Internal CDC document warns delta variant more infectious, can spread among vaccinated people - report

krycor

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
18,490

UK too.. US too..

They all point to the same thing, with vaccine you will live through disease and unlikely to need hospitalization. In fact I’m the US they also claim >99% of hospitalization & deaths in many states are unvaccinated.

Wrt the transmission vector.. duh. Go look back at comments I made last year, it was known that it was very likely that vaccine would not prevent transmission during infectious period.. just that the host would recover and **hopefully** with preventative measures.. this would be ok.

The issue though is not everyone knows they carrying it esp with vaccine and so the unvaccinated have an even greater of a risk of infection.
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,789

This is from America's largest and most reliable news network. You are free to look this up.

It has been on most US news channels the past week continuously. There are hundreds, if not thousands of news articles on this from various US newspapers online. And, from the same article from the UK:
These vaccines are starting to remind me of a certain train simulator with 633 DLCs. First it was second booster packs and then third. Now there's talk of mixing and matching them. So what combinations are people going to choose?

At least the simulator was updated from the 2019 to the 2021 edition. :ROFL:
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
29,611
This is from America's largest and most reliable news network. You are free to look this up.
You picked fox news as the largest and most reliable news network? I hope that was sarcasm.

Surveys:
1627813424980.png
There simply were too many examples of misleading, inaccurate, and slanted reporting about science and politics for Wikipedia to pass on Fox News articles as part of a broader search for the truth.

And while the decision hasn’t exactly banished Fox News from Wikipedia on those topics—there are still thousands of links to Fox News articles that appear there—it deprives Fox News of the ability to frame how the public interprets political events and politicians on Wikipedia. The changes to Bass’s article that highlighted a Fox News-promoted controversy give a glimpse at the stakes involved.

And then Tucker Carlson:

You Literally Can't Believe The Facts Tucker Carlson Tells You. So Say Fox's Lawyers​

Expected of you though.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
24,015
jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab jab, jab, jab, jab ........................................................
Where's the roof door music?
This whole VAX jab hype is turning into a comedy.
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,728
You picked fox news as the largest and most reliable news network? I hope that was sarcasm.

Surveys:
View attachment 1118208

And then Tucker Carlson:

Expected of you though.

Now listen clearly. I have absolutely no interest in any far left, socialist fake news or fake statistics. Fox New is by far the biggest news channel in the US with the most viewers. CNN hanging low at 3rd spot after losing 65% of their viewers so far this year.

There is a reason for this and we all know what it is. Anything else is mere socialist propaganda, like that posted above.
 

Mike Hoxbig

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
37,789

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
29,611
Now listen clearly. I have absolutely no interest in any far left, socialist fake news or fake statistics. Fox New is by far the biggest news channel in the US with the most viewers. CNN hanging low at 3rd spot after losing 65% of their viewers so far this year.

There is a reason for this and we all know what it is. Anything else is mere socialist propaganda, like that posted above.
This was least year, figures for all of them are just going down:
In primetime, Fox News topped total viewers with 2.12 million, but that was down 34% from a year earlier. MSNBC averaged 1.31 million, down 37%, while CNN posted 856,000, down 43%. In the 25-54 demo, Fox News topped with 330,000, down 36%, followed by CNN with 190,000, down 52%, and MSNBC with 168,000, down 44%.

In total day, Fox News topped with 1.19 million, down 27%, versus MSNBC with 772,000, off by 35%, and CNN with 596,000, down 40%. In the 25-54 demo, Fox News averaged 201,000, down 27%, followed by CNN with 125,000, dropping by 50% and MSNBC with 103,000, off by 41%.

And ~2m viewers is not a lot considering the US has 210m adults.

And viewership does not mean reliable, note the and I had in my sentence, and why I mention Tucker Carlson is that he is the most viewed figure on that platform:

Tucker Carlson Has Most-Watched Show In Cable News As Fox Leads Basic Cable For 17 Straight Weeks​


Now stop posting in Covid threads, you still haven't backed up any of your claims in other threads.
 

JangoFett

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2021
Messages
846
This was least year, figures for all of them are just going down:

And ~2m viewers is not a lot considering the US has 210m adults.

And viewership does not mean reliable, note the and I had in my sentence, and why I mention Tucker Carlson is that he is the most viewed figure on that platform:


Now stop posting in Covid threads, you still haven't backed up any of your claims in other threads.

Reporters Maggie Astor and Tiffany Hsu described the video as “deceptive,” “false,” and “with no verifiable evidence.” The first paragraph of Astor’s story, which ran in the news section of the newspaper, began, “A deceptive video released on Sunday by the conservative activist James O’Keefe, which claimed through unidentified sources and with no verifiable evidence …”


The Times asked a judge to dismiss the defamation case, arguing, among other things, that these statements were “mere opinion incapable of being judged true or false,” as Judge Wood put it. Despite the smears appearing in the news section of the newspaper, the Times argued they were subjective assessments from the reporters.

So, are you going to boycott the NYT, now?


What about MSNBC? Will you boycott them, too?

Plus your numbers all indicate that Fox did much better than the other channels at retaining their viewers.
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
29,611



So, are you going to boycott the NYT, now?


What about MSNBC? Will you boycott them, too?

Plus your numbers all indicate that Fox did much better than the other channels at retaining their viewers.
So you're linking to NYT being sued for defamation and that they blurred the lines between opinion and journalism, and that they are trusted to do investigative journalism and therefore the defamation case will go through as a reason to say NYT is less trustworthy than Fox who outright say they are only opinion based and it was accepted as a fact?

That argument seems very strange to me.
 

JangoFett

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2021
Messages
846
So you're linking to NYT being sued for defamation and that they blurred the lines between opinion and journalism, and that they are trusted to do investigative journalism and therefore the defamation case will go through as a reason to say NYT is less trustworthy than Fox who outright say they are only opinion based and it was accepted as a fact?
The NYT used the same legal defence in court that Fox News did for Tucker Carlson's story. In other words, the NYT wants the courts to treat NYT like it did Tucker Carlson.

That argument seems very strange to me.
Do you think the NYT was expecting the argument to fail in court? If they're willing to completely torch their reputation by not owning up to the inaccurate reporting that they did, why are you treating them differently than Fox News?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Swa

tetrasect

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
3,116
So you're linking to NYT being sued for defamation and that they blurred the lines between opinion and journalism, and that they are trusted to do investigative journalism and therefore the defamation case will go through as a reason to say NYT is less trustworthy than Fox who outright say they are only opinion based and it was accepted as a fact?

That argument seems very strange to me.

Yeah didn't fox news win a similar court case by saying that no sane person would believe what they are saying is true? And the judge agreed? :ROFL: :ROFL::ROFL:
 

JangoFett

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2021
Messages
846
Yeah didn't fox news win a similar court case by saying that no sane person would believe what they are saying is true? And the judge agreed? :ROFL: :ROFL::ROFL:
Yes, that's exactly the stupid argument I was taking issue with.


If you discount everything on Fox News because of what Fox's laywers argued, then you should do the same for NYT and MSNBC, or you're just a partisan hypocrite.

So, are you just a partisan hypocrite? Looks like it.
 

Temujin

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2015
Messages
12,874
E7pV68UWQAokKt_
 

tetrasect

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
3,116
If you discount everything on Fox News because of what Fox's laywers argued, then you should do the same for NYT and MSNBC, or you're just a partisan hypocrite.

We're not discounting it because of what Fox's lawyers argued, we're discounting it because it's utter trash.
That is obvious to anyone watching who has more than 2 braincells.

Apparently the slogan "fair and balanced" was too much of a joke even for them.

And nobody is saying NYT or MSNBC is perfect. They all talk kak sometimes. But there's only one network that does it consistently, day in, day out, while showing you BS charts like these:

image-asset.png


fnc-sr-20140730-poll-chart.jpg


50b62bb46bb3f74050000000
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
29,611
Yes, that's exactly the stupid argument I was taking issue with.


If you discount everything on Fox News because of what Fox's laywers argued, then you should do the same for NYT and MSNBC, or you're just a partisan hypocrite.

So, are you just a partisan hypocrite? Looks like it.
You're missing the point, NYT failed that argument for that specific piece, and it was one of many, they used it because Fox got away with it.

The biggest issue is this bit:
In its response to the suit, the Times denied most of Project Veritas’s claims and allegations, though it did acknowledge some were accurate, including that neither Hsu nor Astor contacted Veritas for their stories.
They included many of the traditional legal defenses used by media outlets, including that Project Veritas can’t sue for defamation because some of the “statements at issue” weren’t presented as facts but as “opinion, or statements of opinion based on disclosed facts.”


In its retraction demands, the suit, and in other public statements, Project Veritas criticized the Times’s “opinion” defense.

“Unable to rely on facts, the New York Times’ answer, filed [Monday], doubles down on the sad argument that the so-called 'news' it printed, was in fact just 'opinion' passed off as news,” said Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe.

So the issue is that they labeled it as news instead of opinion for some of the claims.

Fox news => Tucker Carlson does not state opinion anywhere, based on the reputation it is to be inferred based by the judge's argument.
So basically the argument is that NYT is trustworthy as news, therefore them doing something like that is called out/valid for a defamation case and means that any news stories similar to it will also be called out and will mean that everything besides those can be considered factual.

It also completely misses the point of that the argument was that Fox news is factual, your red herring doesn't matter, fox news is not a valid source on anything.
 
Top