Thread: Stupid shit in Medellin
+
Add Report
Results 4,216 to 4,230 of 7075
-
01-09-22 00:51 #2860
Posts: 3228Originally Posted by Paulie97 [View Original Post]
-
01-08-22 23:01 #2859
Posts: 5464You're at your best when all you have are ad hominem attacks and avoidance of the issues. Unfortunately, that's not exactly a high standard.
Originally Posted by Dcrist0527 [View Original Post]
As simple as possible, the video on ARR you keep referring to claims an ARR of 0. 84%. That number comes from the data after the first 7 days of the Pfizer study. Still with me?
The Pfizer study ran for 2 months. It didn't run for 7 days. The 7 day data was simply for a preliminary finding. Does the vaccine behave as expected? Are there unexpected side effects? Should the study be continued, or scrapped?
After 7 days, unless you have deliberately exposed everyone to the virus, you have absolutely no idea what ARR is, because you have no way of knowing how many people in your study have been exposed. Even after 2 months ARR can't be determined, but it is at least slightly closer to reality. If your anti-vax heroes were not cherry picking data they would have used the data from the end of the study instead of the beginning.
Did you understand that. It's about as basic as I can make it. If I had the time I would run the explanation past a bunch of children of different ages to figure out what age range is compatible with your ability to comprehend. Then perhaps I could get an elementary school teacher to fit the information to your level. Unfortunately, I don't have that kind of time. If you don't understand, perhaps you should go play with your toys and leave the discussion to those who can understand.
But even if I follow your speculation, you are disconnected. From reality. The manufacturers are now onto their fourth do$e. That kinda throws a kink in your math, no?
My current numbers are simply what you get if you use the same simple math with the current number of total cases. The vaccine efficacy number I used, "maybe 10%" is due to the fact that positive tests are not separated based on vaccination status. That "maybe" should have been self-explanatory.
Here, again, I'll mention my biggest premise. Pfizer bastardized numbers to misrepresent capabilities. The poster you were responding to acknowledges that. They took the RRR number and sold it as your own personal protection. To your point, no one can argue the vax doesn't help protect against serious illness. But that's not how it was sold. Pfizer's efficacy marketing was on contracting COVID. Our politicians told us it would stop transmission. Hell, even the Supreme Court justices just yesterday were spouting that lie. Repestedly. Talk about misinformation!
Again I'm trying to make it as simple as possible for you. You've already stated that analogies are beyond your ability to comprehend, so I'm rather limited here.
If you are locked within a sterile environment, nothing comes in without being sterilized, no visitors allowed into your hermetically sealed environment, your risk of a Covid infection is 0. 0000%. There is no risk to you. If you take 1000 people and place all but one in the same type of isolation, and the one person outside gets Covid, what's the actual risk of Covid infection? Is it 0.1%, or is it 100%? You don't know.
That's the hyperbolic demonstration with the problem of only considering ARR. You can't adequately determine ARR, without knowing the complete exposure details of every single person. You only know that the infected people were exposed. You don't know about the uninfected people, unless both groups are within an environment where avoiding exposure is unlikely, or unless you deliberately expose your entire test population to the virus.
Fortunately, we have 2 different types of enclosed environments we can collect data from. Unfortunately, each one has a much different risk factor.
Environment 1, a US Navy ship, initially at sea, before the first infection was detected and in isolation shortly after. I'm talking about the USS Roosevelt. Of the up to 5680 crew and air wing onboard, 1271 tested positive for Covid. That's an Absolute Risk of 22%. Nobody was vaccinated and it's unlikely any had previously recovered from Covid. However, average age of the population is probably 22-25, required to meet physical fitness and obesity standards. Most likely a much healthier population than used in any study. Remember that number, 22%.
Environment 2, any nursing home, assisted living facility or correctional facility infected with Covid. You can find data for any Nursing home at http://data.cms.gov.
For this example I picked a nursing home I'm familiar with. Out of the 36 residents, 26 were confirmed with Covid, 18 died. That's an Absolute Risk of 72%, with a 50% fatality rate. This happened well before any vaccines were available. Some nursing homes had a much higher percentage of cases. This is the other end of the spectrum. Many had pre-existing conditions, many had multiple risk factors. You would expect a less effective immune system compared to the Roosevelt crew.
Using the 2 examples, adjusting for average age and risk factors, Absolute Risk falls somewhere between 22-72%. You could go and find the nursing homes with the highest or lowest percentage of cases, but ideally you would use all the available data, rather than cherry picking.
Again, you'll criticize actual data as cherry picked but then throw these numbers out? This is just overt speculation at best. The height of hypocrisy.
Here again, your language is telling. "I know that person. " As if "that person" is a unicorn. The US is the land of obesity. Roughly a third of the country is obese. Newsflash: a third of the country hadn't croaked. Yes, obesity is a comorbidity. But you talk like the fat guy that survives covid is unique. I'm a fat ass. I got it relatively early on and it was essentially a cold. You downplay that the overwhelming majority of people recover just fine.
Oh, the irony, part two. I'm going to assume this wasn't directed at me or anyone in particular. I have never told anyone not to get vaccinated. Just the opposite, actually. But stop and think what you said. "Irresponsible. " "Despicable. " But you have no problem mandating what someone must do to themselves. No problem taking away their jobs because they don't subscribe to the group think. THEY aren't afforded the "medical professional advice. " That's settled science, right? Telling people what they must do = not despicable? Ok, bro. Gotcha.
Nor have I told people what they must do. Are you a child or an idiot? If there's a third option, explain it to me. The discussion is about the CCCA cherry picking data, misrepresenting their expertise and credentials and lying about the Pfizer study. It's not about mandates, supporting mandates or unicorns. If you lack the ability to discuss a simple subject, then perhaps you should find something better suited to your talents.
-
01-08-22 22:35 #2858
Posts: 1782Originally Posted by Dcrist0527 [View Original Post]
-
01-08-22 22:20 #2857
Posts: 1782Originally Posted by Plan77 [View Original Post]
But that should not concern you. You do not need to show a negv test result to enter Colombia so you can enter without concern. Omicron is a pretty feeble virus so I don't see why you should worry about postponement. Just take out tarvel insurance if you are still cautious.
-
01-08-22 20:36 #2856
Posts: 1283Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
I'm not an anarchist. And while I will usually favor freedom, I do think a society is entitled to setting norms to an extent. But I'll use your seatbelt example. And I'll speak on principle, which will be unpopular. But as I said in a recent reply, I am pro-freedom with a heavy dose of personal responsibility. I wear my seat belt. Why? Not because it's the law but I make the personal choice to protect myself. If someone chooses not to and they end up going through a windshield, well, we just improved the gene pool. Personal responsibility means something.
I got vaxxed using a similar logic. Let's pretend we had actual data, which the CDC won't release. If someone makes an informed decision to not get the vaccine, contracts the virus and dies? I lose no sleep about that. We all own the rewards and consequences for our decisions.
-
01-08-22 20:26 #2855
Posts: 1283Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
I often hear the vaccine has become a political issue. That is so sad. I don't quite agree entirely but yes, there are many that make their decisions based on our political hacks, be them elected or on MSNBC, FoxNews, CNN etc.
What gave you the impression I 'declare I have a closed mind, my positions are totally dependent on politics. ' . I am baffled. Call me wrong. Call me an idiot. You can call me a lot. LOL But I greatly value my independent thought. Sean Hannity makes me just as nauseous as Rachel Maddow.
My opinions are founded on principles. I have a strong bias towards freedom and with that, personal responsibility. Only recently has a "freedom thumper" become a dirty phrase. I could go on about my perspective, but pretty sure no one gives a shit. But suffice to say, you could not be more wrong in your assessment.
-
01-08-22 19:14 #2854
Posts: 2931Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
Why a bar is packed with people without masks? I see plenty of them. I know some just decided they want to live normally and not live in fear. That is why you see some people change their tune in this thread, although they gave a different reason.
For me freedom is a collective right. In that, I mean I have no problem going into a packed bar right now or every night, but I won't go back to my family before I quarantine myself for 2 weeks. LOL. I will do the quarantine for my family in this case because they don't think like me.
-
01-08-22 19:03 #2853
Posts: 3228Originally Posted by Dcrist0527 [View Original Post]
From an illness point of view, the pandemic is done and no one is dying from Covid anymore, and despite the number of cases, that is what should be recognized.
As for the deaths, the CDC mandated anyone who dies with Covid is a Covid death. So a person with Covid who dies in a car crash is a Covid death. The current death numbers are all deaths with not from Covid.
From an economic POV, the vaccine manufacturers are still pouring on the fear porn and cashing in despite the fact that their products now have no benefit, only harm. If Moderna, JNJ, and Pfizer were ethical or could be sued, they would be pulling the vaccines on their own right now.
And from a political POV, it is far from over. Thing about the vaccine mandates is that with alpha you could justify a mandate given how well the vaccine worked against the virus and prevented transmission. The problem is cases of alpha has not been an issue for a year, and the vaccines do nothing now to prevent transmission.
The case before the Supreme Court now has nothing to do with illness and everything to do with power. Are you going to allow these federal bureaucrats the ability to hand out emergency use only products and give legal immunity to the people making said products and the bureaucrats? That is sheer insanity. Our bodies would literally no longer be our own at that point. It is even crazier given the vaccines do jack shit against omicron.
So in summary, the health care crisis with Covid is over, but those making bank and getting power from Covid want it to continue on.
-
01-08-22 14:17 #2852
Posts: 1283Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
Yet, as you say, COVID is raging.
But yet, you stand by what we've done. You can't have it both ways, man. Either we've succeeded or we've failed. You can't tell me these magic vaccines and magic masks are the solution and then tell me we're 4 times worse than ever. But yet, you're willing to quadruple-down.
-
01-08-22 14:10 #2851
Posts: 1283Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
But even if I follow your speculation, you are disconnected. From reality. The manufacturers are now onto their fourth do$e. That kinda throws a kink in your math, no?
Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
Originally Posted by JjBee62 [View Original Post]
-
01-08-22 11:59 #2850
Posts: 5464Originally Posted by Dcrist0527 [View Original Post]
It's strange you've never complained about the seatbelt mandate. The Selective Service registration mandate also seems to have avoided your ire. Auto insurance, vehicle registration, Social Security, and countless other mandates and not even a whisper of complaint.
Perhaps the most authoritarian mandate of all, nobody even knows it exists. I'm talking about the Pants mandate. Everyone, male or female is required to keep their ass and genitalia completely covered at all times in public. Why?
I've seen thousands of naked bodies, all ages, all types, all sexes. Not once has it made me sick, although some have caused mild nausea. Certainly seeing a naked body has never sent me to the hospital.
Where is your outrage? Why aren't you fighting against the evil pants mandate? You're ready to go to battle over Covid vaccine mandates, even though the vaccines indisputably save lives and improve patient outcomes. Yet not a single peep from you over a mandate that only exists to benefit the clothing industry.
If you believe people have the right to choose whether they kill other people, why do you believe people don't have the right to walk around naked?
And yes, that's a serious question. Public nudity is common in many countries. The practice is harmless. It's certainly safer than confining a bunch of unvaccinated children with an unvaccinated teacher for several hours per day.
-
01-08-22 11:17 #2849
Posts: 5464Originally Posted by Dcrist0527 [View Original Post]
Consider this:
You accused me of having a closed mind because I pointed out that an anti-vax group, which is clearly an anti-vax group, was an anti-vax group. Yet, with this post and several others, you not only declare you have a closed mind, your positions are totally dependent on politics. No other factor is more important to your decision making.
If the talking head who tells you your opinions goes on air today and states all true patriots will cut off their balls, paint them red, white and blue and hang them around their neck, tomorrow you would be explaining your colorful scrotum necklace to the EMTs.
I've never debated any subject based on right or left, conservative or liberal, or Republican or Democrat. It's irrelevant.
Take health care. My opinion on healthcare has nothing to do with what the Democrats want, which is almost exactly the same thing the Republicans want. The Democrats have held a majority in the house many times. Not once have they proposed a bill to make healthcare a right, or to provide free healthcare. The most extreme thing they have done was the ACA, which is fundamentally the same as the Republican plan adopted by Massachusetts.
My opinion on healthcare comes from the fact that I moved up my wedding by 7 months because my fiancee was about to lose her health insurance. That would have forced her to choose between death, or losing everything she owned, if her cancer returned.
My opinion on healthcare is based on being unable to afford insurance for nearly 10 years. 10 years without a single doctor's visit, with several injuries, a couple of illnesses and one bad infection. After you've sliced open your infected arm with a razor blade and washed out the infection with rubbing alcohol, your opinion on healthcare might change.
My opinion on healthcare is based on listening to a single mother, employed full time, explain how she could only take her kids to the ER when they got sick because her employer didn't offer insurance. All those ER visits get billed directly to the taxpayers.
Another funny thing is that you go to Colombia, where healthcare, including dental and vision, is a right. Every girl with perfect teeth, a clear complexion and in good health is the beneficiary of healthcare as a right. Which also makes you the beneficiary of healthcare as a right. How many of those girls would have nice white, straight teeth if dental costs were similar to the US? How many mongers would still choose Colombia?
-
01-08-22 10:52 #2848
Posts: 5464Originally Posted by Dcrist0527 [View Original Post]
Consider this:
You accused me of having a closed mind because I pointed out that an anti-vax group, which is clearly an anti-vax group, was an anti-vax group. Yet, with this post and several others, you not only declare you have a closed mind, your positions are totally dependent on politics. No other factor is more important to your decision making.
If the talking head who tells you your opinions goes on air today and states all true patriots will cut off their balls, paint them red, white and blue and hang them around their neck, tomorrow you would be explaining your colorful scrotum necklace to the EMTs.
I've never debated any subject based on right or left, conservative or liberal, or Republican or Democrat. It's irrelevant.
Take health care. My opinion on healthcare has nothing to do with what the Democrats want, which is almost exactly the same thing the Republicans want. The Democrats have held a majority in the house many times. Not once have they proposed a bill to make healthcare a right, or to provide free healthcare. The most extreme thing they have done was the ACA, which is fundamentally the same as the Republican plan adopted by Massachusetts.
My opinion on healthcare comes from the fact that I moved up my wedding by 7 months because my fiancee was about to lose her health insurance. That would.
-
01-08-22 08:30 #2847
Posts: 5464My apologies Dcrist
I didn't initially watch the CCCA video where they discussed Absolute Risk Reduction versus Relative Risk Reduction. I should have done that before I responded.
Unfortunately, watching the video revealed 2 things.
1. ARR, as they are using it is a useless number. More on that in a moment.
2. The CCCA cherry picked data from the Pfizer study to further their anti-vax agenda.
Second point first: The numbers they used to determine ARR were from 7 days into the 2 month study, which shows an ARR of 0. 84%. If they had any interest in honesty they would have used the data from the completed study, with an ARR of about 2.5%.
Why is ARR, as they are using it, useless? Because to determine ARR you first must determine Absolute Risk. I can think of only 2 methods to determine Absolute Risk and neither is a possibility.
The first method requires doing nothing, except weekly testing of the entire population for a minimum of 1 year. No vaccines, masks, shutdowns, curfews, school closings, etc. As much of the population as possible needs to be exposed to Covid. It's simple. You can't determine the risk of catching Covid for people who have not been exposed to Covid. Eventually most people will be exposed, but that could take several years. The more people try to prevent exposure to Covid, the longer it takes.
The second impossible option also requires time travel. First step, before the beginning of the Pfizer study, is to verify all study participants are free of Covid and free of Covid antibodies. Prior infection gives some acquired immunity. Two weeks of isolation with daily testing should give you an untainted pool.
Continue isolation and give the first dose. Continue isolation and testing for 3 more weeks and give the second dose. After another 2 weeks of isolation and testing, to reach peak vaccine effectiveness, expose everyone to Covid.
Continue isolation and testing for another 2 weeks. This fits pretty close to the 2 month study length. The percentage of infected in the placebo group gives you Absolute Risk. The infected percentage in the vaccine group lets you determine ARR.
However, even if you could perform such a study, ARR still only tells part of the story. You have to also determine risk reduction for the different levels of severity. A 1% overall ARR isn't a bad thing if the vaccine reduces the risk of serious illness by 50%.
-
01-08-22 06:53 #2846
Posts: 1680Huh?
Mr E with another fake analogy? This is the most ridiculous one of all. Early Euro settleters in contact with Native Americans had no more knowledge of how disease is spread than the Founding Fathers. You have no right to be a fat clown? Get it? No right exists, in the USA or anywhere else. Yo. LOL.