- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Pfizer CEO: “Two doses of the vaccine offers very limited protection, if any
Posted on 1/11/22 at 2:55 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 1/11/22 at 2:55 pm to RogerTheShrubber
LINK
And here is a link to your post responding to my original post, denying what the study says.
quote:
Two dose vaccine effectiveness was 86.7% (95% confidence interval 84.3% to 88.7%) against infection with the delta variant, 98.4% (96.9% to 99.1%) against alpha, 90.4% (73.9% to 96.5%) against mu, 96-98% against other identified variants, and 79.9% (76.9% to 82.5%) against unidentified variants
And here is a link to your post responding to my original post, denying what the study says.
0
Posted on 1/11/22 at 2:56 pm to moneyg
quote:
You seem to be unwilling to admit what you support.
What they're told to support. That's how the cult works.
Whatever government official or national writer is in their ear for the day, is what they support.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 2:57 pm to stout
Doesn’t matter. Had paids
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:06 pm to moneyg
quote:
There are doctors (some in this thread) who believe it's their role to make decisions for their patients based on their medical expertise and have communicated known manipulated data and information to coerce their patients.
Lets play this game. Assuming this is true, give me one source of data regarding this virus that you would cite as trustworthy. One that is peer reviewed would be preferred. See before this pandemic, we had access to that in the medical field. Today we do not. So maybe these nefarious MDs were simply acting on the best information they had at the time.
Again, it is time to stop taking sides and confront reality. This is a political issue now and not a healthcare issue. Your fight is with the govt not with the people reporting to hospitals on a daily basis.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:13 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Eh, it's a pretty representative sample of the population at large. I feel pretty comfortable extrapolating from this patient population. But as far as I'm aware, all the primary care physicians associated with this medical center do it the same way.
I want to believe you but as long as I have worked in healthcare, I have never seen twice yearly testing for adults who aren't sick. Hell we perform surgery and procedures on pts that haven't had labs in 6 months. If where you work is truly doing this, its a colossal waste of resources. Chem 7 and CBC shouldn't change much without a major comorbidity causing it. The human body is amazing at maintaining homeostasis.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:13 pm to jennBN
quote:
This is a political issue now
I believed it has been political since day 1.
It's development, release, the media treatment, governmental action. Everything.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:15 pm to LCA131
And you may be right. I was a sky screamer in Feb 2020. However, as more data became available my opinion has changed. Specifically because I can't find reliable data. 
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:18 pm to lsupride87
quote:
will also disagree based on all the hospital data we get. Omicron evades boosters, original vaccine, and natural immunity. Even those who had delta only a few months before have walked in with another infection recently
So what you are saying is you aren’t vaccinated at all for omicron, no one is. So forcing this vaccine on people is quite literally retarded.
This post was edited on 1/11/22 at 3:19 pm
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:22 pm to jennBN
quote:
I want to believe you but as long as I have worked in healthcare, I have never seen twice yearly testing for adults who aren't sick. Hell we perform surgery and procedures on pts that haven't had labs in 6 months. If where you work is truly doing this, its a colossal waste of resources. Chem 7 and CBC shouldn't change much without a major comorbidity causing it. The human body is amazing at maintaining homeostasis.
I should brush up on why they cancel patient appointments if they didn't do labwork. It does seem scammy because most of the time there is bloodwork from the earlier appointment already there, but there might be a legit reason for it. Or it might be a money grab, I honestly have no idea.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:26 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Read that original sentence again. But regardless, in my experience, people who have insisted on already being infected with minor symptoms did not often have the specific antibodies for COVID.
How many pcr positives have you given antibody tests to that showed they had antibodies?
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:32 pm to dgnx6
quote:
How many pcr positives have you given antibody tests to that showed they had antibodies?
Don't know off the top of my head. But there have been cases where there was a positive PCR and there wasn't an IgG or IgM antibody, which is weird, as well as the inverse. In terms of symptoms, we treat everyone with this viral syndrome protocol one of my attendings likes regardless of a positive or negative test.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:38 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
But regardless, in my experience, people who have insisted on already being infected with minor symptoms did not often have the specific antibodies for COVID.
I get it. Anecdotal. But it has nothing to do with the rest of the world. If you donn't know, just admit you dont know and are guessing based on very limited experience.
You claim the numbers of asymptomatic are overly stated, I asked for proof, we have none.
Buy nature, asymptomatic will be understated, particularly among the healthy.
This post was edited on 1/11/22 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:41 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
People aren't getting tested on a widespread basis for antibodies like Jethro thinks.
I get an antibody test every time I donate blood (once a quarter). Lifesouth does it along with a cholesterol screen.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:46 pm to stout
Does he mean three doses including a booster, or three doses plus a booster? And what is the difference between a dose and a booster? Aren't they all the same shot?
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:47 pm to Aubie Spr96
quote:
I get an antibody test every time I donate blood (once a quarter).
Yeah, I don't think the average person is donating blood though.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 3:55 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
You claim the numbers of asymptomatic are overly stated, I asked for proof, we have none.
I didn't say they were overstated. I said people want the numbers of asymptomatic infections to be understated. There was a meta-analysis done in December in JAMA that suggested asymptomatic infections among the tested populations of 95 studies was 0.25%, with 40% among individuals who had a confirmed infection. But the study itself suggests it was difficult to extrapolate to the general population because most of the studies were conducted in specific populations. Another reason to doubt widespread asymptomatic infection is that not all transmission routes are equal, because those routes are mediated by several factors. There also might be bias at play in the collection of data, as the authors of the study elude to. LINK
Again, if people are assuming the distribution of this virus is uniform and equal to 1 at all times, then maybe I could buy the widespread asymptomatic argument. But this virus, and especially respiratory tract viruses, operate through cyclical virulence, which is the pattern we've actually seen.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 4:00 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
There also might be bias at play in the collection of data,
I'm pretty sure there is a lot of bias used to generate feelings on both sides. I think thats kind of the idea here, that regardless of position, all humans view this stuff with weighted intent and tend to view personal experience as gospel.
I think Covid is very serious for some, not for others and we should be treating/quarantining at risk and not healthy, if statistics are to be believed.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 4:02 pm to USMCguy121
quote:
MRNA requires perpetual boosters.
Negative. The difficulty to vaccinate is due to the mutations of the target. The mRNA actually shows enhanced immunity compared to the traditional attenuated virus vaccine (Johnson & Johnson)
This post was edited on 1/11/22 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 1/11/22 at 4:10 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I'm pretty sure there is a lot of bias used to generate feelings on both sides
No, the bias is that studies is that studies which did not detect asymptomatic infections were less likely to be published. The link makes reference to several limitations.
quote:
I think Covid is very serious for some, not for others and we should be treating/quarantining at risk and not healthy, if statistics are to be believed.
There's a wide variety in terms of quality of infection that is pretty curious. It seems to hit certain people hard that you might not expect to, which suggests a possible HLA antigen component to this.
Posted on 1/11/22 at 8:24 pm to HouseMom
quote:
I think the number of asymptomatic people carrying Covid is vastly underestimated, which would make this a much less problematic illness.
The problem with this rationale is the excess death data, looking at total deaths compared to pre COVID without assessing cause.
It’s a delta big enough to comfortably fit both the claimed COVID number, suicides from lockdowns, with room to spare.
You can’t gainsay that figure, which is why this board largely ignores it.
This post was edited on 1/11/22 at 8:26 pm
Page 17 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News