The Vaccine

[scbruet]

There is no gotcha in the video. Clearly you’re missing the point. What was discussed in the video by actual Pfizer scientists and those well in the vaccine are the same things others have tried to discuss in here and other places only to be shunned as conspiracy theorists.

I definitely am missing the point. Which was what?

 

[Beachbummer]

That table with death data is missing the total population in each group. If 90% of the population is vaccinated, it means the unvaccinated population is very small and those death numbers could still be horrendous compared to the rest of the population. Let's pretend the following situation in UK


Vaccinated Unvaccinated
1 70% 30%
2 80% 20%
3 99.9% 10%


You need to ratio the deaths to the population size ratio to get apples to apples. If the vaccine was useless the proportion of dead would be identical in both groups. Comparing counts ONLY without considering the vaccination % of the population does not tell you anything. You need both. The numbers in the table mean different things depending on what scenario was the case at the time.

 

[Bizywk]

You would get played by ads from the 1930s? I don't follow haha.

That's my point, my friend. Doctors are wonderful, but they are human. Don't blindly trust - or shame those that wait for evidence.

Remember that smoking had been around for a long time while we still don't have the first long term trial of this new technology.

Blowing smoke: Vintage ads of doctors endorsing tobacco

Cigarettes healthy? You won't believe the claims tobacco companies made back in the day

www.cbsnews.com

 

[scbruet]

Of course. Get a second opinion.

More Than 12.7 Billion Shots Given: Covid-19 Tracker

Bloomberg counted up the shots administered in 184 countries and 59 US states and territories

www.bloomberg.com

6.3 billion doses given world wide. I'm not sure how much more evidence gathering is needed about its effectiveness. You can debate effectiveness of natural immunity vs the vaccine, but it's likely a splitting hairs argument. Plus, you shouldn't want to get covid to develop natural antibodies.

I just want to fly without masks again haha.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Well it’s been an entertaining thread but I think I’ve come to my own conclusion. If you decide to get the vaccine good and if you don’t all is still equally good. Make your own decision and I’ll make mine. Seems reasonable…

 

[Bruce]

Perhaps a good option for those with compromised immune systems?

AstraZeneca Seeks Emergency Use Authorization In U.S. For Covid Prophylaxis Drug

Late-stage trials of the drug show it is 77% effective in reducing the risk of Covid-19 symptoms if administered as a preventive treatment.

www.forbes.com

 

[Lurch]

That table with death data is missing the total population in each group. If 90% of the population is vaccinated, it means the unvaccinated population is very small and those death numbers could still be horrendous compared to the rest of the population. Let's pretend the following situation in UK


Vaccinated Unvaccinated
1 70% 30%
2 80% 20%
3 99.9% 10%


You need to ratio the deaths to the population size ratio to get apples to apples. If the vaccine was useless the proportion of dead would be identical in both groups. Comparing counts ONLY without considering the vaccination % of the population does not tell you anything. You need both. The numbers in the table mean different things depending on what scenario was the case at the time.

Pop size is at the top of the table, first row. But I appreciate the thoughtful reply

 

[adrianp89]

So can someone explain why Evil Sports was banned? All he did was post a video - which was then removed.

Some serious Mark Zuckerberg going on here. Turning into the Yamaha forum of old.

 

[Bizywk]

@Julian

Did Evil sports get banned?

 

[Julian]

You’re reading something wrong. Total deaths 2500, 1600 were fully vaccinated

Gotcha...I was reading only one row there. So after a tiny bit of research here, the conclusion you make is invalid. Yes...it sure seems on the surface that you are better off being unvaccinated when it comes to deaths doesn't it? But that simply isn't what is at play here.

Post misrepresents data from Public Health England report on vaccine efficacy

CLAIM: Data from Public Health England on the coronavirus delta variant shows that patients are more than 745% more likely to die after two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine than unvaccinated patients.

apnews.com

Fact Check-Data from Public Health England does not undermine role of COVID-19 vaccines

U.S. Republican Senator Ron Johnson used health data gathered in England to claim more vaccinated people have been seriously affected by the Delta COVID-19 variant than the unvaccinated. Johnson's statements, and subsequent social media posts sharing them, do not explain...

www.reuters.com

Bottom line is is as @Beachbummer says.....when you have as high a % of the population vaccinated as the UK does, you have to factor that into your equations.

 

[Julian]

@Julian

Did Evil sports get banned?

Not that I am aware of. I haven't looked back through posts, but I have seen some of his posts "unapproved" as they literally added no value and one I saw was literally "stirring the pot" - which is why we "warn" people. If he got "temporarily banned", it could be because he reached the predetermined "Warning" limit that is published in our warning post. That is something the forum does automatically when you reach those preset levels.

 

[scbruet]

Gotcha...I was reading only one row there. So after a tiny bit of research here, the conclusion you make is invalid. Yes...it sure seems on the surface that you are better off being unvaccinated when it comes to deaths doesn't it? But that simply isn't what is at play here.

Post misrepresents data from Public Health England report on vaccine efficacy

CLAIM: Data from Public Health England on the coronavirus delta variant shows that patients are more than 745% more likely to die after two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine than unvaccinated patients.

apnews.com

Fact Check-Data from Public Health England does not undermine role of COVID-19 vaccines

U.S. Republican Senator Ron Johnson used health data gathered in England to claim more vaccinated people have been seriously affected by the Delta COVID-19 variant than the unvaccinated. Johnson's statements, and subsequent social media posts sharing them, do not explain...

www.reuters.com

Bottom line is is as @Beachbummer says.....when you have as high a % of the population vaccinated as the UK does, you have to factor that into your equations.

That makes sense. So the data is real, it just really misses the full story.

The math used to interpret the data in the Twitter post “doesn’t make sense,” Cennimo said. “You have no idea how comparable the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups are. It’s not a controlled group. We don’t know who had cancer, who was immunocompromised.”

Really sad that a US senator is sharing that interpretation, that he knows isn't correct.

 

[Julian]

Here is some quick math (I approximated the vaccine rates for the UK-its in the ballpark):



So the Raw percentage is what people are alarmed by - it is simple math...but bad logic. The "Population %" column is what you need to think about - 3.5 times more likely to die if you are unvaccinated. Or if you want to make it sound more impressive 350% more likely

Bottom line....deaths in the UK are way down due to the vaccination rate! WOOT!!!! Spread is down. Things are looking better.

Now all we need to do is follow their lead.

Same for Northern India by the way. I talked to one of my managers there yesterday, and they are massively increasing vaccination rates, testing, and deaths are way down. They are also:

• Preventing interstate travel unless you have a negative rPCR test (Air travel, trains and even roads!)
• Focusing vaccination drives in populated areas (where spread is easier/faster).
• There is very little vaccine push back - they saw the death toll and reacted fast....now have something like 4-5 vaccine makers in play.

 

[Lurch]

Gotcha...I was reading only one row there. So after a tiny bit of research here, the conclusion you make is invalid. Yes...it sure seems on the surface that you are better off being unvaccinated when it comes to deaths doesn't it? But that simply isn't what is at play here.

Post misrepresents data from Public Health England report on vaccine efficacy

CLAIM: Data from Public Health England on the coronavirus delta variant shows that patients are more than 745% more likely to die after two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine than unvaccinated patients.

apnews.com

Fact Check-Data from Public Health England does not undermine role of COVID-19 vaccines

U.S. Republican Senator Ron Johnson used health data gathered in England to claim more vaccinated people have been seriously affected by the Delta COVID-19 variant than the unvaccinated. Johnson's statements, and subsequent social media posts sharing them, do not explain...

www.reuters.com

Bottom line is is as @Beachbummer says.....when you have as high a % of the population vaccinated as the UK does, you have to factor that into your equations.

This study focused on the Delta variant, and included the total number of reported/verified (I hope) Delta cases. I offered no conclusion on the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing cases. Only that of the verified Delta cases, more vaccinated people died than non-vaxxed. Keep doing those tiny bits of research.

 

[Julian]

This study focused on the Delta variant, and included the total number of reported/verified (I hope) Delta cases. I offered no conclusion on the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing cases. Only that of the verified Delta cases, more vaccinated people died than non-vaxxed. Keep doing those tiny bits of research.

Correct, you offered no conclusion, but did say:

Interesting data as well out of the UK, showing an almost 2x higher death rate among fully vaccinated with Delta than partial/non-vaxxed.

this is incorrect. It isn't a 2x higher death "RATE" it is a 3.5 times LOWER death rate.

Your "conclusion" (2x higher death rate" is wrong. Bad logic.

 

[Bizywk]

Not that I am aware of. I haven't looked back through posts, but I have seen some of his posts "unapproved" as they literally added no value and one I saw was literally "stirring the pot" - which is why we "warn" people. If he got "temporarily banned", it could be because he reached the predetermined "Warning" limit that is published in our warning post. That is something the forum does automatically when you reach those preset levels.

Kudos for maintaining an environment of respect which allows civil debate of differing viewpoints.

The system is blocking conversations to him. His last few posts don't seem to have violated any terms of service. Trolling is bad, but some might confuse being a "Devil's Advocate" with Pot Stirring. Gen George S. Patton always said "If everyone is thinking alike, then someone isn't thinking."

 

[adrianp89]

Kudos for maintaining an environment of respect which allows civil debate of differing viewpoints.

The system is blocking conversations to him. His last few posts don't seem to have violated any terms of service. Trolling is bad, but some might confuse being a "Devil's Advocate" with Pot Stirring. Gen George S. Patton always said "If everyone is thinking alike, then someone isn't thinking."

Yeah I saw nothing that should have triggered the warning system.

 

[Beachbummer]

In confirmed cases, not total population. I see I didn't make that distinction.

I don't think that's a valid decision point... You get sick much less, but from those that get sick, then they are more likely to die....

Example of pretend sickness...

20,000 population 50% vaccination rate
Unvcaccinated 100 get sick 10 die
Vaccinated 15 get sick 3 die...

twice as likely to die once vaccinated if you got sick... (1:5 instead of 1:10)

How should that information influence your decision making?

Or, what did you mean to highlight or point out from that info...Maybe I totally missed your intended point.

I read the compare needs to be made to the universe, not only those that got sick.

 

[Lurch]

I don't think that's a valid decision point... You get sick much less, but from those that get sick, then they are more likely to die....

Example of pretend sickness...

20,000 population 50% vaccination rate
Unvcaccinated 100 get sick 10 die
Vaccinated 15 get sick 3 die...

twice as likely to die once vaccinated if you got sick... (1:5 instead of 1:10)

How should that information influence your decision making?

Or, what did you mean to highlight or point out from that info...Maybe I totally missed your intended point.

I read the compare needs to be made to the universe, not only those that got sick.

It doesn't and hasn't influenced my decision making - We're all vaxxed in the Lurch house, yet 2/3 of us are positive (I suspect I have a superior immune system).

Yes, I understand the math and results of diminished cases with the vaccines. I just think it's interesting that of the confirmed delta cases in England, those that were vaccinated had a higher death rate than those who weren't. It could be due to the fact that they prioritized at-risk populations with the vaccine, and the heathier have been slower to get vaxxed...who knows. Its just information.

 

[Bruce]

It could be due to the fact that they prioritized at-risk populations with the vaccine, and the heathier have been slower to get vaxxed...who knows. Its just information.

These are the most reasonable reasonable sentences that I have read in your posts.

I also believe it to be quite accurate. Those with the weakest immune systems have typically been vaccinated first and responded least to those vaccinations.