- 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: 99.5% of COVID-19 deaths in the US are now in unvaccinated people, CDC head says
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:24 am to BaldEagleHey
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:24 am to BaldEagleHey
quote:That is *exactly* what I did.
Use this LINK
Go to page 17 and you would be able to see the real numbers
quote:So you just don't understand.
and not your interpretation of the numbers.
quote:The vaccinated, by a lot.
There were 257 deaths in the UK who died from the Delta variant within 28 days of positive specimen date.
118 of these deaths were fully vaccinated. An additional 44 had at least one dose. So, 162 vaccinated UKers died from the delta variant whilst 92 unvaccinated died. (There were 2 deaths where the vaccination status was unknown).
162 vaccinated vs. 92 unvaccinated
So, who is better off?
Do you really not understand that those 162 vaccinated deaths are from a pool of far more people? If you have a million people and all but 1 of them was vaccinated, and 10 out of the million died including the 1 unvaccinated, was that guy better off because only 1 of him died vs 9 of the vaccinated?
Use your head.
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:35 am to limbaughnomicon
quote:The image picked data with no context in order to fool you. And it worked.
you can deep dive and see further stats and data in the actual technical briefings and accompanying Excel sheets that go into much greater detail. The image was an overview aggregate showing the last several technical briefings.
A "deep dive" clearly lays out that only 5 vaccinated people under the age of 50 died of the delta variant vs 21 unvaccinated. Those age ranges have been vaccinated at something like 50-60%, so that is a roughly apples to apples comparison. Clearly better to be vaccinated.
In the over 50 age group, the "overview" of the data says that 160 vaccinated died vs only 71 unvaccinated, and that's where your "analysis" ends. You need to recognize that those 50 and over in the UK have been vaccinated at around 90%. That means those 160 deaths are from a population of people about 10 times larger than the 71. That's the "deep dive". I did it, you didn't.
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:39 am to jimmy the leg
Cleveland Clinic did a study and concluded that natural antibodies makes the vaccine pointless. The vaccine manufacturers are currently lobbying the FDA for an annual booster authorization too.
The reality is; the vaccine still is extremely unknown, even to those that developed them. If you have antibodies, why on earth would you get this jab?
The reality is; the vaccine still is extremely unknown, even to those that developed them. If you have antibodies, why on earth would you get this jab?
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:44 am to Korkstand
quote:
The vaccinated, by a lot.
Do you really not understand that those 162 vaccinated deaths are from a pool of far more people? If you have a million people and all but 1 of them was vaccinated, and 10 out of the million died including the 1 unvaccinated, was that guy better off because only 1 of him died vs 9 of the vaccinated?
Use your head.
Use your head.
Less than 2/3 of the UK population has received full vaccination.. 46% of the fatal cases in question were from that group.
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:47 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Cleveland Clinic did a study and concluded that natural antibodies makes the vaccine pointless.
I won’t go that far, as I believe those that are high risk should strongly consider getting vaccinated (especially the elderly or those with compromised immune systems).
However:
quote:
if previously having Covid provides protection against the variants in the same way as those that have been vaccinated (and to assume that is the case seems quite logical), then why aren’t those previously infected grouped with those that have been vaccinated? Combined, we have to be reaching the threshold for herd immunity.
I have to see anything remotely logical concerning the above not being done.
Quite frankly, not doing what I suggest, coupled with the Covid gestapo going door to door, is enough to make people distrust what is being put forth.
I am waiting for a response from Roger. He claims to be a doctor, so his take will be interesting.
This post was edited on 7/10/21 at 11:48 am
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:50 am to BurntOrangeMan
quote:
Use your head.
quote:*Highly* misleading stats if you don't stratify the data. I can't figure out if you guys just don't understand that, or if you're counting on it.
Less than 2/3 of the UK population has received full vaccination.. 46% of the fatal cases in question were from that group.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
According to the UK data linked in this thread, an unvaccinated person is roughly 4X more likely to die of the delta variant than a vaccinated person.
Posted on 7/10/21 at 12:38 pm to Korkstand
What's the end game? A: A fully vaccinationed population
Who represents the most critical audience? A: Older population
The most difinitive data in this report is from those two catagories.
That core data does not reflect anything close to the 4x's or 1 out of 9 gibberish you are flaunting.
Who represents the most critical audience? A: Older population
The most difinitive data in this report is from those two catagories.
That core data does not reflect anything close to the 4x's or 1 out of 9 gibberish you are flaunting.
Posted on 7/10/21 at 12:54 pm to BurntOrangeMan
quote:That "gibberish" comes from the vaccination rates among that older population that you reference. It's over 90%. If the vaccine were not at all effective, we would expect to see 10X as many vaccinated deaths as unvaccinated, because that is the ratio of vaccinated to unvaccinated among that population. But we don't see that. Instead we see only just a little over 2X as many deaths. That's where the 4X comes from.
What's the end game? A: A fully vaccinationed population
Who represents the most critical audience? A: Older population
The most difinitive data in this report is from those two catagories.
That core data does not reflect anything close to the 4x's or 1 out of 9 gibberish you are flaunting.
If you need more help, I can try to explain another way.
This is a case of the classic mistaking correlation with causation. Those over age 50 are far more likely to die of covid, and because of that they are far more likely to have been vaccinated. If none of them were vaccinated, we would expect to see the unvaccinated death rate to carry over to them. That is, there would be around 650 deaths from the delta variant instead of the 160 we see.
This post was edited on 7/10/21 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 7/10/21 at 12:58 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
won’t go that far, as I believe those that are high risk should strongly consider getting vaccinated
No disrespect but I’d rather take the word of Cleveland clinic. Either way, the argument against antibodies was their unknown shelf life. With the vaccine companies now saying their products may only provide a year of protection - it strengthens the position of those like me who want to wait and allow vaccines to be perfected. That’s my point.
Also, the effectiveness of the vaccines are wildly overstated. I personally know of a 26 person micro outbreak of mostly elderly men where 22 were fully vaccinated. A third or more of the folks I personally know who’ve been vaxed had reinfection. The CDC isn’t looking closely enough into this and keep chirping the vax companies marketing language of 90% efficacy.
I won’t fault any at risk person who chooses to get vaxed. Just know the real risks.
This post was edited on 7/10/21 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 7/10/21 at 1:05 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
No disrespect but I’d rather take the word of Cleveland clinic. Either way, the argument against antibodies was their unknown shelf life. With the vaccine companies now saying their products may only provide a year of protection - it strengthens the position of those like me who want to wait and allow vaccines to be perfected. That’s my point.
I agree with all of this.
My point with vaccinations dealt with people that are high risk. In short, if they die from Covid, then what good are the antibodies?
Again...
quote:
if previously having Covid provides protection against the variants in the same way as those that have been vaccinated (and to assume that is the case seems quite logical), then why aren’t those previously infected grouped with those that have been vaccinated? Combined, we have to be reaching the threshold for herd immunity.
This post was edited on 7/10/21 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 7/10/21 at 1:06 pm to Korkstand
quote:
What's the end game? A: A fully vaccinationed population
quote:
That "gibberish" comes from the vaccination rates among that older population that you reference. It's over 90%
Welcome to critical thinking, you aren't 10 steps ahead fool... you are 10 steps from being lapped the third time.
Posted on 7/10/21 at 1:22 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
My point with vaccinations dealt with people that are high risk. In short, if they die from Covid, then what good are the antibodies?
All This is spot on. But only because treatments like convalescent plasma and HCQ were being black balled. I still can’t ignore the total deaths statistics for 2020. If we didn’t lose more Americans that year, and the average age of a covid death was older than life expectancy, who is to say any one truly died FROM covid?
Posted on 7/10/21 at 1:23 pm to BurntOrangeMan
quote:So I take it you still don't understand. Should I also take it that you don't want to understand?
Welcome to critical thinking, you aren't 10 steps ahead fool... you are 10 steps from being lapped the third time.
We all know that older people are more at risk of complications and death from covid. If you don't recognize that the vast majority of older people in the UK have been vaccinated, then you are unwittingly (or intentionally) grouping almost all of the at-risk people into the vaccinated group, leaving few at-risk individuals in the unvaccinated group. If you don't see the need to stratify the data by age (risk), and compare rates rather than basic counts, then you have no business criticizing someone else's critical thinking skills.
This post was edited on 7/10/21 at 3:17 pm
Posted on 7/10/21 at 6:47 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
So we know of those that were vaccinated and later got the variants (a VERY small number for sure), but information about those that had Covid previously being reinfected is unknown (I would argue intentionally dismissed). So if previously having Covid provides protection against the variants in the same way as those that have been vaccinated (and to assume that is the case seems quite logical), then why aren’t those previously infected grouped with those that have been vaccinated? Combined, we have to be reaching the threshold for herd immunity. I don’t get it. FWIW - I am not anti-vaccination for those that have not had Covid previously or those deemed to be high risk.
Thoughts?
Posted on 7/10/21 at 7:42 pm to cmayes56
quote:
DJT Cult members?
uh, there are a ton of black folk not getting the vaccine, and you think they are part of a DJT cult
Youre just proving that you sho iz clueless
Posted on 7/10/21 at 8:43 pm to Revelator
quote:
99.5% of COVID-19 deaths in the US are now in non-vaccinated people, CDC head says
Not surprising.
Before the vaccines were available, 100% of Covid deaths were people not vaccinated.
Now, only 99.5% of Covid deaths are people not vaccinated.
This post was edited on 7/10/21 at 11:11 pm
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:18 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
So if previously having Covid provides protection against the variants in the same way as those that have been vaccinated (and to assume that is the case seems quite logical), then why aren’t those previously infected grouped with those that have been vaccinated? Combined, we have to be reaching the threshold for herd immunity.
Bumped...again.
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:30 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
So if previously having Covid provides protection against the variants in the same way as those that have been vaccinated (and to assume that is the case seems quite logical), then why aren’t those previously infected grouped with those that have been vaccinated? Combined, we have to be reaching the threshold for herd immunity.
I don’t get it.
The vaccine provides a more robust immune response than asymptomatic and mild disease does, that much is pretty clear from the available data. To what degree this is clinically relevant remains somewhat in question, but a majority of reinfections (which are very rare) occurred in those who initially had mild or asymptomatic illness.
I agree however that rates are dropping as a product of the combined effect of both vaccination and natural infection. On an individual basis however, there is reason to consider vaccinating certain people who had previously been infected.
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:40 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Cleveland Clinic did a study and concluded that natural antibodies makes the vaccine pointless.
Not really. They said, simply because isn't enough of it to go around, let's share it with the world - and who should we discriminate against, from who shall we take the vaccine away? Let's take it away from our previously sick with COVID people, because they at least have already SOME kind of protection, while the poor people of the world have NONE, so let's do something to "spread them (the shots) around."
LINK
The study findings reveal that individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection do not get additional benefits from vaccination, indicating that COVID-19 vaccines should be prioritized to individuals without prior infection. The study is currently available on the medRxiv* preprint server (not peer-reviewed).
In the United States, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has provided emergency use authorization for two mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, which have shown high efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease in clinical trials. However, the ability to vaccinate a large part of the global population is limited by vaccine supply.
In order to ensure fair access to vaccines throughout the world, the COVID-19 vaccines Global Access (COVAX) initiative was launched. In many countries, especially those with low socioeconomic status, there is a serious shortage of vaccines. Thus, in order to get the maximum vaccine benefits, the most vulnerable population should be prioritized for the vaccination.
The Cleveland Clinic also recommends everyone get the vaccine(s).
LINK
Is the COVID-19 Vaccine Safe?
Yes, we strongly encourage you to get it.
Given the speed of development of these vaccines, it’s understandable that there have been questions about whether or not there’s been enough research and testing to ensure the vaccines are safe. But all vaccines must go through rigorous clinical trials to determine safety and efficacy, with at least two months of patient follow-up, and report their findings to the FDA.
If I've had COVID-19 should I get vaccinated anyway?
We still recommend that you get the vaccine even if you’ve had COVID-19. However, you may consider waiting 90 days after getting infected as it’s not common to get COVID-19 again within three months of first being infected.
This post was edited on 7/10/21 at 11:56 pm
Posted on 7/10/21 at 11:55 pm to Revelator
quote:
99.5% of COVID-19 deaths in the US are now in unvaccinated people, CDC head says
Are they including before the vaccine existed?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News