AlCzervik wrote:
all it really takes is interest and a modicum of moderation.
Well, it certainly helps if the moderator also controls the membership 
...
If only...how different this place would be.
Covid-19 Discussion (moderated)
Sort:
"How much thinking does it take to realize that at whatever rate Covid spread or variant spread could 'circumvent' vaccination - that in those vastly preponderant instances when vaccination causes the immune system to escalate its defenses against the disease ... and then Kill it - then that person is then less likely to spread the disease?
How much thinking ?"
"Apparently he'll Never see anything he doesn't intend to."
Note: Reading the sheet will involve giving an email adress and requesting access from myself.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17DtxIjv_G-bfez7FtDndJU8VRXkvo4f5/edit#gid=1363900188
A spreadsheet I made using data from John Hopkins' research center and worldometer. Both were mentioned to be extremely reliable sources in one of the opening posts. It shows total cases, cases last 28 days, cases per million (for both), total deaths, deaths last 28 days, deaths per million (for both) on one side, and on the other side vaccination numbers (total doses administered, fully vaccinated and % of the population fully vaccinated. Its goal: Evaluate the effect of vaccination on transmission and as a collective protective weapon against COVID. The result shows absolutely no positive effect. So, it doesn't take much thinking to narrow down one's thoughts to that one holy sentence that is quoted in the beginning, but that sentence presents a contrast with the actual numbers:
chamo2074 wrote:
https://christine-cotton.1ere-page.fr/evaluation-essais-pfizer/
I found a really good presentation made by Christine Cotton, an expert biostatistician:
It talks about the evaluation of the methodological practices implemented in the Pfizer trials of its mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 with regard to Good Clinical Practices.
Here about Good Clinical Practices
She analyzed Pfizer documents regarding the BNT162b2 product that can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
She also makes a really good point about the need to have a methodology capable of identifying the elements likely to cause the results to deviate from their real value, these elements bear the name of bias.
She identified all of these elements:
1)
First bias shown:
- Possibility of an incomplete report by the patient or him being unable to evaluate his health state.
- Misevaluation of the health state by the staff member after a simple phone call or a teleconsultation.
- Use of antipyretics that are able to prevent the symptoms (they were used 3.5 times more in the vaccine group than in the placebo group).
- Suspected but unconfirmed symptomatic cases are twice more common in the vaccine group.
- No answer from the staff.
Here's a question mark showing a contrast between the results from the clinical trials and reality:
The reported COVID cases post-vaccination (failure of the vaccine) is 4.6% in the real-life scenario as shown in the post-marketing experience document. The clinical trial shows 0.044%, so about 100 times less.
Among those links I posted earlier, one clearly shows unconfirmed but suspected COVID cases:
Translating what she wrote:
"Dubious estimate of the true number of symptomatic cases of COVID-19
Conclusions on demonstrated vaccine efficacy unreliable
To address these multiple biases in counting symptomatic COVID-19 cases, it would have been much more appropriate to perform PCR tests not only for participants reporting symptoms but for the entire population included in the study. Clinical trial, which would also have detected asymptomatic COVID-19 which are also vectors of the disease.
This was a very surprising way of managing the participants in the clinical trial since any person with COVID-19, even asymptomatic, could infect those around them, thus transmitting a potentially fatal disease, which obviously did not worry the laboratory much.
Why did the lab not choose to perform regular PCR tests on all participants?
Why didn't the lab choose to do serology to check if the participant had COVID-19?
Any efficacy demonstrated on the primary endpoint chosen cannot claim to demonstrate that the vaccine prevents the transmission of COVID-19, see Opinion of HAS and ANSM December 2020
"Without demonstrated impact on transmission"
'Effective vaccine for personal protection'
Any communication aimed at promoting vaccination on the basis of different arguments is therefore not supported by any statistical or scientific evidence. "
To be followed, I don't want the post to be too long.
https://christine-cotton.1ere-page.fr/expertise-in-english/
I found an english version, no need for me then just check it out.
chamo2074 wrote:
"How much thinking does it take to realize that at whatever rate Covid spread or variant spread could 'circumvent' vaccination - that in those vastly preponderant instances when vaccination causes the immune system to escalate its defenses against the disease ... and then Kill it - then that person is then less likely to spread the disease?
How much thinking ?"
"Apparently he'll Never see anything he doesn't intend to."
A spreadsheet I made using data from John Hopkins' research center and worldometer. Both were mentioned to be extremely reliable sources in one of the opening posts. It shows total cases, cases last 28 days, cases per million (for both), total deaths, deaths last 28 days, deaths per million (for both) on one side, and on the other side vaccination numbers (total doses administered, fully vaccinated and % of the population fully vaccinated. Its goal: Evaluate the effect of vaccination on transmission and as a collective protective weapon against COVID. The result shows absolutely no positive effect. So, it doesn't take much thinking to narrow down one's thoughts to that one holy sentence that is quoted in the beginning, but that sentence presents a contrast with the actual numbers:
Please put a warning note before/above this GoogleDocs link that makes it clear that reading it will involve giving an Email address and whether you will have access to those Email addresses. This just brings it up to the level of most website signups that allow people to see what they are getting into, and it's not your fault, but since GoogleDocs leaves this vague and it's your personal spreadsheet you want people to see, it falls to you in this case 
.
Hmm, can you find a different solution?
Like is there a way to copy the excel sheet?
chamo2074 wrote:
Hmm, can you find a different solution?
Like is there a way to copy the excel sheet?
I'm not looking for a solution, I want you to label this link for others who might click on the link and then be wondering "why is it asking for my Email address and what does that mean?" (and it helps for them to know this before they gets asked for it). It's standard boilerplate on most websites, but GoogleDocs is geared more towards shared/collaborative work online, not for publishing, and so does not inform people. I'm asking you to make up that gap.
You could also format and embed the data here with HTML, which would remove any such issue. That I cannot help much with except to say that Ctrl-A usually selects a whole document. But once you try to copy it, it may require a bunch of editing to make it presentable.
Apr 25, 2022
0
#3828
There is a little triangle at the top of the page between row labels (numbers) and the column labels (letters) click on that and you select the whole page. Copy, go to new page, and paste.
Thanks. I tried that actually but it is not presentable if I do it this way.
I'll try just posting pics to what's relevant possibly.
This is dam interesting...
https://qz.com/2159984/what-we-know-about-why-some-people-never-get-covid-19/?utm_source=YPL
About disinformation and misinformation. I just came around this actually:
https://twitter.com/ DowdEdward/status/ 1520191130201059328?s=20&t=p- zo9qN_mxTN0oXOe1XntQ
Absolutely hilarious, that I was being accused of spreading "the worst misinformation in this thread". The worst misinformation that'll ever be seen about COVID is from the mouth of people like Biden, Fauci and Gates. And yes this is 'dangerous misinformation'. They told people they were able to go into indoor and outdoor areas without masks which may have caused insane spread of the disease and the death of millions of people instead of their survival.
Insanity in this thread around me telling a vaccinated person "they were not going to catch it if they follow guidelines as well, not worrying about unvaccinated colleagues", and they told people they weren't going to catch it even if they don't follow guidelines.
chamo2074 wrote:
About disinformation and misinformation. I just came around this actually:
[link removed]
Absolutely hilarious, that I was being accused of spreading "the worst misinformation in this thread". The worst misinformation that'll ever be seen about COVID is from the mouth of people like Biden, Fauci and Gates. And yes this is 'dangerous misinformation'. They told people they were able to go into indoor and outdoor areas without masks which may have caused insane spread of the disease and the death of millions of people instead of their survival.
Insanity in this thread around me telling a vaccinated person "they were not going to catch it if they follow guidelines as well, not worrying about unvaccinated colleagues", and they told people they weren't going to catch it even if they don't follow guidelines.
Your link doesn't work, but I did watch the "montage". I encourage everyone to stay far away from edited snippets strung together this way. Energetic music and a barrage of out of context and undated sound bites does not an argument make...
Are you suggesting that what was said in the video wasn't actually said in the way it was said? I am pretty sure most were under the illusion that these things were true. Plus, even if it's outdated, it falls under the mentioned concept of 'dangerous misinformation'.
I don't normally post dangerous misinformation but its Sunday, so its good for a laugh. https://www.yahoo.com/news/covid-truthers-found-pandemic-freak-225020496.html
chamo2074 wrote:
Are you suggesting that what was said in the video wasn't actually said in the way it was said? I am pretty sure most were under the illusion that these things were true. Plus, even if it's outdated, it falls under the mentioned concept of 'dangerous misinformation'.
Yes, and if somebody posted the information about how long Covid can last on surfaces from the 2nd week of the pandemic, that would now be "misinformation" as well.
As for whether "these things were true", there's not enough in those soundbites to make a judgment, which was my point...not to take edited clips strung together as meaningful.
I watched some of these passages on TV and what was said here was meant. There is no excuse for saying something like this even if less information was known at the time, because these people I'm quite sure have access to confidential and key information before everybody else. Besides, why make all of these statements persuading people to get the jab if you might end up looking like a fool? I also find it hard not to heavily question the credibility of people like this just like others end up losing all credibility because they try to take an initiative and prescript a drug when it's their job. I also find it hard not to heavily question what made them reach such conclusions.
I agree with you that clips like this aren't necessarily 'meaningful', but I wouldn't have posted it if it didn't reflect reality in some way: First, vaccines prevent transmission and you won't have to wear a mask. Next you might catch it but won't get hospitalized. Later you might but most likely won't die. Add that to it's not as effective against variants. And finally, vaccine immunity wains over time and you'll need a second, then third, then a shot every 4 months. And the pandemic is still not controlled and we're not back to normality yet.
chamo2074 wrote:
I watched some of these passages on TV and what was said here was meant. There is no excuse for saying something like this even if less information was known at the time, because these people I'm quite sure have access to confidential and key information before everybody else. Besides, why make all of these statements persuading people to get the jab if you might end up looking like a fool? I also find it hard not to heavily question the credibility of people like this just like others end up losing all credibility because they try to take an initiative and prescript a drug when it's their job. I also find it hard not to heavily question what made them reach such conclusions.
I agree with you that clips like this aren't necessarily 'meaningful', but I wouldn't have posted it if it didn't reflect reality in some way: First, vaccines prevent transmission and you won't have to wear a mask. Next you might catch it but won't get hospitalized. Later you might but most likely won't die. Add that to it's not as effective against variants. And finally, vaccine immunity wains over time and you'll need a second, then third, then a shot every 4 months. And the pandemic is still not controlled and we're not back to normality yet.
Your conclusions seem a little overreaching here:
- Vaccines do prevent transmission of viruses to varying degrees
- The Covid-19 vaccines do prevent hospitalization in most cases
- Dying after being vaccinated is far less likely than if you are not vaccinated
- Vaccine immunity has always waned over time to varying degrees, which doesn't mean vaccine providers might not try to milk the situation, but it's not like some new situation. I just got a new Hep-B vaccine this year after I went for my shingles vaccine and they told me the bloodwork showed I had no Hep-B antibodies anymore...
As for making statements and possibly looking like fools...well, these people shown in the clips must make comments, that's their job. If they said nothing, the hue and cry would be much greater . They don't have the luxury of waiting for hindsight that we often enjoy in this thread.
"- Vaccines do prevent transmission of viruses to varying degrees"
Well, the 'degree' they told us about was "going maskless in indoor areas" and "not going to get infected". The positivity rate since the beginning of the pandemic according to this speaks for itself: https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiMTkzYjlkMjktZThkMi00NDFiLWE1NzUtNjhjN2UzYmVjOGM4IiwidCI6IjIwNTk5OGJhLWVkZjAtNDFlZi1iMzZjLTU2NWVkNjMxZGM5YyJ9
"- The Covid-19 vaccines do prevent hospitalization in most cases"
They do, but they clearly said, not going to get hospitalized. Reminds of something that happened here earlier.
"- Dying after being vaccinated is far less likely than if you are not vaccinated" No argument here, not related to the point discussed here but a little bracket I can't not open: Why mandate vaccines when some people are extremely unlikely to die anyway, and when vaccinated people are much less likely to die, why would you need everybody else to be vaccinated?
"- Vaccine immunity has always waned over time to varying degrees," Some vaccines are only needed for one or two shots. Flu vaccines are needed yearly. This one though:
"Effectiveness against symptomatic disease After 2 doses of the AstraZeneca Against the Omicron variant Starts at 45 to 50% (already disappointing, "To be approved, vaccines are required to have a high efficacy rate of 50% or above." Drops to almost no effect, 25 weeks after the second dose With 2 doses of Pfizer or Moderna Effectiveness dropped from around 65 to 70% Down to around 15% by 25 weeks after the second dose Two to 4 weeks after a booster dose Effectiveness ranges from around 60 to 75% Dropping to almost no effect from 20+ weeks after the booster Effectiveness against hospitalization Alpha and Delta variants Higher levels of protection against hospitalization with all vaccines Omicron 18 to 64-year-olds All COVID-19 cases admitted via emergency care VE after a booster peaked at 82.4% Dropped to 53.6% by 15+ weeks after the booster Needed oxygen/ventilated VE 97.1% down to 75.9%"
You said it, there are different degrees. But this is an extremely high degree of waning. You need one every 15-25 weeks? And who knows how effective and long-lasting the 4th dose will be. The pandemic is supposed to be controlled with this? People are being mistreated/losing their jobs because they haven't taken this jab, when it possibly could have been unauthorized!
"As for making statements and possibly looking like fools...well, these people shown in the clips must make comments, that's their job."
They didn't have to make statements as big as these. They could have stayed flexible, and not given us false promises and absolutely inaccurate information to convince us about getting the shots. And again, where exactly did they get this information/make these conclusions from? Wherever/whatever that is, is certainly unreliable at this point.
chamo2074 wrote:
"- Vaccines do prevent transmission of viruses to varying degrees"
Well, the 'degree' they told us about was "going maskless in indoor areas" and "not going to get infected". The positivity rate since the beginning of the pandemic according to this speaks for itself: https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiMTkzYjlkMjktZThkMi00NDFiLWE1NzUtNjhjN2UzYmVjOGM4IiwidCI6IjIwNTk5OGJhLWVkZjAtNDFlZi1iMzZjLTU2NWVkNjMxZGM5YyJ9
"- The Covid-19 vaccines do prevent hospitalization in most cases"
They do, but they clearly said, not going to get hospitalized. Reminds of something that happened here earlier.
"- Dying after being vaccinated is far less likely than if you are not vaccinated" No argument here, not related to the point discussed here but a little bracket I can't not open: Why mandate vaccines when some people are extremely unlikely to die anyway, and when vaccinated people are much less likely to die, why would you need everybody else to be vaccinated?
"- Vaccine immunity has always waned over time to varying degrees," Some vaccines are only needed for one or two shots. Flu vaccines are needed yearly. This one though:
"Effectiveness against symptomatic disease After 2 doses of the AstraZeneca Against the Omicron variant Starts at 45 to 50% (already disappointing, "To be approved, vaccines are required to have a high efficacy rate of 50% or above." Drops to almost no effect, 25 weeks after the second dose With 2 doses of Pfizer or Moderna Effectiveness dropped from around 65 to 70% Down to around 15% by 25 weeks after the second dose Two to 4 weeks after a booster dose Effectiveness ranges from around 60 to 75% Dropping to almost no effect from 20+ weeks after the booster Effectiveness against hospitalization Alpha and Delta variants Higher levels of protection against hospitalization with all vaccines Omicron 18 to 64-year-olds All COVID-19 cases admitted via emergency care VE after a booster peaked at 82.4% Dropped to 53.6% by 15+ weeks after the booster Needed oxygen/ventilated VE 97.1% down to 75.9%"
You said it, there are different degrees. But this is an extremely high degree of waning. You need one every 15-25 weeks? And who knows how effective and long-lasting the 4th dose will be. The pandemic is supposed to be controlled with this? People are being mistreated/losing their jobs because they haven't taken this jab, when it possibly could have been unauthorized!
"As for making statements and possibly looking like fools...well, these people shown in the clips must make comments, that's their job."
They didn't have to make statements as big as these. They could have stayed flexible, and not given us false promises and absolutely inaccurate information to convince us about getting the shots. And again, where exactly did they get this information/make these conclusions from? Wherever/whatever that is, is certainly unreliable at this point.
Who is Fabian Mathieu? This seems like someone's personal site.
The Omicron numbers only tell the story for the later variant, which is more transmissible but less deadly, and boosters specifically targeting Omicron are not due until August or after...so this is fairly misleading. But we should never have reached Omicron, really, and the world is going to have to get much better at reacting to viruses like Covid-19 immediately and definitively.
btickler wrote:
chamo2074 wrote:
"- Vaccines do prevent transmission of viruses to varying degrees"
Well, the 'degree' they told us about was "going maskless in indoor areas" and "not going to get infected". The positivity rate since the beginning of the pandemic according to this speaks for itself: https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiMTkzYjlkMjktZThkMi00NDFiLWE1NzUtNjhjN2UzYmVjOGM4IiwidCI6IjIwNTk5OGJhLWVkZjAtNDFlZi1iMzZjLTU2NWVkNjMxZGM5YyJ9
"- The Covid-19 vaccines do prevent hospitalization in most cases"
They do, but they clearly said, not going to get hospitalized. Reminds of something that happened here earlier.
"- Dying after being vaccinated is far less likely than if you are not vaccinated" No argument here, not related to the point discussed here but a little bracket I can't not open: Why mandate vaccines when some people are extremely unlikely to die anyway, and when vaccinated people are much less likely to die, why would you need everybody else to be vaccinated?
"- Vaccine immunity has always waned over time to varying degrees," Some vaccines are only needed for one or two shots. Flu vaccines are needed yearly. This one though:
"Effectiveness against symptomatic disease After 2 doses of the AstraZeneca Against the Omicron variant Starts at 45 to 50% (already disappointing, "To be approved, vaccines are required to have a high efficacy rate of 50% or above." Drops to almost no effect, 25 weeks after the second dose With 2 doses of Pfizer or Moderna Effectiveness dropped from around 65 to 70% Down to around 15% by 25 weeks after the second dose Two to 4 weeks after a booster dose Effectiveness ranges from around 60 to 75% Dropping to almost no effect from 20+ weeks after the booster Effectiveness against hospitalization Alpha and Delta variants Higher levels of protection against hospitalization with all vaccines Omicron 18 to 64-year-olds All COVID-19 cases admitted via emergency care VE after a booster peaked at 82.4% Dropped to 53.6% by 15+ weeks after the booster Needed oxygen/ventilated VE 97.1% down to 75.9%"
You said it, there are different degrees. But this is an extremely high degree of waning. You need one every 15-25 weeks? And who knows how effective and long-lasting the 4th dose will be. The pandemic is supposed to be controlled with this? People are being mistreated/losing their jobs because they haven't taken this jab, when it possibly could have been unauthorized!
"As for making statements and possibly looking like fools...well, these people shown in the clips must make comments, that's their job."
They didn't have to make statements as big as these. They could have stayed flexible, and not given us false promises and absolutely inaccurate information to convince us about getting the shots. And again, where exactly did they get this information/make these conclusions from? Wherever/whatever that is, is certainly unreliable at this point.
Who is Fabian Mathieu? This seems like someone's personal site.
The Omicron numbers only tell the story for the later variant, which is more transmissible but less deadly, and boosters specifically targeting Omicron are not due until August or after...so this is fairly misleading. But we should never have reached Omicron, really, and the world is going to have to get much better at reacting to viruses like Covid-19 immediately and definitively.
"Power BI is an interactive data visualization software product developed by Microsoft with primary focus on business intelligence. It is part of the Microsoft Power Platform."
It utilizes data from drees which is extremely reliable from May 2021 so it does not only take omicron-related statistics into consideration.
Omicron is the current variant, and only new variants coming are considered omicron sub-variants. They're getting more transmissible but also much less deadly. If the vaccine used to be efficient, the truth is that it's not that efficient anymore with the omicron variant. Why exactly should we never have reached omicron? Was the virus supposed to get eradicated with better gesture? Maybe questioning the gesture of the pandemic is reasonable.
"Boosters specifically targeting Omicron are not due until August or after...so this is fairly misleading"
Well, at the same time, people are jobless because they didn't inject a vaccine that's experimental and non-specific to the current wave. In France they're considering implementing 'placement' which allows the authorities to move unvaccinated people from their houses. The atrocities we're seeing is insane. If COVID caused damage, this is causing as much damage. 5M deaths? I wonder how many people are going to find themselves jobless because they refused a vaccine to protect people from a virus that currently has a 0.1% fatality rate (last 28 days according to John Hopkins, probably even less because of under-reported asymptomatic cases) and that is not doing a good job at all at preventing transmission.
BTW.....I have no problem with how btickler is running his thread.....or how Elroch is running HIS thread......or Hession Warrior. To keep a good thread running takes hard work and time.
all it really takes is interest and a modicum of moderation.