- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: "The vaccine was never supposed to prevent spread, its just to reduce symptoms!!!"
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:42 pm to NytroBud
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:42 pm to NytroBud
quote:
but its not a true vaccine
You guys are impressive in your ability to be obtuse.
But I'd love your clinical case against why it's not a vaccine.
0
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:43 pm to goldennugget
And you’ll still be told that the only way to get rid of Covid for good is if everyone get a jab every 6 months
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:43 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
approximately 1.1 million additional COVID-19 deaths and more than 10.3 million additional COVID-19 hospitalizations in the U.S. by November 2021.
So deaths would have more than doubled in the absence of vaccinations? That seems a little bit like the original 2 millions deaths total thrown out
quote:
If no one had been vaccinated, daily deaths from COVID-19 could have jumped to as high as 21,000 per day — nearly 5.2 times the level of the record peak of more than 4,000 deaths per day recorded in January 2021.
That seems a little far fetched as well, but I am not a scientist
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:44 pm to goldennugget
quote:
BIDEN: “You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:47 pm to sicboy
quote:
My chances of not catching it improved drastically but I'm not completely immune.
110% false.
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:47 pm to jchamil
quote:
So deaths would have more than doubled in the absence of vaccinations? That seems a little bit like the original 2 millions deaths total thrown out
I guess so. Here's some additional percent reduction data from a study in Buenos Aires, with people over 60. 98% reduction death rate.
JAMA
quote:
A 2-dose vaccination schedule was associated with an 88.1% (95% CI, 86.8%-89.2%) reduction in documented infection, 96.6% (95% CI, 95.3%-97.5%) reduction in all-cause death, and 98.3% (95% CI, 95.3%-99.4%) reduction in COVID-19–related death.
This post was edited on 12/17/21 at 2:48 pm
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:47 pm to jchamil
quote:It is far fetched.
That seems a little far fetched as well, but I am not a scientist
It is an assertion that cannot be proven.
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:49 pm to Scruffy
quote:
It is an assertion that cannot be proven.
The analysis can be done to arrive at a number. Pretty easily actually, from the data in the clinical trials of vaccinated and unvaccinated.
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:53 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
A 2-dose vaccination schedule was associated with an 88.1% (95% CI, 86.8%-89.2%) reduction in documented infection, 96.6% (95% CI, 95.3%-97.5%) reduction in all-cause death, and 98.3% (95% CI, 95.3%-99.4%) reduction in COVID-19–related death.
I can't argue with that study in Brazil, but the 88.1% reduction in infection rate seems to contradict what I'm seeing with vaccinated people catching covid. Just look at all of the athletes catching it and sporting events being cancelled when most are vaccinated. A lot of people I know, including my wife and I, caught covid recently when we are fully vaccinated
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:55 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:Again, it is akin to an opinion.
The analysis can be done to arrive at a number. Pretty easily actually, from the data in the clinical trials of vaccinated and unvaccinated.
Had that individual doubled his numbers, you would hold the same view of the article stated.
Hell, he could triple it, and you would likely hold the same view.
And this isn’t a critique of vaccinations.
It is a critique of the idea that an opinion of that type holds any merit.
Most likely, it was an analysis that started with the “sound bite” and then did what it had to to reach that conclusion.
This post was edited on 12/17/21 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:56 pm to jchamil
quote:
I can't argue with that study in Brazil, but the 88.1% reduction in infection rate seems to contradict what I'm seeing with vaccinated people catching covid. Just look at all of the athletes catching it and sporting events being cancelled when most are vaccinated. A lot of people I know, including my wife and I, caught covid recently when we are fully vaccinated
I think that it's likely a function of the virus mutating. The first version of it did not spread in the vaccinated as much, and we obviously know that this one does spread more easily among the vaccinated.
I guess that makes sense, because any version of the virus that does not spread among the vaccinated would not become as prevalent (because so many are now getting vaccinated).
Posted on 12/17/21 at 2:58 pm to Scruffy
They used actual data to arrive at that number and didn't just pick one. But it does make some assumptions on immunity waning.
quote:
Briefly, the agent-based computer model analyzes features of the coronavirus, its transmission, and its effects to compare the observed pandemic trajectory (infections, hospitalizations, and deaths) to a counterfactual scenario in which no vaccination program exists. The model incorporates the transmission dynamics of previous variants other than Omicron, which is only now beginning to appear in the U.S. The model accounts for waning immunity and changes in population behavior over time as schools and businesses have reopened and travel has increased. We have refined the model to reflect emerging scientific evidence. See “How We Conducted This Study” at the end of this brief for further details on our methods.
This post was edited on 12/17/21 at 2:59 pm
Posted on 12/17/21 at 3:02 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
I think that it's likely a function of the virus mutating. The first version of it did not spread in the vaccinated as much, and we obviously know that this one does spread more easily among the vaccinated.
I guess that makes sense, because any version of the virus that does not spread among the vaccinated would not become as prevalent (because so many are now getting vaccinated).
I'm not a big vax proponent, and was kind of forced into getting it myself. That being said, one of the only times I ever got the flu shot was also one of the only times I caught the flu, and I still thought I was going to die. Covid didn't really do that much to me...so maybe the vax did help my symptoms. I have no idea
Posted on 12/17/21 at 3:03 pm to xxTIMMYxx
Cal/OSHA has revised and extended their emergency temporary standard through April with a signed order to further extend.
really?
Cal/OSHA, with their revisions, effectively dispels the notion that those who are vaccinated are no less a threat for transmitting the vid than anyone else. California, of all places, has further weakened the case for vaccine choices. Worse, it does not help Brandon with his efforts to mandate through OSHA
really?
Cal/OSHA, with their revisions, effectively dispels the notion that those who are vaccinated are no less a threat for transmitting the vid than anyone else. California, of all places, has further weakened the case for vaccine choices. Worse, it does not help Brandon with his efforts to mandate through OSHA
Posted on 12/17/21 at 3:05 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:You can put however much weight you want to on analyses like this, but they usually require extensive assumptions, not to mention my belief that, with politically charged topics, and the researchers wanting as much publicity as possible, the outcome, IMO, is decided prior to the analysis itself.
They used actual data to arrive at that number and didn't just pick one. But it does make some assumptions on immunity waning.
Do you believe this analysis would have been as extensively shared via the media had the individuals come to the conclusion that it was no different?
I do not.
We have reached a point where you have to consider the motivations of the researchers like you would the motivations of researchers backed by drug companies.
This post was edited on 12/17/21 at 3:11 pm
Posted on 12/17/21 at 3:07 pm to NoSaint
quote:
Feels like we have a lot of “reduce” vs “eliminate” issues when discussing this topic.
Reduction was definitely part of the story. Elimination never was.
I hate you people so much.
Posted on 12/17/21 at 3:37 pm to loogaroo
quote:
Then it is not a vaccine.
It's amazing how many mouthbreathhing experts we have on the history of vaccines. You are a perfect example of someone who is immune to correction.
Posted on 12/17/21 at 3:41 pm to tgrgrd00
quote:
I hate you people so much.
It's enraging. These people prove C.S. Lewis right every day. I'd rather live in a tin pot, 3rd world dictatorship than under the boot of a Covidian. They will torment us without end, because they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
Posted on 12/17/21 at 3:58 pm to BluegrassBelle
But this "vaccine" is proving to be anything but effective.
Posted on 12/17/21 at 3:58 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
You are a perfect example of someone who is immune to correction.
What does this mean, exactly?
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News