[quote]2600 bro wrote:
I got a push notification from WSJ and NYT when a nurse had an mild allergic reaction to the Pfizer vaccine in December.
Nice "suppression"
Several folks have now died shortly after getting the vaccine.
You get push notifications about those did you?
The Unkle wrote:
[quote]2600 bro wrote:
I got a push notification from WSJ and NYT when a nurse had an mild allergic reaction to the Pfizer vaccine in December.
Nice "suppression"
Several folks have now died shortly after getting the vaccine.
You get push notifications about those did you?
They died of something else unrelated to the vaccine.
The Unkle wrote:
macdaddy og 1 wrote:
You tried to spread covid disinformation and failed.
You tried to spread vaccine disinformation and failed.
You tried to spread disinformation about Biden and failed.
People like you are why the Democrats have full control now. Thank you, Unkle ??
See what I mean.
I quoted Fauci's own words in which he claims he lied to us for our own good. Period. This is the response triggered in Covid Believers
No, You never quoted Faucci in his own words that he "lied". You lied, and i would rather deal with the crap on the bottom of my shoes than waste any more time on you. And I would advise others to do the same.
Loser.
The Unkle wrote:
Several folks have now died shortly after getting the vaccine.
Did they die "with the vaccine" or "of the vaccine"?
seattle prattle wrote:
The Unkle wrote:
See what I mean.
I quoted Fauci's own words in which he claims he lied to us for our own good. Period. This is the response triggered in Covid Believers
No, You never quoted Faucci in his own words that he "lied". You lied, and i would rather deal with the crap on the bottom of my shoes than waste any more time on you. And I would advise others to do the same.
Loser.
Post of the millennium. Thanks
rojo wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
Rojo, I believe you are making a mistake by taking a side in this debate. Owner's of the site should at least create the appearance of impartiality on controversial issues, like this.
In all due respect for you and your site, I will leave it at that, though i would ask you to reconsider posting such things.
I'm not taking a side. The only side I'm trying to be on is the side of facts. I want to be straight down the middle. My problem is this whole thing is presented to us as coming from a side - either the left or right. That's not right. Fauci thinks we aren't ready for the science so he often says something that isn't scientifically accurate and then gets mad a few months later when there are a lot of people not believing the scientists.
You seem to think I'm a right winger downplaying Covid. Nothing could be further from the truth. I'm ripping Fauci for twice downplaying the virus.
Rojo, this is outright lying, FAKE NEWS. From the beginning of COVID, you never once have a statement in support of public health and criticized ANYONE taking proper COVID protocols.
Sarah Williamson. wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
No, You never quoted Faucci in his own words that he "lied". You lied, and i would rather deal with the crap on the bottom of my shoes than waste any more time on you. And I would advise others to do the same.
Loser.
Post of the millennium. Thanks
Seattle Prattle is my main man!
My town hit herd immunity recently, just as the vaccines were beginning to roll out. Basically positivity rates dropped from the teens to below 3 percent over the last month and a half, and cases and deaths went flat when we got a little over 0.2% fatality rate. There have been mask mandates since the summer and restrictions didn't really change in any significant way since October. The only explanation is herd immunity, as environmental conditions still favor transmission. This is in-line with what one would expect with the theoretical IFR of 0.26% put out by the CDC back in March. The shutdowns haven't achieved much other than to slow the process over eleven months rather than the 3 months experienced in a place like NYC.
joed1rtty wrote:
The only explanation is herd immunity, as environmental conditions still favor transmission. This is in-line with what one would expect with the theoretical IFR of 0.26% put out by the CDC back in March. The shutdowns haven't achieved much other than to slow the process over eleven months rather than the 3 months experienced in a place like NYC.
Or behavioral changes. Shockingly, some people take COVID seriously and when you have test postivity in the teens they alter their behavior.
Also why are you so insistent on the 0.26% IFR? This has repeatedly been debunked on these forums -- the CDC based it on a single flawed study and ever longitudinal review has found results closer to 0.6%. There are many states with > 1800 deaths/million. Taking 0.26% IFR means they are >75% infected. No studies have come CLOSE to this number in the US. It doesn't pass the first mathematical sanity check.
The R value doesn't change that quick, especially when no regulations make any fundamental changes (in fact we had a loosening of restrictions during that period as children were allowed back in school and we were allowed to play soccer again, and yet cases and deaths still declined).
Yes, JD, the fact that you continue to use the 0.26 means that you are unwilling or unable to properly check your data sources. In either case, it indicates that you completely unreliable as an interpreter of information. That will hold until you stop, or look at the primary source, and explain ho your number is justified(and good luck with that). Have you tired yet?
Have you tried yet?
Lol the deniers forgot that "MUH False Positives!!" only has an impact when excess deaths aren't staggeringly high. What is killing all these people if the COVID test isn't accurate (it is)?
Harambe wrote:
Lol the deniers forgot that "MUH False Positives!!" only has an impact when excess deaths aren't staggeringly high. What is killing all these people if the COVID test isn't accurate (it is)?
Probably the same things that kill people every year.
This would largely result in an increased IFR, because asymptomatic people (caught in random testing situations like mine) would be retested, and when test positivity rates are low, a lot of asymptomatic positives will in fact be false positives. In high percent positivity situations, the gross number remains the same but the percentage of false/true positives falls.
Note that you would not retest if the clinical picture fits.
Thanks, Jim... wrote:
Harambe wrote:
Lol the deniers forgot that "MUH False Positives!!" only has an impact when excess deaths aren't staggeringly high. What is killing all these people if the COVID test isn't accurate (it is)?
Probably the same things that kill people every year.
400k more than usual? Wow. How come people seem to die more when areas they live in higher COVID test positivity? Weird for a useless test...
lmao
How can it be 400k more when we know that many deaths are being counted as Covid, are not?
You're not too bright.
I'm Bigfoot wrote:
How can it be 400k more when we know that many deaths are being counted as Covid, are not?
You're not too bright.
Take COVID out of the equation and look at raw deaths. Why are there ~400k more than usual since the start of 2020? Hmmm..... that's a tricky one!
P.S. We don't "know" any of the drivel you spout with no evidence to back it up.
It's like someone reset my Embarrass the COVID Denier game back to beginner difficulty.
Sarah Williamson. wrote:
The Unkle wrote:
[quote]2600 bro wrote:
I got a push notification from WSJ and NYT when a nurse had an mild allergic reaction to the Pfizer vaccine in December.
Nice "suppression"
Several folks have now died shortly after getting the vaccine.
You get push notifications about those did you?
They died of something else unrelated to the vaccine.
No. 94% of the people who died "with" Covid died of something else.
The vaccine killed these people