Stupid shit in Medellin

[Nounce]

Sounds good, as long as you don't leave out all the people who decided "not to live in fear" that wound up on their backs pleading with others not to make the same mistakes as them.
.

Show me some examples of vaccinated people doing that. I think the anti-vax pepole will love to hear from you and have a field day with it. LOL.

You are assuming a lot of things and you think you know about human behavior. Did you know before there will be so many people not taking vaccine.

You also throw out the false dilemma fallacy. There are more choices besides living in fear and throwing caution to the wind. For example reasonable caution doesn't have to involve fear. It's just being smart.

Like wearing a mask having a drink in a packed bar? If the word fear is the only thing you don't agree, remove the word in my post.

[Ptrbrgr]

Perhaps I can shed some light on this.

Dcrist is referring to a video put out by a Canadian anti-vax group called the Canadian Covid Care Alliance. In the video, they compared the number of infected in the initial Pfizer trial, only over the first 7 days of the trial.

Thank you for this. I found the video, and managed to watch almost ten minutes of it before I threw in the towel. Oh dear. Well, to those who got so upset about the video: as they told Cheese Wagstaff in the Wire after the dog fight: "I think you have been played". I'll see if I can find a bit of time later today to type up a brief summary.

[Villainy]

Yes he can. JPeedo is the most dishonest, disrespectful, patronising, condescending, myopic, ignorant, yet self-satisfied contributor here. He is also obstinate. So I suggest you stop feeding the fish.

+1. And everybody sees it but him and his senile sidekick paulie.

One thing about JBee. Agree with him or not at least he researches his comments using reputable sources and doesn't just get his BS off of some conspiracy theory website or podcast.

BTW I think I recognize you two guys. Didn't they make a movie about you, starring Jeff Daniels and Jim Carey?

[JustTK]

+1. And everybody sees it but him and his senile sidekick paulie.

Right. His last name is Dunning Kruger. Classic example.

[JjBee62]

Hehe, yes. I am delighted to see the Colombian government's new vax card regulations are a complete failure. Let's hope they get reversed pronto. And it's not just Colombia. I noticed that Spain implemented an immigration policy a few months ago that requires arrivals from most countries to present a vax card. Yet they are now at an all time high of 100.000 cases per day. Many other countries too. Cases are at an all time high worldwide. Yet deaths are not. It's incredible that these governments can't see what is staring them in the face.

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.

Your tendency to miss the point of every post you respond to continues. The concern isn't about getting into Colombia. If a person can't get into Colombia, the decision to postpone is out of their control.

There are 2 concerns for people traveling to Colombia at this time. One is not knowing if there are going to be shutdowns, curfews or a return of pico and cedula restrictions. The ministry of health previously stated those types of restrictions are based upon hospital available capacity, not on number of cases. Fortunately, Colombia has been diligent about getting people vaccinated, so hospitalization and death rates are much lower than when the strictest restrictions were enforced. Do a search and you might be able to find the reports on available hospital capacity. That will help you to decide whether or not it's a good time to visit.

The other concern is testing positive before the trip ends, forcing a quarantine which would extend the trip. If a 2 week extension of the trip would cause serious problems for you, it's probably not a good time to travel. The girls I regularly talk to are all telling me that a lot of people around them are getting sick. Fortunately, they are young, healthy and vaccinated, so none of them are suffering serious symptoms.

[Paulie97]

It's equivalent to over for some. It's based on a different thinking. It is possible if this continues for another 10 years. Many more will just move on to live normally.

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.e.

Sounds good, as long as you don't leave out all the people who decided "not to live in fear" that wound up on their backs pleading with others not to make the same mistakes as them.

You also throw out the false dilemma fallacy. There are more choices besides living in fear and throwing caution to the wind. For example reasonable caution doesn't have to involve fear. It's just being smart.

[Paulie97]

+1. And everybody sees it but him and his senile sidekick paulie.

You are a dimwit that has never been able to go toe to toe with me or anyone else outside the Faux News lobotomized crowd so don't talk to me about senility. Wink.

[MarquisdeSade1]

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.

Everyone but St George.

[JohnnyWalker55]

Yes he can. JPeedo is the most dishonest, disrespectful, patronising, condescending, myopic, ignorant, yet self-satisfied contributor here. He is also obstinate. So I suggest you stop feeding the fish.

+1. And everybody sees it but him and his senile sidekick paulie.

[Elvis 2008]

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.

Sigh. Wrong again: https://www.history.com/news/colonis...llpox-blankets.

[JjBee62]

You'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.

Oh, the irony. On one hand, you make a cherry picking accusation. I'll note, you do not dispute the data. But regardless, you discount it. Then you go on to extrapolate data, make estimations not based in fact. In fact, what you speculate on cannot be known. Why? Because Pfizer blew up the control group. Perhaps the most important human study in our lifetime was undermined. By the "scientists". If that alone doesn't alarm you, Pfizer will send you a big Christmas card next year.

Do you not understand the term "cherry pick?" It's quite common. It's a logical fallacy. It's dishonest and intentionally misleading. Perhaps before you respond you should look at the meaning, because you don't seem to know it.

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?

There's this thing called mathematics. Apparently, it's another subject which you've failed to learn. At any point you can get a reasonable estimate of current ARR with simple math. First, take your total number of cases within your population group. Divide that number by the total population group. You can use the population of your town, your state, your country or the world. If you're still confused, the CCCA presentation includes 2 sets of numbers, at 7 days and at 2 months. In the video they show how they got the 0. 84% result. Using the data from the 2 month point, gives a result that's about 3 times higher. No extrapolation needed, no guesswork, no estimate. Just the same mathematics you were supposed to master before completing 4 grade.

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!

Pfizer didn't do anything with the numbers. The 95% number, which was expressed by Pfizer as "up to 95% effective at preventing infection" was a preliminary finding based upon initial indications. After the study concluded they corrected the number to "up to 91%. " They've continued to correct the number as more data becomes available.

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.

I didn't throw any numbers out. You can go and find the numbers yourself, although you'll probably need someone else to do the math.

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.

I'm making an effort to not just point out the obvious regarding your reasoning ability. I made no statement about that person. I certainly didn't indicate that person is a "unicorn. " Quite the opposite. "Unfortunately, nobody knows how Covid will affect them until they get it. " Is basic fucking English something else not in your repertoire? I used 2 examples, with different risk factors to illustrate that "nobody knows how Covid will affect them until they get it."

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.

Okay, I'll surrender to my impulse. You're absolutely fucking without a clue. I have never made a statement for or against any mandates. The closest I have come is to point out that if someone is faced with a mandate, they can either comply or find a new job (or new place to travel).

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.

[JustTK]

But yet, you stand by what we've done. You can't have it both ways, man.

Yes he can. JPeedo is the most dishonest, disrespectful, patronising, condescending, myopic, ignorant, yet self-satisfied contributor here. He is also obstinate. So I suggest you stop feeding the fish.

[JustTK]

There were just about 1500 daily cases on Dec 1 which jumped to 10000 in 15 days.
Looks like Colombia is about to exceed the record of 32000 a day. I don't see things becoming somewhat normal again for another 2 months at least.

Hehe, yes. I am delighted to see the Colombian government's new vax card regulations are a complete failure. Let's hope they get reversed pronto. And it's not just Colombia. I noticed that Spain implemented an immigration policy a few months ago that requires arrivals from most countries to present a vax card. Yet they are now at an all time high of 100.000 cases per day. Many other countries too. Cases are at an all time high worldwide. Yet deaths are not. It's incredible that these governments can't see what is staring them in the face.

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.

[Dcrist0527]

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.

You are off your rocker. LOL I think you need that sleep.

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.

[Dcrist0527]

Another funny 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..

Your portrayal of me could not be further from the truth. I would consider my position to be somewhere between conservative and libertarian. It would also be fair to say 90%+ of the democrat party turns my stomach. But what you cannot say about me is that I follow a party line. Clearly you misinterpreted my last point about Dem vs Rep. Or maybe I wasn't clear; it works both ways. The vast majority of political discourse is party driven. That is a sad fact. Gone is independent thought. It is my side vs your side at all costs. Ideas? They don't matter. And as I have said repeatedly now, my only interest in this whole vaccine argument is to challenge people to think for themselves.

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.