- 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: Where is the proof that the unvaccinated transmit the disease more than the vaccinated?
Posted on 9/9/21 at 11:39 am to Kjnstkmn
Posted on 9/9/21 at 11:39 am to Kjnstkmn
quote:
Thanks for pointing out the BS in the article, will make a note not to cite it going forward.
Yeah it was actually a really interesting study, it’s just a shame that they did not take the extra time to compare viral loads of vaccinated vs unvaccinated with the same delta variant. That would have been much more interesting.
0
Posted on 9/9/21 at 11:49 am to oogabooga68
quote:So to confirm, you think our incompetent government has created this conspiracy so massive that every single hospital in America is fudging their numbers and every single doctor/nurse/paramedic...they're all in on the conspiracy to present bad data, and not 1 of the probably millions needed to carry through this conspiracy has spoken up to expose it?
Because all data is being manipulated and censored at this point, sweetheart and that's NOT an opinion....
Is that your assertion?
Posted on 9/9/21 at 11:49 am to FooManChoo
quote:
I think common sense would dictate that if the vaccinated can carry and spread the virus, and are less likely to be symptomatic and therefore more likely to be out in public, then they would spread the virus more than the unvaccinated, who would be more likely to be symptomatic and stay away from others.
Unless the viral load of the vaccinated is much lower, which it seems like one would expect if they don’t have symptoms. But what “one would expect” seems to have gone out the window with COVID.
For example, and I think this isn’t getting enough attention, “asymptomatic spread” was used as the justification for lockdowns and universal masking and basically everything, including being the basis for forced vaccines, even if that isn’t explicitly stated.
But then, what is the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated, if asymptomatic spread is a problem?
Posted on 9/9/21 at 11:59 am to Jax-Tiger
quote:The issue here is you already said you don't believe or question the hospital numbers, so we're at an impasse but...when 90% or more of hospitalizations are unvaccinated and ICUs are filled then it kinda does become an issue for everyone.
I think the unvaccinated are so vocal just because they want to be left alone to live their lives and that is becoming impossible to do without taking the jab.
As an example, the latest data I've seen from Medical City(a large hospital system here in North Texas) - 93% of current hospitalized with COVID are unvaxxed. 98% under 50 years old unvaxxed and 96% pregannt are unvaxxed. But again, there's not much more to say if you simply don't believe the numbers and that this hospital and every other one in America are part of a grand conspiracy and not 1 executive in all of America is willing to speak up about it.
This post was edited on 9/9/21 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:19 pm to Jax-Tiger
I've been trying to figure out how the 50% of unvaxed are alone responsible for a higher spike of covid than the spike that occurred when no one was vaccinated.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:20 pm to shel311
I still haven't had a valid answer to my question.
The hospitalizations don't answer that question.
If we do this because we want to bring the hospitalizations down, are we going to turn our attention to smokers, fat people, people who get speeding tickets, people who take drugs, don't exercise, or eat processed food? I mean, all of those things are due to conscious choices that people make, and drive up our hospitalizations and health care costs.
THE BIG DIFFERENCE THAT I SEE IS THAT THOSE OTHER THINGS ALSO DRIVE UP THE PROFITS OF OUR HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY, JUST LIKE TAKING THE JAB.
If people take the vaccine because they are forced to take the jab in order to save their job start getting sick 10 years down the road, should they have legal recourse against those who made them take it?
This is turning into a major clusterfrick.
The hospitalizations don't answer that question.
If we do this because we want to bring the hospitalizations down, are we going to turn our attention to smokers, fat people, people who get speeding tickets, people who take drugs, don't exercise, or eat processed food? I mean, all of those things are due to conscious choices that people make, and drive up our hospitalizations and health care costs.
THE BIG DIFFERENCE THAT I SEE IS THAT THOSE OTHER THINGS ALSO DRIVE UP THE PROFITS OF OUR HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY, JUST LIKE TAKING THE JAB.
If people take the vaccine because they are forced to take the jab in order to save their job start getting sick 10 years down the road, should they have legal recourse against those who made them take it?
This is turning into a major clusterfrick.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:20 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:Variants
I've been trying to figure out how the 50% of unvaxed are alone responsible for a higher spike of covid than the spike that occurred when no one was vaccinated.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:22 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
Okay. Then you agree that all of the policies being implemented to force people to get vaccinated by restricting their ability to work, move around, go to restaurants, or even get medical care are wrong and authoritarian, right?
Correct.
quote:
I think the unvaccinated are so vocal just because they want to be left alone to live their lives and that is becoming impossible to do without taking the jab.
I don't really think so. I think a lot of the unvaxxed are just as jubilant to report someone with the vaccine had complications from it, or caught COVID anyway as the Vaxxed are about unvaxxed people getting COVID.
The unhinged of both sides are trying to force their view points down the throats of the others. Very few of us in the middle (both vaxxed and unvacced) just want to be left alone and allowed to make the choice for ourselves. We are the ones the politicians and media hate, because we are the ones still watching their crooked asses ruin this country while the puppets fight with each other over the "New" distraction from the real problem in this country.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:24 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
Do studies show this,
Do you seriously expect the govt to fund a study like this?
After 2 years how hard would it have been to conduct an ivermectin study? Yet Nada, nothing, zip. The very fact that a human medicine that won the Nobel and is on the list of 50 essential medications is referred to as horse dewormer by professionals, is all the proof you need that they are only following a narrative, not looking for solutions
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:28 pm to shel311
quote:
Variants
So? You're missing the point. It's not the number of viruses out there but the number of people transmitting the viruses. 50% of the populace is not responsible for such a huge spike.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:31 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:LINK - This is pre-Delta but still confirms what you asked.
I still haven't had a valid answer to my question.
LINK - Post Delta, the states that had the worst surges were states with lower vax rates. The states that had the smallest surges were states with higher vax rates
1 more LINK
quote:
In April, Public Health England reported the results of a large study of COVID-19 transmission involving more than 365,000 households with a mix of vaccinated and unvaccinated members.
It found immunisation with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren’t vaccinated.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:32 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:That's the answer to your question, what do you mean "so"
So?
quote:By answering your question?
You're missing the point.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:34 pm to shel311
quote:
By answering your question?
By answering with variants as being the cause for the spike.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:35 pm to kingbob
quote:
The studies I’ve seen actually show the opposite. The difference is that those who are vaccinated tend to get less sick and not require hospitalization at nearly as high of rates as when the unvaccinated catch covid.
Between Jan. 1 and Aug 30, about 99% of hospitalizations were unvaccinated.
As of Aug. 30, 1.6 million hospitalized, only 10,471, or 0.65% were fully vaccinated.
Only 0.92% of the deaths were fully vaccinated.
LINK
This post was edited on 9/9/21 at 12:36 pm
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:36 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:
So? You're missing the point. It's not the number of viruses out there but the number of people transmitting the viruses. 50% of the populace is not responsible for such a huge spike.
The current dominant variant, delta, is many times more infectious than prior variants during earlier spikes. So yes that’s why. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated are spreading, but it’s mostly unvaccinated who show up in the hospital. The good news is now we get to herd immunity faster, and future spikes should be less noticeable.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:37 pm to shel311
quote:
they were only around half as likely
Wow...."AROUND".....not too specific....
"HALF".....OK, just a $cientific flip of the coin there, either or ya know...
"LIKELY".....again, not $pecific or $cientific....
But by all means, MANDATES FOR EVERYONE!!!
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:39 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:That IS the answer to your question.
By answering with variants as being the cause for the spike.
Do you just not believe that variants exist and these variants are more contagious? I have no idea what you're trying to say.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:40 pm to Alt26
quote:
But for the sake of discussion, if a person has the ability to contract and/or transmit the virus at the same level whether or not they are vaccinated, then isn't the benefit of being vaccinated SELF protection vs. protection for the others? And if so, why the need for MANDATORY vaccinations? If you want greater protection for yourself, then take the vaccine. If you don't care, then don't. Make your own risk assessment. But save the BS argument of "I'm getting vaccinated to protect YOU, not me." Because that doesn't make much sense if you can still infect others despite being vaccinated.
This has always been my view. I got vaccinated to protect myself. Alabama has the lowest vaccinated rate in the country. I'm going to see Bama-LSU in a packed Bryant-Denny in November, and if 30,000 unvaccinated Alabamians catch the virus there and are dead within a month, I really don't care. Personal choices.
I've never thought the vaccine was supposed to keep me from acquiring the virus. I've always thought it was supposed to keep me from getting sick. The numbers show clearly that it is doing that in large numbers.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:40 pm to oogabooga68
quote:There ya go, doesn't like the evidence because it doesn't fit his agenda, so he doesn't believe it.
Wow...."AROUND".....not too specific....
"HALF".....OK, just a $cientific flip of the coin there, either or ya know...
"LIKELY".....again, not $pecific or $cientific....
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:41 pm to lagallifrey
quote:Right. Dude asked a question. He was given the answer, then said I was missing the point by answering his question correctly. Just no clue what he's going for there.
The current dominant variant, delta, is many times more infectious than prior variants during earlier spikes. So yes that’s why.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News