.34A, 6.1.22: l. 236, 6.2.3: UET 6/2 260 l. 1) Moving about defeats poverty. He who knows how to move around becomes strong. He will live longer than the sedentary man.

2.37 67. (cf. 6.1.11.146, 6.2.3: UET 6/2 267 ll. 1-2) You are a scribe and you do not know your own name? Shame (?) on you!

2.38 68-69. (cf. 6.2.3: UET 6/2 268 ll. 1-2) If a scribe knows only a single line but his handwriting is good, he is indeed a scribe!

2.40 72. (cf. 6.2.3: UET 6/3 452 l. 3) A scribe whose hand can follow dictation is indeed a scribe!

2.45 77-78. The pupil of a master, like cornelian pierced through its side. He is indeed a scribe!

2.46 79. That which is pierced through its side is indeed lapis lazuli!

2.47 80. What kind of a scribe is a scribe who does not know Sumerian?

(from https://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/proverbs/t.6.1.02.html )

image.thumb.png.21ee76c05acdc5d8b8654aac52642bd6.png

image.thumb.png.0108423605d19e511fdaed1272175dcc.png

Edited by Chroma Starlight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

This is not my idea, but it makes sense: in the US it would be economically advantageous to simply pay people a thousand dollars to get vaccinated. I'd put a tight time limit on it, like two weeks for the first shot, and apportion the payout for the two shots somehow.

I don't think the payout would even need to be that high.  Colorado did a 5 week lottery - drew the name of a vaccinated person each week for 5 weeks, with each winner getting $1,000,000.  From looking at the numbers, it doesn't appear that that really motivated people much -- the chances of winning were pretty minimal after all.

The state has now started giving out $100 Walmart gift cards and that seems to be working a bit better - at least, Walmart is reporting a slight uptick in people coming in for the vaccine.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

It might appear like that in YouTube AntiVax Wonderland  but if anyone's interested in the actual figures, then here you go.

 

Some people aren't at all interested in actual facts.  They, in fact, probably don't even bother looking for them.  It's much easier to find wacky websites/videos to back an erroneous stance.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know Jebus last words where according to the books: Placere nulla Vaccinum, amen.*
So what are we discussing here?

 

 

* Some might have noticed, that I started to post utterly b*lls*** in this thread, just like a few others do since the beginning of this thread.

Edited by Sid Nagy
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2021 at 3:24 PM, Arielle Popstar said:

It would appear that in the UK at least, the numbers of vaccinated contracting COVID is about to overtake the numbers of unvaccinated contracting it. Regardless of whether or not there is a difference in the severity of the symptoms, both still appear to be able to transmit the disease to others so to me it sounds like people should be careful of both the vaccinated and unvaccinated who might be displaying symptoms.

Correct. If Israel's data is accurate and indicative of rates elsewhere, current mRNA vaccines might be about 50% effective at preventing infection and 88-91% effective at presenting serious symptoms. The change in public behavior I've seen recently seems sufficient to erase the vaccination advantage, possibly even for serious symptoms. People are standing close together in lines, shaking hands, congregating en-mass indoors, etc.

The difference in the infection/illness vaccine efficacy means that unvaccinated people are more likely to become aware of their infections than are vaccinated people. Phrased another way, as a fraction of their respective populations, the vaccinated will produce more oblivious Typhoid Marys. As the population of unvaccinated, uninfected people declines, their risk of contracting Covid-19 might actually increase.

Once again, ignorance is an equal opportunity employer. If vaccinated people re-enter public life with the expectation they're both safe and incapable of harming others, they are displaying an ignorance similar to those who refuse to get vaccinated. So, in addition to treating the vaccinated as more of a risk than commonly thought, the vaccinated should treat themselves as more of a threat than they currently do.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

the vaccinated should treat themselves as more of a threat than they currently do.

My husband and I are both fully vaccinated and will continue to wear our masks as we have from the start.  It's almost become second nature.  Even though our mask mandate ended, I still see a lot of people masked.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, RacyAcey said:

Will never get the shot.....I will take my chances with the virus. 

Pretty big wager you're making there.

You know what they say, "play stupid games, win stupid prizes"

c43b967b0852d2c3896ca8014949f411.jpg

Edited by PermaRuthed
needs fancy picture
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mollymews said:

the UK data is here: https://covid.joinzoe.com/

the numbers show

1.1 million people vaccinated with one or two doses
2,394 of 1.1 million reported getting Covid after 1 dose. Number of deaths: 1
187 of 1.1 million reported getting COVID after 2 doses. Number of deaths: 0

probabilities of getting Covid: 1 in 500 after 1 dose. 1 in 3,333 after 2 doses. 1 in 1.1 million of dying

total population of UK: 66.7 million. Covid cases to date: 5.6 million. Number of deaths: 129,000

probabilities: 1 in 12 of getting Covid. 1 in 520 of dying

so basically you (Arielle) by using the UK as a datapoint in this conversation are going off a personal philosophical view that gambling on a 1 in 520 chance of dying is ok with you, rather than taking the 1 in 1.1 million chance. And using this crafty man on the internet as someone to take your lead in this matter


not sure if you are a christian but if you are then a thought for you and anyone else who is a christian and is getting lured into the anti-covid vaccination trope

should you be the 1 in 520 and not the 1 in 1.1 million then when you stand in judgment before the throne of heaven then you will be asked to reconcile the bible teaching with your presence before god. The bible teaching is:


1 Corinthians 3: 16-23

16 Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst?
17 If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for God’s temple is sacred, and you together are that temple.
18 Do not deceive yourselves. If any of you think you are wise by the standards of this age, you should become fools so that you may become wise.
19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight. As it is written: “He catches the wise in their craftiness”
20 and again, “The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile.”
21 So then, no more boasting about human leaders! All things are yours,
22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours,
23 and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God.

 

St Paul is talking about you here, christian person. You the foolish who listens to crafty people who pretend to be wise and lead you into foolishness. You the foolish who will not accept the facts, which is on you as the teaching says: "All things are yours". And in not accepting facts and using your ability to reason that is god's gift to you, then standing before the throne of heaven as the 1 in 520 then you have destroyed God's temple, you. And on this you will be judged

First off, my summation was based off of the figures from the exact same site that you yourself list as authoritative, as it was the one Dr. John Campbell used in his Youtube analysis. 

60e6e72d5d0cbc3f32ec5c6d_4P1wau-kgcYTRtF

Looking at that graph from page he lists as his reference, one can see the unvaccinated cases leveling off and starting to drop while the vaccinated cases are doing a fairly steep rise. Your rebuttal is rebutting something I did not address in the first place. Please look at the craftiness in your own backyard before looking for it in others.

Quote

St Paul is talking about you here, christian person. You the foolish who listens to crafty people who pretend to be wise and lead you into foolishness. You the foolish who will not accept the facts, which is on you as the teaching says: "All things are yours". And in not accepting facts and using your ability to reason that is god's gift to you, then standing before the throne of heaven as the 1 in 520 then you have destroyed God's temple, you. And on this you will be judged

Yes, God will judge me, so you don't have to :) In the meantime perhaps you could look at where your "facts" differ from the Dr. Campbells Youtube to see if there is anything you may need to adjust on your own understanding.

1 hour ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Wonder if the studies authors would be surprised at how quickly the Covid virus is mutating.

"Thus, we contend that vaccine resistance is less of a concern than drug resistance because it is less likely to evolve and when it does, it is less harmful to human and animal health and well-being."

Think that statement has been proved wrong considering the speed of the delta variant and the significant reduction in efficacy in both antibody treatments and vaccines.

1 hour ago, Innula Zenovka said:

It might appear like that in YouTube AntiVax Wonderland  but if anyone's interested in the actual figures, then here you go.

 

Nothing on that page addresses my original point. Btw, should I be calling you Dr Innula considering that you make yourself out to be more of an authority on interpretation of the data than the Youtube Doctor I linked? He is most definitely not an anti vaxxer and since this pandemic has started has consistently preached the importance of getting vaccinated. He is also straightforward with his analysis of the data and a good deal more honest than a many of the ones I see elsewhere including here. He is thorough and exact on his analysis which makes his videos a bit tedious at times but that is all good when one wants exact information, right?

Interesting point though on the page you did link:

The risk of identifying a new infection following vaccination was highest during the first 21 days after the first vaccination

That verifies what many have said about getting Covid after being vaccinated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

The difference in the infection/illness vaccine efficacy means that unvaccinated people are more likely to become aware of their infections than are vaccinated people. Phrased another way, as a fraction of their respective populations, the vaccinated will produce more oblivious Typhoid Marys.

That all depends on how effective vaccinated people are at transmitting the virus. The research is still preliminary but there's reason to think it's much less likely, at least in part because the vaccinated carry less virus in their nasal passages. (Somewhere I saw speculation that even that smaller amount is including a larger share of non-viable viral fragments.)

It would be possible to account for all the case increases in both the US and UK to transmission from only unvaccinated cases. I doubt it will end up that extreme (especially for delta), but there's real uncertainty that transmission from break-out cases is even a concern.

That said, personally, we still wear masks almost the same as we did before being vaccinated. (The main difference: after our second doses took full effect we've eaten in a restaurant's outdoor tent.) I think masks are still very important, especially trying to counter delta which seems practically designed to be stopped by masks, but again it's a messaging thing: maybe on balance we must pretend it's okay to let down our masks, if that little fiction is what it takes to get people vaccinated.

Edited by Qie Niangao
typo
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You know, this seatbelt isn't 100% effective at preventing injury or death in car crashes. I see no reason to wear it."

And this is why I will continue to wear masks for a long time, it seems. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

The risk of identifying a new infection following vaccination was highest during the first 21 days after the first vaccination

That verifies what many have said about getting Covid after being vaccinated.

Is there anyone stupid enough to conclude from such data that the vaccine itself somehow caused those infections?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Extrude Ragu said:

It is the job of leaders to inspire confidence and build trust by being open and accountable. When a significant portion of a country does not trust the words of so-called leaders, health organizations or have confidence in the vaccine it represents a failure of leadership.

???

. Then in March, a week after the World Health Organization officially declared COVID-19 a pandemic, Trump had another conversation with Woodward, in which he admitted something else: that he had been purposely lying to the public about the highly contagious virus the whole time. “I wanted to always play it down,” he said. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/04/trump-administration-covid-19-emails

The leader of the free world lied for the entirety of 2020 about the virus, & then tried to lay claim to the vaccine, which he also did not buy from certain manufacturers (Pfizer) because he had personal financial interests in others (Regeneron) leaving the USA short on 2nd doses for awhile.

Absolutely it is the job of leaders to guide, with truth.  Sadly Trump lied, people died.   It is absolutely not a personal choice.  It is a social altruistic responsibility to others to put faith & trust in science.  
 

In the 1940s & 50s polio disabled about 35,000 people (mostly children) in the USA a year.  How did we end polio?  It wasn’t because folks made a personal decision to not take the vaccine.  They trusted science & opted to do what was needed to protect one another.  Trump vilified & pulled the USA out of the WHO which led a campaign that eradicated polio from 350,000 cases world wide in 1988 to less than 3,000 in 2000.  This didn’t happen cause folks had a  tete-a-tête with their doctors & made their own heartfelt hand wringing choice.  No.  They trusted science & saved generations from the iron lung.   Thankfully Jonas Salk was around before YouTube & FB herbal oil cure all pyramid schemes.  
 

How we as a whole have managed to regress from viewing science as a godsend to fear mongering with misinformation in one generation is truly bizarre.  

 

Edited by Pixie Kobichenko
Autocorrect is a jerk. 🙄
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Qie Niangao said:

That all depends on how effective vaccinated people are at transmitting the virus. The research is still preliminary but there's reason to think they it's much less likely, at least in part because the vaccinated carry less virus in their nasal passages. (Somewhere I saw speculation that even that smaller amount is including a larger share of non-viable viral fragments.)

It would be possible to account for all the case increases in both the US and UK to transmission from only unvaccinated cases. I doubt it will end up that extreme (especially for delta), but there's real uncertainty that transmission from break-out cases is even a concern.

That said, personally, we still wear masks almost the same as we did before being vaccinated. (The main difference: after our second doses took full effect we've eaten in a restaurant's outdoor tent.) I think masks are still very important, especially trying to counter delta which seems practically designed to be stopped by masks, but again it's a messaging thing: maybe on balance we must pretend it's okay to let down our masks, if that little fiction is what it takes to get people vaccinated.

Dang it. There were two additional levers in my mind as I started writing that and I forgot them both. Viral load was one, and symptom driven spread was the other. Vaccines reduce both. Thanks for catching that, Qie.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Looking at that graph from page he lists as his reference, one can see the unvaccinated cases leveling off and starting to drop while the vaccinated cases are doing a fairly steep rise

Similarly, the number of people remaining unvaccinated continues to fall each day, while the number of people vaccinated continues to rise by the same number.  

It's also important, of course, to consider what was happening at the time in the country to which the figures refer -- vaccination is one factor, but there are so many other variables, too, particularly age groups, areas, occupations and so on.    The raw figures don't mean a great deal on their own.       

No one has ever suggested the vaccine is more than moderately successful after the first dose.    While it offers some protection about a fortnight after the first dose (and a greatly reduced danger of serious illness leading to hospitalisation or death), it's not fully effective until a couple of weeks after you've had the second one (assuming it's one of the vaccines that requires two shots, of course).

I think I remember reading that the the first shot of AstraZeneca reduces your danger of infection by about 30% after the first dose, and the second one reduces by ninety-something percent (i.e.to only a few hundredths of what it would otherwise have been were you unvaccinated).

That's still five (or however many) out of a hundred, or fifty thousand out of a million, people who are still susceptible to Covid, and a lot of them may well catch it, and there's no way of knowing if you're one of the fortunate ninety-five or the unfortunate five, but even if you lose the first bet (immune or not),  your chances on the second, high stakes, bets of asymptomatic or not, and if you're not, how bad it is, and whether you survive) have shot way up in your favour from what they would have been had you been unvaccinated.

 

Edited by Innula Zenovka
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

There are some good arguments out there for the idea that the new strains are as a direct result of the vaccines themselves. After all, there would be no need for the virus to mutate if there had been no vaccine and that is proven by the fact that the vaccines are not as effective on the delta strain. Same as antibiotic resistance.

Yes, viruses mutate to adapt.  To try to survive.  Same with any virus & vaccine.

But the vaccines are not causing the new strains.  If so, there would be more & deadlier strains in the vaccinated population.  But delta hospitalizations are unvaccinated members of the population.  
Its nature vs science.  That is why it is important that everyone who is medically eligible to be vaccinated, do so.  I mean, it’s not 🚀 science.  But it’s still science.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way evolution works is that viruses undergo a continuous program of testing and enhancement.

Random mutations have random effects on the virus' ability to reproduce.   The ones best able to reproduce continue to mutate, and now those new and improved ones best able to reproduce continue to spread of not according to how the numbers go.

So saying that viruses are now mutating and may be getting better able to combat the protections offered by the vaccine is exactly what you'd expect to happen.   That's how it's supposed to work.

However, no matter how good the viruses become at mutating, they've still got to spread in order to continue to reproduce themselves,  since there are not enough non-immune people left (whether by reason of previous infection or by vaccination) for it to spread.    It burns itself out through herd immunity.

Vaccination brings two distinct benefits -- it offers hugely enhanced personal protection to the individual, but it also serves to impede the spread of the virus by hastening the point at which it can spread no further, and the outbreak dies down because the virus has nowhere to go.     

We're trying to put out a forest fire here, and vaccination is helping cut firebreaks. 

Edited by Innula Zenovka
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Oh that is interesting:

"Daily active smokers are infrequent among outpatients or hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Several arguments suggest that nicotine is responsible for this protective effect via the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR)."

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04583410

& it’s interesting to point out that googling “smokers cough nicotine COVID” brings reliable results that would suggest that smoking-vaping increases chances of catching & spreading the virus.  https://www.massgeneral.org/children/vaping/smoking-vaping-and-covid-19

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

& it’s interesting to point out that googling “smokers cough nicotine COVID” brings reliable results that would suggest that smoking-vaping increases chances of catching & spreading the virus.  https://www.massgeneral.org/children/vaping/smoking-vaping-and-covid-19

Well, yes... here's what that points to.     Sound advice, certainly, but not quite the sort of "reliable results" I was expecting when I clicked the link, I have to say.

49e14b3a056f2b7067a4a44d11ba94a3.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

Is there anyone stupid enough to conclude from such data that the vaccine itself somehow caused those infections?

Obviously, there are.  it's interesting how one can slew the facts to somehow support their position.  It would be fun to watch if it weren't so dangerous.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 86 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...