- 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
Twitter Suspends Science Writer After He Posts Results Of Pfizer Clinical Test
Posted on 7/31/21 at 12:24 pm
Posted on 7/31/21 at 12:24 pm
Update: Whether due to pressure from the backlash or simply realizing their action was ridiculous, Twitter has reinstated Alex Berenson and even more fascinating, has removed the 'warning' label from his tweet...
LINK
LINK
9
Posted on 7/31/21 at 12:27 pm to FlexDawg
And here comes the Vax Mafia.
I never get a flu shoot either. Come at me.
I never get a flu shoot either. Come at me.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 12:59 pm to BuckyCheese
Vax Mafia is strangely quiet.
Much like progressives when their position is indefensible.
Much like progressives when their position is indefensible.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:03 pm to FlexDawg
I don't get it. Why are there only 29 in the trial? Millions of doses have been given.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:05 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
I don't get it. Why are there only 29 in the trial? Millions of doses have been given.
Think about that… you think 100% of trial participants died?
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:06 pm to Diamondawg
If there were only 29 in the trial we are fricked as that would be a 100% death rate from the Kung Flu.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:08 pm to FlexDawg
quote:
Twitter has reinstated Alex Berenson and even more fascinating, has removed the 'warning' label from his tweet...
Twitter jumped the gun. They were told to allow it. This is building toward announcing the vaccine is worthless, in some cases dangerous, and 100% Trump's fault for rushing it through.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:08 pm to FlexDawg
That seems to too small of a testing pool.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:08 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
quote:I don't do twitter. I have no idea what any of this means. Am I supposed to direct my outrage at twitter or the "scientist"?
Think about that… you think 100% of trial participants died?
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:12 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
scientist"?
I just looked up the guy.
Hes not a scientist.
He writes for NYT.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:15 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
I don't do twitter. I have no idea what any of this means. Am I supposed to direct my outrage at twitter or the "scientist"?
The text copied by OP clearly says 15 vaccinated and 14 unvaccinated trial participants died. You seemed to assume that there were only 29 trial participants by adding those two values. Perhaps we gave you too much credit for knowing that a trial would include far more participants than the small subset of those who died.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:21 pm to thermal9221
quote:
That seems to too small of a testing pool.
The US testing pool was 40k with another > 30k internationally. Those were just the deaths from both sides of the study.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:22 pm to FlexDawg
Science, yo
Posted on 7/31/21 at 1:45 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
The US testing pool was 40k with another > 30k internationally. Those were just the deaths from both sides of the study.
Unless I'm interpreting the data wrong, the 14 and 15 deaths were total deaths in the study, not deaths necessarily attributable to COVID.
It looks like 2 in the placebo group and 1 in the vax group are attributed specifically to COVID.
Posted on 7/31/21 at 2:13 pm to Jack Bauers HnK
quote:
Twitter Suspends Science Writer After He Posts Results Of Pfizer Clinical Test by Jack Bauers HnK
quote:
I don't do twitter. I have no idea what any of this means. Am I supposed to direct my outrage at twitter or the "scientist"?
The text copied by OP clearly says 15 vaccinated and 14 unvaccinated trial participants died. You seemed to assume that there were only 29 trial participants by adding those two values. Perhaps we gave you too much credit for knowing that a trial would include far more participants than the small subset of those who died.
You are trying to conflate issues. The op was about deaths. Assuming control group and test group were same size, the jab did not decrease death rate.
Anything you take beyond that is you just trying to conflate other aspects to distract from the point.
This post was edited on 7/31/21 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 7/31/21 at 2:16 pm to notsince98
But the Destroya demands that you be vaccinated. Phuc her
Posted on 7/31/21 at 2:33 pm to FlexDawg
This post was edited on 7/31/21 at 2:35 pm
Posted on 7/31/21 at 2:35 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
I don't get it. Why are there only 29 in the trial? Millions of doses have been given.
There weren't, there were/are almost 50k.
quote:
In an ongoing, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, multinational, pivotal efficacy study, 44,165 =16-year-old participants and 2,264 12-15-year-old participants
LINK to the actual study that the Twiddiot site removed.
Parts which should raise eyebrows...
quote:
BNT162b2 is highly efficacious against COVID-19 and is currently authorized for emergency use or conditional approval worldwide. At the time of authorization, data beyond 2 months post-vaccination were unavailable.
Translation: we are guessing this won't hurt people so let's skip Phases I & II population frameworks and skip directly to Phase III. What's the worst that could happen?
quote:
Conclusion With up to 6 months of follow-up and despite a gradually declining trend in vaccine efficacy, BNT162b2 had a favorable safety profile and was highly efficacious in preventing COVID-19.
The bolded/underlined part has me curious. Are they talking about vaccines in general (Polio, Chicken Pox, etc) or are they talking about other COVID-19 vaccines or are they saying the efficacy of their vaccine begins degrading after 6 months?
quote:
Participants who were healthy or had stable chronic medical conditions were eligible. An active immunocompromising condition or recent immunosuppressive therapy were exclusion criteria.
COVID-19 is the new black plague (#NotRacist) so why in the bleeding shite would they not include these two groups or at least do a separate, coinciding study based in these?
quote:
Participants with a COVID-19 medical history were excluded, though evidence of current or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection on laboratory testing of study-obtained samples was not an exclusion.
Translation: You couldn't participate if you were known to have had COVID-19 but you could if you didn't know you had ever had it or caught it during the testing. This makes little sense to me.
quote:
Early protection against COVID-19 without robust serum neutralization indicates that neutralizing titers alone do not appear to explain early BNT162b2-mediated protection from COVID-19. Other immune mechanisms (e.g., innate immune responses, CD4+ or CD8+ T-cell responses, B-cell memory responses, antibody-dependent cytotoxicity) may contribute to protection.
My takeaway from this is that the Placebo Group had an unexpected resistance to COVID-19 which paralleled the Vaccinated Group for up to two weeks.
Even then, if I am understanding the chart correctly, only .08% of the Placebo Group had COVID issues for at least up to 6 months after the test (compared to the <.01% of the Vaccine Group).
My Conclusion: You have pretty much the same chance of dying from COVID-19 whether you take the vaccine or not. While the vaccine will lessen the chances of your catching it, it's statistically irrelevant when compared to that of the unvaccinated (.08% vs <.01%).
This post was edited on 7/31/21 at 2:37 pm
Posted on 7/31/21 at 2:35 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:
Much like progressives when their position is indefensible
That has never stopped them. If it had, they would have shut up a long time ago
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News