International COVID-19 Updates & Discussion 3

[buchanan8]

This is exactly the cognitive dissonance,they just choose their own reality rooted squarely in confirmation bias
Somehow the majority is wrong,so anybody that also disagrees with the majority has to be right by default

Majorities are very often wrong. (After all majorities keep voting for the ANC). At same time it doesn't mean majorities are always wrong.

 

[noxibox]

Deputy District Attorney Who Opposed Vaccine Mandates Dies From COVID At 46​

Kelly Ernby, a Republican who ran for California State Assembly in 2020, said "there’s nothing that matters more than our freedoms right now" at a rally last month.

Deputy District Attorney Who Opposed Vaccine Mandates Dies From COVID At 46

Kelly Ernby, a Republican who ran for California State Assembly in 2020, said "there’s nothing that matters more than our freedoms right now" at a rally last month.

www.huffpost.com

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478107062693285888

So not one person that supported vaccine mandates has died? In that case supporting a vaccine mandate sounds like it is more effective than any vaccine. We should make supporting vaccine mandates mandatory. It will be cheaper than buying vaccines. Just re-iterate your support for vaccine mandates whenever you need a booster.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478328180704428033

Study seems to mainly deal with infection though, rather than serious illness and death.

The waning protection against getting sick appears to apply to all the vaccines and to past infection. The apparent negative protection is most likely not any physical effect of the vaccines themselves. The authors do state they were unable to control for the behaviour of the participants.

 

[buchanan8]

So not one person that supported vaccine mandates has died? In that case supporting a vaccine mandate sounds like it is more effective than any vaccine. We should make supporting vaccine mandates mandatory. It will be cheaper than buying vaccines. Just re-iterate your support for vaccine mandates whenever you need a booster.


The waning protection against getting sick appears to apply to all the vaccines and to past infection. The apparent negative protection is most likely not any physical effect of the vaccines themselves. The authors do state they were unable to control for the behaviour of the participants.

I was unsure what was meant by 'negative effectiveness', but admittedly haven't done a deep dive into it.

 

[Slooth]

Why did god discriminate against the 5,473,037 that died from COVID and what basis?

I couldn't agree more! I have it in with that guy, he/she (no offence to any gender base) put his/her foot in it when they had to populate the world with 7.9 billion w@'nkers running around. If I could have a word with the guy/gal I would give him/her my mind on taking 5,473,037 people.

Oooooooh this had rattled my cage, don't get me started on...

• Heart disease.
• Cancer.
• Accidents (unintentional injuries).
• Chronic lower respiratory diseases.
• Strokes.
• Alzheimer's disease.
• Diabetes.
• Influenza and pneumonia.

EDIT: f'ark 'merica!

EDIT EDIT: I'm no conspiracy theorist, however I do believe God and Trump were working hand in hand to remove mankind/womankind from the face of this planet.

 

[Geoff.D]

Actually y2k had a lot of people working long hours fixing things and patching things before, it only ended up being a nothingburger due to a lot of hard work going on in the background.

What a joke! There was pretty much nothing that could be done at all to many many systems anyway without a complete rewrite of OS, and lots of sw. NONE of that happened, and all we did in our domain was organise for a routine system reboot in a managed manner to ensure no major outages.

 

[Hush9300]

I was unsure what was meant by 'negative effectiveness', but admittedly haven't done a deep dive into it.

Negative effectiveness or efficacy refers to the likelihood of infection vs unvaccinated individuals.

The waning protection against getting sick appears to apply to all the vaccines and to past infection. The apparent negative protection is most likely not any physical effect of the vaccines themselves. The authors do state they were unable to control for the behaviour of the participants.

Waning protection is one thing and completely understandable but negative vaccine efficacy/effectiveness is another entirely.

That you dismiss the negative efficacy/effectiveness as nothing to do with the vaccines themselves is rather strange... How else do you explain the increased likelihood of infection vs an unvaccinated individual?

 

[buchanan8]

Negative effectiveness or efficacy refers to the likelihood of infection vs unvaccinated individuals.



Waning protection is one thing and completely understandable but negative vaccine efficacy/effectiveness is another entirely.

That you dismiss the negative efficacy/effectiveness as nothing to do with the vaccines themselves is rather strange... How else do you explain the increased likelihood of infection vs an unvaccinated individual?

Maybe it helps explain why the USA, Britain, France etc are all having record cases this week. Around a million new cases in the USA yesterday. Who knows.

 

[Hush9300]

Maybe it helps explain why the USA, Britain, France etc are all having record cases this week. Around a million new cases in the USA yesterday. Who knows.

Omicron was always going to result in increased infection rates due to its ability to reinfect and breakthrough but that the vaxxers are being dismissive of the negative efficacy/effectiveness is the stuff of legend.

Edit: I also don't care much about case numbers... Those countries you've listed are completely bonkers when it comes to testing.

 

[noxibox]

I was unsure what was meant by 'negative effectiveness', but admittedly haven't done a deep dive into it.

The way I understand it it would just mean a higher proportion of illness in the vaccinated. So for instance if you have 45 cases in the unvaccinated and 90 in the vaccinated that would produce -100%. But that number alone won't necessarily mean anything about the vaccines themselves unless all other factors are equal. Plus we might find that only 10% of the vaccinated group get severely ill while 50% of the unvaccinated do.

 

[buchanan8]

Omicron was always going to result in increased infection rates due to its ability to reinfect and breakthrough but that the vaxxers are being dismissive of the negative efficacy/effectiveness is the stuff of legend.

Edit: I also don't care much about case numbers... Those countries you've listed are completely bonkers when it comes to testing.

Can you imagine the profits made in 'testing' this past 22 months?

 

[noxibox]

That you dismiss the negative efficacy/effectiveness as nothing to do with the vaccines themselves is rather strange... How else do you explain the increased likelihood of infection vs an unvaccinated individual?

Since we know nothing about the individuals involved or any of a very long list of possible confounding factors there is no basis for jumping to conclusions about what the numbers mean. The authors of the study say as much. Strange that some people want to jump to an entirely baseless conclusion that somehow the vaccines are increasing the chance of getting infected.

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478538279746252800

 

[Hush9300]

Since we know nothing about the individuals involved or any of a very long list of possible confounding factors there is no basis for jumping to conclusions about what the numbers mean. The authors of the study say as much. Strange that some people want to jump to an entirely baseless conclusion that somehow the vaccines are increasing the chance of getting infected.

How is it baseless when results from the real world - vaccine effectiveness from numerous studies- indicate negative effectiveness? What is strange is that instead of asking why this phenomenon is occurring you wanting to dismiss it because it is not a controlled study. Well in the real world there is no such thing as a controlled study and it is why vaccine effectiveness is an important measure.

If it doesn't work in the real world then it is rubbish in more ways than one... You do realise that there is cost to everything don't you and it is why vaccine effectiveness is in many ways an even more important metric than vaccine efficacy. If the cost of disease in the real world is vested in the vaccinated then the cost of the public health measures (primary doses, boosters, testing and restrictions) is all for nothing. The cost of public health measures need to be justifiable and it is not when Omicron has resulted in negative effectiveness.

You cannot spin this.

 

[Dave]

Malone has credentials sure, but he's also human and prone to all of the typical human failings like jealousy, greed etc. In this instance he's probably unhappy that he really isn't part of the biggest medical advancement in recent history - mRNA vaccination, so like a jilted jaded lover is coming out with all of the "it wasn't all that good anyway", "I was wronged" etc etc. Morons entertain that ****.

He's alluded to being bitter that "his" patents aren't actually part of the modern research into mRNA and the vaccine development and that they have "stolen" royalties that he could have got a portion of if he hadn't been cheated out of his share.

 

[Dave]

you've clearly just mistakenly posted your morning mirror monologue on the internet fyi

Have you considered changing your username and avatar?

Currently as soon as many people see it they've already formed the opinion you're a bit of an idiot even before reading your post, which then unfortunately invariably confirms that early opinion...

 

[noxibox]

How is it baseless when results from the real world - vaccine effectiveness from numerous studies- indicate negative effectiveness?

If you don't understand confounding factors then I can't really help. Not worth writing an entire essay on the topic.

What is strange is that instead of asking why this phenomenon is occurring you wanting to dismiss it because it is not a controlled study.

I neither dismissed it nor failed to ask questions. Didn't state a controlled study was needed either.

You cannot spin this.

I'm not the one trying to spin a study into saying something it doesn't.

 

[Hush9300]

If you don't understand confounding factors then I can't really help. Not worth writing an entire essay on the topic.

You do realise that if I were to consider confounding factors as per the study it still wouldn't portray the vaccine in a good light because it would CLEARLY demonstrate that the vaccinated are, as of this moment, responsible for superspreader events because it is only them allowed to attend gatherings.

Either way the narrative around the vaccine is crumbling at a rapid rate.

I neither dismissed it nor failed to ask questions. Didn't state a controlled study was needed either.

So what is the point of you trying to consider confounding factors when it is neither here nor there?

I'm not the one trying to spin a study into saying something it doesn't.

Then take it at face value which is negative effectiveness vs Omicron from 2 doses in real world data and stop trying to say that it doesn't necessarily mean anything when it does in actual fact.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Currently as soon as many people see it they've already formed the opinion you're a bit of an idiot even before reading your post, which then unfortunately invariably confirms that early opinion...

... and now we know why you've changed yours

 

[quovadis]

You do realise that if I were to consider confounding factors as per the study it still wouldn't portray the vaccine in a good light because it would CLEARLY demonstrate that the vaccinated are, as of this moment, responsible for superspreader events because it is only them allowed to attend gatherings.

Either way the narrative around the vaccine is crumbling at a rapid rate.

So what is the point of you trying to consider confounding factors when it is neither here nor there?

Then take it at face value which is negative effectiveness vs Omicron from 2 doses in real world data and stop trying to say that it doesn't necessarily mean anything when it does in actual fact.

Perhaps wait for additional review and studies before you decide what is actual fact especially since we can't effectively account for mutated variants or sub-variants which do not progress or achieve a foothold in the population due to the resistance gained as a result of vaccination or even pre-Omicron natural exposure.

 

[Dave]

... and now we know why you've changed yours

My username has always been Dave, it just used to have 123 at the end and I got rewarded with the slightly shorter version for services to the forum pointing out the idiots and morons, comrade NarrowBrainFtw.