Covid-19 vaccine

[notimp]

Wow, what a bunch of pretty, fake graphs. Look at you, such a good little sheep parroting the lügenpresse's talking points!

And the graphs you posted (you posted a 'study' that wasnt linked, but that I linked to that was a bunch of graphs 'interestgly' marked, on a partisan blog, that came into existance in august of this year), also coming from state institutions - arent fake?

All that I'm trying to teach you is - that you can stick to your graphs. The ones you posted.

But that you dont read 'plateaus' or 'linear increases' (different from exponential), as "masks didnt work" - because something worked there.
And something, likely wasnt tight lockdowns of entire cities, and something also wasnt 'herd immunity reached' (at least not for large populations), because that would be represented by a spike, and a sharp decline.

So using _your graphs_ - whoever came to the conclution, that they were _proof_ that masks dont work - didnt know jack.

Plateaus at 10% of population infected (back when masks were made mandetory) dont come into existance because of nothing. So something worked.

For a while. Until winter.

And even in winter - said something is working again (looking at the US infection graph), at a higher case rate - once 'exponential infection rate of people you interact with in closed rooms without masks' stopped. The US is holding a plateau right now - at 20-30% of population infected, which isnt herd immunity.

So whats responsible for that? Jesus?

 

[gene0915]

And the graphs you posted (you posted a 'study' that wasnt linked, but that I linked to that was a bunch of graphs 'interestgly' marked, on a partisan blog, that came into existance in august of this year), also coming from state institutions - arent fake?

All that I'm trying to teach you is - that you can stick to your graphs. The ones you posted.

But that you dont read 'plateaus' or 'linear increases' (different from exponential), as "masks didnt work" - because something worked there.
And something, likely wasnt tight lockdowns of entire cities, and something also wasnt 'herd immunity reached' (at least not for large populations), because that would be represented by a spike, and a sharp decline.

So using _your graphs_ - whoever came to the conclution, that they were _proof_ that masks dont work - didnt know jack.

Plateaus at 10% of population infected (back when masks were made mandetory) dont come into existance because of nothing. So something worked.

For a while. Until winter.

And even in winter - said something is working again (looking at the US infection graph), at a higher case rate - once 'exponential infection rate of people you interact with in closed rooms without masks' stopped. The US is holding a plateau right now - at 20-30% of population infected, which isnt herd immunity.

So whats responsible for that? Jesus?

Your post makes zero sense.

Said it before and I'll say it again:

Ignorant liberal: ..... tens of thousands have successfully taken the vaccine and only a handful of people died or had adverse reaction....... oh freaking well. A few deaths per 1K is AOK. Get that vaccine out there!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111!!111 If people don't want the vaccine, we should shoot them in the head to save them from this virus that is so deadly you need a test to know whether you have it and the survival rate is only 99.8%!!!!!!!!!!111111111

Well informed, level headed person: ..... Hey liberal, why do you want to force everyone to get an experimental vaccine (that could possibly kill them or cause them great harm 1, 5, 10 years from now) and destroy the economy over a virus that is only responsible for killing 0.10% of the population? (Based off CDC numbers and census data...... if you can trust the numbers.)

To a liberal, logic and numbers only matter when it suits them. Low deaths from the COVID vaccine is safe to ignore. Low deaths from the virus is a reason to burn the country to the ground.

 

[notimp]

Your post makes zero sense.

Said it before and I'll say it again:

Ignorant liberal: ..... tens of thousands have successfully taken the vaccine and only a handful of people died or had adverse reaction....... oh freaking well. A few deaths per 1K is AOK. Get that vaccine out there!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111!!111 If people don't want the vaccine, we should shoot them in the head to save them from this virus that is so deadly you need a test to know whether you have it and the survival rate is only 99.8%!!!!!!!!!!111111111

Well informed, level headed person: ..... Hey liberal, why do you want to force everyone to get an experimental vaccine (that could possibly kill them or cause them great harm 1, 5, 10 years from now) and destroy the economy over a virus that is only responsible for killing 0.10% of the population? (Based off CDC numbers and census data...... if you can trust the numbers.)

To a liberal, logic and numbers only matter when it suits them. Low deaths from the COVID vaccine is safe to ignore. Low deaths from the virus is a reason to burn the country to the ground.

Yes correct. Not only ignorant liberals, but the position of anyone managing a state - that cant look at individual cases.

Also vaccines currently dont have much impact on any of those graphs. You still have too few people getting access to them.
-

And if you are only focusing on individual cases, then Peter got a pimple, because they had to wear a mask, and Marry got adverse effects from her vaccination - but thanks to vaccinations (and btw not wearing masks, but masks 'slowed down' the propagation), the thing that by end of january, in the US will have produced as many deaths as the entirety of US deaths in WW2, will stop.

An noone looking at numbers cares about Mary and her adverse effects, if those are shown to be small (low) enough compared to the amount of people vaccinated (getting immunity without becoming sick).

Thats the sad truth.

 

[gene0915]

Yes correct. Not only ignorant liberals, but the position of anyone managing a state - that cant look at individual cases.

Also vaccines currently dont have much impact on any of those graphs. You still have too few people getting access to them.
-

And if you are only focusing on individual cases, then Peter got a pimple, because they had to wear a mask, and Marry got adverse effects from her vaccination - but thanks to vaccinations (and btw not wearing masks, but masks 'slowed down' the propagation), the thing that by end of january, in the US will have produced as many deaths as the entirety of US deaths in WW2, will stop.

An noone looking at numbers cares about Mary and her adverse effects, if those are shown to be small (low) enough compared to the amount of people vaccinated (getting immunity without becoming sick).

Thats the sad truth.

Imagine a world where people were given all the data (good and bad) and left to make their own choices? If they want to mask up or get an experimental vaccine, go for it! If stores don't want to require anyone to wear a mask, then don't. If people want to go into a store but are afraid to walk into a store that DOESN'T require everyone to wear a mask, they could shop elsewhere.

Is that the world you want or do you want a world where highly infectious disease experts, like Bill Gates, are given airtime to opine about how we need to live our lives and watch small business left and right permanently close down?

 

[notimp]

Imagine a world where people were given all the data (good and bad) and left to make their own choices? If they want to mask up or get an experimental vaccine, go for it! If stores don't want to require anyone to wear a mask, then don't. If people want to go into a store but are afraid to walk into a store that DOESN'T require everyone to wear a mask, they could shop elsewhere.

Is that the world you want or do you want a world where highly infectious disease experts, like Bill Gates, are given airtime to opine about how we need to live our lives and watch small business left and right permanently close down?

Also - one more try to get over the 'what you say doesnt make sense' part.

If one person infects three people you get exponential growth - that if nothing is done, stops at 60-70% of population infected. (Then it runs out of fuel, because of herd immunity). Still not exactly correct, because there are other limiting factors, that also could lead to a plateau after a while - like "everyone in a state has it, and other state closed borders", or f.e. that you arent dealing with exponential growth, but something 'close to that' - because f.e. 'people became more careful'.

Linear growth occurs, when every infected person infects 1.something other people.

Curves look as follows:

So if you reduce the infection rate from lets say 2.5 people infected by every person infected to 1.2, you still have growth (curve didnt go down), but whatever you did - worked.

If you would reduce it to 0.9 (which means persons stays at home for sure..., and others arent infecting 2.5 people) you would first see slow decline.

Now - what happened in winter?

Case infection rates suddenly shot up to exponential again (one person infecting 3), then plateaued at different levels. (In europe at lower ones, because of stricter curfew measures), but plateauing

==

src: https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/no...ng-begin-dropping/3PZYKKLA7FDCFJLSXFBGTPF5GI/

still means a significant change in infection rate, to about 1.something
-

Now - what did cause the exponential rise, when winter started? Masks not working (flat reduction of infection rate) - or most people (lets say 3x for no reason) spending their entire day in closed, but heated rooms?

The 'flat increase' in 'masks not performing as they should have', doesnt explain an increase in infection rate by 3 or 4 times. So that wasnt masks.

So correct: Mask dint prevent 95% of infections (largely because people didnt use them all the time), but if they prevented 50%, or all measures together did, you would see a plateau. And an increase by 300% once winter started - cant be explained by masks not working. Its to much of an increase - so infection rate spiked to 3-5 people again, not because of masks, but because people in smaller rooms, likely not wearing them now infected 3-5 other people again. But that plateaued again - which means it ran out of fuel (so something worked again).

And it wasnt herd immunity, because then you would see a rather sharp decline in new infections (hence the 'immunity' part), same with lockdowns.

If you dont want to 'believe' me (because we have an argument), here - read this:
https://www.pnas.org/content/117/37/22684

Its more complicated, but also more accurate, than what I'm telling you.

 

[wartutor]

Also - one more try to get over the 'what you say doesnt make sense' part.

If one person infects three people you get exponential growth - that if nothing is done, stops at 60-70% of population infected. (Then it runs out of fuel, because of herd immunity). Still not exactly correct, because there are other limiting factors, that also could lead to a plateau after a while - like "everyone in a state has it, and other state closed borders", or f.e. that you arent dealing with exponential growth, but something 'close to that' - because f.e. 'people became more careful'.

Linear growth occurs, when every infected person infects 1.something other people.

Curves look as follows:

So if you reduce the infection rate from lets say 2.5 people infected by every person infected to 1.2, you still have growth (curve didnt go down), but whatever you did - worked.

If you would reduce it to 0.9 (which means persons stays at home for sure..., and others arent infecting 2.5 people) you would first see slow decline.

Now - what happened in winter?

Case infection rates suddenly shot up to exponential again (one person infecting 3), then plateaued at different levels. (In europe at lower ones, because of stricter curfew measures), but plateauing

==

src: https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/no...ng-begin-dropping/3PZYKKLA7FDCFJLSXFBGTPF5GI/

still means a significant change in infection rate, to about 1.something
-

Now - what did cause the exponential rise, when winter started? Masks not working (flat reduction of infection rate) - or most people (lets say 3x for no reason) spending their entire day in closed, but heated rooms?

The 'flat increase' in 'masks not performing as they should have', doesnt explain an increase in infection rate by 3 or 4 times. So that wasnt masks.

So correct: Mask dint prevent 95% of infections (largely because people didnt use them all the time), but if they prevented 50%, or all measures together did, you would see a plateau. And an increase by 300% once winter started - cant be explained by masks not working. Its to much of an increase - so infection rate spiked to 3-5 people again, not because of masks, but because people in smaller rooms, likely not wearing them now infected 3-5 other people again. But that plateaued again - which means it ran out of fuel (so something worked again).

And it wasnt herd immunity, because then you would see a rather sharp decline in new infections (hence the 'immunity' part), same with lockdowns.

If you dont want to 'believe' me (because we have an argument), here - read this:
https://www.pnas.org/content/117/37/22684

Its more complicated, but also more accurate, than what I'm telling you.

Mostly what caused the spike in fall/winter months was schools opening up, (I don't know why the fuck they even did this other than $.) Then to top it off they also let schools participate in sports. Spreading it from town to town at an exponential rate. (An even more stupid thing to do than just opening schools.) They let it spread made the numbers look bad before the election.

 

[notimp]

Mostly what caused the spike in fall/winter months was schools opening up

Also fine as an explanation. Simply - more people in closed rooms. Often without masks, sometimes with... (If you except mask reduction potential not by 95% but closer to 50% if both infected and non infected people were wearing them, you still could get those 'spike' - which ultimately wasnt a spike - but an exponetial increase (something changed) into a plateu (something is limiting it again, and it isnt heard immunity (immunity would mean decline).)

Its easier to explain this with "in winter every person infected, also infected their entire family (no one is wearing masks all day at home)" - than with "schools are now open again" - but yes ultimately that (more people in heated rooms) was what caused the exponential incline in winter.

Could have been schools entirely, you can have that. (For arguments sake.)

But that it went to exponential again, is 'some change' (more people infected by one person again) that was more than just 'masks failing'.

 

[gene0915]

Mostly what caused the spike in fall/winter months was schools opening up, (I don't know why the fuck they even did this other than $.) Then to top it off they also let schools participate in sports. Spreading it from town to town at an exponential rate. (An even more stupid thing to do than just opening schools.) They let it spread made the numbers look bad before the election.

Schools require staff and students to wear masks at all time while in class so how could opening up schools cause a spike? Unless..... masks are useless? Or maybe the sports are to blame? Fine, ban all sports. I'm fine with that. But if they do that, and schools STILL see spikes, then what?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Also fine as an explanation. Simply - more people in closed rooms. Often without masks, sometimes with... (If you except mask reduction potential not by 95% but closer to 50% if both infected and non infected people were wearing them, you still could get those 'spike' - which ultimately wasnt a spike - but an exponetial increase (something changed) into a plateu (something is limiting it again, and it isnt heard immunity (immunity would mean decline).)

Its easier to explain this with "in winter every person infected, also infected their entire family (no one is wearing masks all day at home)" - than with "schools are now open again" - but yes ultimately that (more people in heated rooms) was what caused the exponential incline in winter.

Could have been schools entirely, you can have that. (For arguments sake.)

But that it went to exponential again, is 'some change' (more people infected by one person again) that was more than just 'masks failing'.

This post, and your other one above, I get where you're coming from but unlike you, I don't believe ANY of the infection stats because the PCR test, which is what drives those numbers, is not accurate... especially without knowing the Ct.

Same for rates of death. Refer back to my old post about West Palm Beach, Florida where a motorcycle accident, gunshot to the head and falling off a ladder were all listed as COVID deaths. And you would be an ignorant fool to think that those 3 cases are the ONLY ONES where the cause of death was incorrectly listed as COVID.

Stop believing the narrative, they are pushing an agenda.

 

[notimp]

Schools require staff and students to wear masks at all time while in class so how could opening up schools cause a spike? Unless..... masks are useless? Or maybe the sports are to blame? Fine, ban all sports. I'm fine with that. But if they do that, and schools STILL see spikes, then what?

Here - this is how Vandetbilt university is explaining it to parents in the schools scenario:

Contact investigations for SARS-CoV-2 have confirmed community transmission rates that are consistent with droplet and contact spread (household attack rates of 10%, health care and community attack rates of <1%, and R0 [the effective reproduction number, or average number of new infections caused by an infected individual during their infection] of 2-3),5 and much different than for airborne viral pathogens, such as varicella zoster virus or measles (household attack rates of 85%-90% and R0 of 10-18).

This implies that simple and easy-to-use barriers to respiratory droplets, along with hand hygiene and avoidance of touching the face, could help prevent community transmission when physical distancing and stay-at-home measures are relaxed or no longer possible. The 2 major options for such barriers are face masks and face shields.

This isnt entirely truthful, because its "houshold attack rates and community attack rates" - while preventative measures are taken, and also part of the transmission vector of covid is airborn (but one with much lower likelyhood than the droplet infection vector...) But they are essentially saying, that with masks in place and stay at home relaxed - you could end up at similar community infection rates..

src: https://webcache.googleusercontent....ulty-in-classrooms/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=at

 

[Windaga]

Most likely. My district isn't requiring them, though a lot of the teachers and faculty are going to get it. I usually don't get the flu shot, but if it makes my students and co-workers feel more comfortable, then I'll probably get it. Of course, I haven't discussed it with my partner, but our stances are pretty similar. My sister got hers a few days ago, as her hospital is requiring active staff to get it. She's doing well, though she did say she felt crappy the very next day.

 

[cubes]

Hell to the Naw

 

[notimp]

Better summery of how those curves are 'supposed' to develop.
https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication Files/20-112_4278525d-ccf2-4f8a-b564-2e95d0e7ca5b.pdf

Because - even if nothing is done, growth is not supposed to sustain an 'exponential rise' forever.

R = reproduction rate (how many people does one person infect)
D = the average number of days between the moment that someone is infected and the moment that they infect another person (specific for Covid 19)

 

[wartutor]

Schools require staff and students to wear masks at all time while in class so how could opening up schools cause a spike? Unless..... masks are useless? Or maybe the sports are to blame? Fine, ban all sports. I'm fine with that. But if they do that, and schools STILL see spikes, then what?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



This post, and your other one above, I get where you're coming from but unlike you, I don't believe ANY of the infection stats because the PCR test, which is what drives those numbers, is not accurate... especially without knowing the Ct.

Same for rates of death. Refer back to my old post about West Palm Beach, Florida where a motorcycle accident, gunshot to the head and falling off a ladder were all listed as COVID deaths. And you would be an ignorant fool to think that those 3 cases are the ONLY ONES where the cause of death was incorrectly listed as COVID.

Stop believing the narrative, they are pushing an agenda.

I don't know about you but it's damn near impossible to get all the adults to wear masks (and when they do most dont do it correctly) to have students do it and do it right gets into the impossible area, especially the younger you get. As soon as schools opened here numbers exploded (was relatively low here before that) its a known fact schools are super spreaders (whether it's the flu, common cold, or any other transmitted disease) adding sports made it worse. (Allowed wrestling and tackle football both high contact sports but "hey we don't allow them to shake hands afterwards so it's all OK. At least 2 times a week we would hear on the radio of a football team having to quit playing for 2 weeks because half (or more) of the team tested positive. They practiced social distancing (then packed 30+ kids on the bus to and from school) they never should of opened until a vaccine was out and administered.

 

[notimp]

I don't know about you but it's damn near impossible to get all the adults to wear masks (and when they do most dont do it correctly) to have students do it and do it right gets into the impossible area, especially the younger you get. As soon as schools opened here numbers exploded (was relatively low here before that) its a known fact schools are super spreaders (whether it's the flu, common cold, or any other transmitted disease) adding sports made it worse. (Allowed wrestling and tackle football both high contact sports but "hey we don't allow them to shake hands afterwards so it's all OK. At least 2 times a week we would hear on the radio of a football team having to quit playing for 2 weeks because half (or more) of the team tested positive. They practiced social distancing (then packed 30+ kids on the bus to and from school) they never should of opened until a vaccine was out and administered.

Here read this.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020...could-lead-to-much-faster-spread-of-covid-19/

Dont focus in on 'high income' vs 'low income' countries, at the first chance, but just read it for the two scenarios.

 

[NeSchn]

One week update. My arm hasn't fallen off yet, it started to get sore the first evening I got the shot, it amplified the next day, it was nothing unmanageable, and the pain was basically gone by Friday.

Not sure if related or not to the vaccine, but the back of my eyes were hurting from Friday until sometime Sunday evening. Maybe it was caused by staring at the computer screen as I work at the computer from Wednesday til Sunday, or stress, or it could've been the 5G receptors planting themselves into my eyes.

 

[Alexander1970]

And now ?

SARS-CoV-2-Variante B.1.1.7 is waiting in Front of the Door....

I am (still) not a Pessimist,but Vaccination is in my Opinion useless.....what helps a "Relief of Symptoms" when now "again" the Hospitals are getting overloaded and overrun with the Version 2.0 Patients...

It is maybe finally Time to see the Truth - we never will or can control this Virus.
I am not really a "good" believer,but I see it as God's "Holy Wrath".

We have mistreated,raped and abused this World long enough.
Maybe it is Time to say goodbye......

 

[leon315]

I've seen this thing a lot, and I can't agree more.

View attachment 238595

Just wondering, what is Six-feet?? Homo of Neanderthal?

 

[notimp]

I've seen this thing a lot, and I can't agree more.

If the masks work, why the six feet?
Because cloth and surgical masks dont filter the virus, they just filter mukus, meaning, there is an aerosol cloud around people, that could also lead to infections. Also - nobody believes, that most people are now washing their hands more regularely - so you better tell them, not to be all over each other - still as part of mukus based transmission prevention.

Basically, if mask damp, and people touch mask > mukus on hands, please do not shake hands.

If the six feet works, why the masks?
So you dont spit into the next persons face, while talking, so you reduce the volume of aerosols around any person - which prevents larger concentration of the virus in aerosols at places of mass gatherings. (subways, supermarkets, ...)

If both work -
Yes, now you are onto something..

- why the lockdowns?
Because masks reduce the likelyhood to transmit it by a flat amount. If that flat amount is not enough anymore (think - to prevent hospitals of getting overrun), harsher methods are implemented. Also both masks and distance rules work as well as peoples compliance to them. But lets not blame it on people - lets just call it what it is, both are just a flat reduction to infection rate - not a solution.

If all three work, why the rushed vaccine?
First, at least in europe not rushed in terms of testing, but rushed in terms of legal fasttracking (so the rubber stamping process after the review process is faster, funding was given out for free, financial risks of companies were bought up, ...)

Because its the solution. The thing that works (besides lockdowns, which are very costly), to drive the infection curves down to zero. Masks slowed propagation down, but sadly didnt eliminate contagion entirely.

(Certain kinds of masks would have, but they never were thinkable for large scale public use - people couldnt wear them all they, it would have reduced their effectiveness at work, and simply - they werent available in those numbers.)

If the vaccine is safe - why no liability clause?
Basically politicians taking legal risks away from companies, (For that they need to be fairly sure, that nothing bad happens at scale.) and onto themselves. By doing this they can ensure that rollout is faster. Also more risky - but its calculated risk. (Politicians betting their political careers on it.) Why do you want a faster rollout? Economic reasons.

Backbenches all better now?

 

[gene0915]

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopoliti...ter-receiving-first-dose-pfizer-covid-vaccine

One of the comments was pretty funny and spot on:

""We have to see if the vaccine was the cause of death." Interesting, I thought everyone that died did so from Covid. Fall out of a tree... died from Covid. Shark attack.... covid. Morbid obesity.... covid. Covid vaccine..... more research must be done."

 

[Rj.MoG]

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopoliti...ter-receiving-first-dose-pfizer-covid-vaccine

One of the comments was pretty funny and spot on:

""We have to see if the vaccine was the cause of death." Interesting, I thought everyone that died did so from Covid. Fall out of a tree... died from Covid. Shark attack.... covid. Morbid obesity.... covid. Covid vaccine..... more research must be done."

Sir i've linked some vital information below regarding the dangers of the covid vaccine that you might find interesting

https://www.clinical-partners.co.uk/for-adults/autism-and-aspergers/adult-autism-test