Not a debate, but seems like US authorities underestimating % people who won't get vaccinated. What you think?

Lead Foil Hat IV wrote:

2600 bro wrote:

Lol you beat me to it

You guys really are a pair of idiots. Long term in both cases requires patience...we DO NOT KNOW. On the virus effecting people, I would think it would not be surprising that those who suffered severe cases, hence severe damage to tissues, would have long term effects. I also believe the vaccine downside for older people are not a worry considering the risk of the virus to them. We are talking about kids though who are not affected by the virus. Non-invasive infections that do not cause illness are not normally thought to cause long term chronic health issues, particularly cold viruses....corona viruses are cold virus. Numerous letters and papers have arisen warning about potential autoimmune impacts of mRNA tech yet you guys are assuming those authors are wrong and crazy and you are certain the virus causes long term problems for children who at worst get the sniffles. Then, you demand we believe this absurd stance rather than recommend patience with younger populations using mRNA tech (the stance of all world governments) or you may not ck the intelligence of those urging patience. Then you have the hall to claim 2 phase 1 trials finished two years ago on 175 total patients is clear evidence that there are no long term autoimmune issues for younger people two by mRNA vaccines. You realize this is not evidence don't you. Yes, it is clear that mRNA vacs don't outright kill people....that is all we know so far. Lastly, there is no benefit to the kids...if the virus affected them then it would make more sense to risk urgency....but there is little to gain if all susceptible populations are re irving vaccinations. Your odd urgency suggest financial motive, but I could be wrong.

Lead Foil Hat IV wrote:

You guys really are a pair of idiots. Long term in both cases requires patience...we DO NOT KNOW. On the virus effecting people, I would think it would not be surprising that those who suffered severe cases, hence severe damage to tissues, would have long term effects. I also believe the vaccine downside for older people are not a worry considering the risk of the virus to them. We are talking about kids though who are not affected by the virus. Non-invasive infections that do not cause illness are not normally thought to cause long term chronic health issues, particularly cold viruses....corona viruses are cold virus. Numerous letters and papers have arisen warning about potential autoimmune impacts of mRNA tech yet you guys are assuming those authors are wrong and crazy and you are certain the virus causes long term problems for children who at worst get the sniffles. Then, you demand we believe this absurd stance rather than recommend patience with younger populations using mRNA tech (the stance of all world governments) or you may not ck the intelligence of those urging patience. Then you have the hall to claim 2 phase 1 trials finished two years ago on 175 total patients is clear evidence that there are no long term autoimmune issues for younger people two by mRNA vaccines. You realize this is not evidence don't you. Yes, it is clear that mRNA vacs don't outright kill people....that is all we know so far. Lastly, there is no benefit to the kids...if the virus affected them then it would make more sense to risk urgency....but there is little to gain if all susceptible populations are re irving vaccinations. Your odd urgency suggest financial motive, but I could be wrong.

Lead Foil Hat IV wrote:

Again, you try to sound smart to shut people down because your argument is weak. There is no added risk if the children don't get vaccinated. KIDS are not getting sick....but they are sick of idiots like yourself demanding they stay holed up at home in isolation. You still have provided zero basis for bypassing patience, ignoring real scientific concerns of potential for autoimmune disease and think we must go against all reason and caution to vaccinate a whole group of people not affected by the virus....You are either crazy, really stupid yet somehow work in a lab so you think you are smarter than everyone, or you have profit motive pushing you to hype mrna vaccines is children. Why not just wait even a few months until we have vaccine using more time tested tech available? Most people probably don't think it is necessary but would go along with something more time tested.

Lead Foil Hat IV wrote:

2600 bro wrote:

"I don't understand multiplicative risk" guy back for more!!

Love to see it!

Again, you try to sound smart to shut people down because your argument is weak. There is no added risk if the children don't get vaccinated. KIDS are not getting sick....but they are sick of idiots like yourself demanding they stay holed up at home in isolation. You still have provided zero basis for bypassing patience, ignoring real scientific concerns of potential for autoimmune disease and think we must go against all reason and caution to vaccinate a whole group of people not affected by the virus....You are either crazy, really stupid yet somehow work in a lab so you think you are smarter than everyone, or you have profit motive pushing you to hype mrna vaccines is children. Why not just wait even a few months until we have vaccine using more time tested tech available? Most people probably don't think it is necessary but would go along with something more time tested.

2600 bro wrote:

Because fearmongers like you would make the same tired arguments. Do we need to go over excess deaths for 20th time for you :)? I am a patient person - don't worry!

Either way...

China released an inactivated virus vaccine... fly over there and get it!? It's only 50-60% effective at most. The flu vaccine took years of engineering to be able to pump out a new one each year...

In response to DanM:

Multiplicative risk means that as the thing happens (people get infected) the risk goes up (unmitigated spread would lead to complete healthcare system collapse). So the 0.15% global IFR (low estimate for western countries but whatever) would be 5, 10, 20X? higher if we hadn't worked so hard on mitigation, vaccine development. There's a reason why Wuhan and Lombardy had 1-5% IFRs.

Lead Foil Hat IV wrote:

Again, you try to sound smart to shut people down because your argument is weak. There is no added risk if the children don't get vaccinated. KIDS are not getting sick....but they are sick of idiots like yourself demanding they stay holed up at home in isolation. You still have provided zero basis for bypassing patience, ignoring real scientific concerns of potential for autoimmune disease and think we must go against all reason and caution to vaccinate a whole group of people not affected by the virus....You are either crazy, really stupid yet somehow work in a lab so you think you are smarter than everyone, or you have profit motive pushing you to hype mrna vaccines is children. Why not just wait even a few months until we have vaccine using more time tested tech available? Most people probably don't think it is necessary but would go along with something more time tested.

2600 bro wrote:

Because fearmongers like you would make the same tired arguments. Do we need to go over excess deaths for 20th time for you :)? I am a patient person - don't worry!

Either way...

China released an inactivated virus vaccine... fly over there and get it!? It's only 50-60% effective at most. The flu vaccine took years of engineering to be able to pump out a new one each year...

In response to DanM:

Multiplicative risk means that as the thing happens (people get infected) the risk goes up (unmitigated spread would lead to complete healthcare system collapse). So the 0.15% global IFR (low estimate for western countries but whatever) would be 5, 10, 20X? higher if we hadn't worked so hard on mitigation, vaccine development. There's a reason why Wuhan and Lombardy had 1-5% IFRs.

Lead Foil Hat IV wrote:

Again, you try to sound smart to shut people down because your argument is weak. There is no added risk if the children don't get vaccinated. KIDS are not getting sick....but they are sick of idiots like yourself demanding they stay holed up at home in isolation. You still have provided zero basis for bypassing patience, ignoring real scientific concerns of potential for autoimmune disease and think we must go against all reason and caution to vaccinate a whole group of people not affected by the virus....You are either crazy, really stupid yet somehow work in a lab so you think you are smarter than everyone, or you have profit motive pushing you to hype mrna vaccines is children. Why not just wait even a few months until we have vaccine using more time tested tech available? Most people probably don't think it is necessary but would go along with something more time tested.

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

2600 bro wrote:

Because fearmongers like you would make the same tired arguments. Do we need to go over excess deaths for 20th time for you :)? I am a patient person - don't worry!

Either way...

China released an inactivated virus vaccine... fly over there and get it!? It's only 50-60% effective at most. The flu vaccine took years of engineering to be able to pump out a new one each year...

In response to DanM:

Multiplicative risk means that as the thing happens (people get infected) the risk goes up (unmitigated spread would lead to complete healthcare system collapse). So the 0.15% global IFR (low estimate for western countries but whatever) would be 5, 10, 20X? higher if we hadn't worked so hard on mitigation, vaccine development. There's a reason why Wuhan and Lombardy had 1-5% IFRs.

Your statement on multiplicative risk is your assumption not a fact. It could have very well been zero and all of the mitigation efforts not absolutely nothing; this is crudely evidenced by that fact that regions that did very little had similar outcomes to those with heavy mitigation efforts. You can get all spun up and start spinning words into circles like yo usually do, but at the end of the day you are just making assumptions that contradict broad observations. Odd, you are oddly obsessed with yourself as being some sort of supreme intelligence.

2600 bro wrote:

Infectious diseases are usually used as the literal definition of multiplicative risk.

Where do you come up with stuff? You always make my mornings :)

Plenty of regions had VERY VERY low cases, deaths, and IFRs (SK, HK, Japan, Aus, NZ, Singapore)

Places in the US had very low cases, deaths, and IFRs (San Francisco city).

You must be trolling - Wuhan and Lombardy (the first locations hit hard) were caught entirely unprepared. They imposed their measures much much too late.

And lastly the assertion that lockdowns kill more people is just hilarious - excess deaths (which you now refuse to discuss after being schooled by 5 people in the last thread) and provisional death data from the CDC show only minor changes in death from (suicide, overdose, cancer, heart disease).

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

Your statement on multiplicative risk is your assumption not a fact. It could have very well been zero and all of the mitigation efforts not absolutely nothing; this is crudely evidenced by that fact that regions that did very little had similar outcomes to those with heavy mitigation efforts. You can get all spun up and start spinning words into circles like yo usually do, but at the end of the day you are just making assumptions that contradict broad observations. Odd, you are oddly obsessed with yourself as being some sort of supreme intelligence.

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

2600 bro wrote:

Infectious diseases are usually used as the literal definition of multiplicative risk.

Where do you come up with stuff? You always make my mornings :)

Plenty of regions had VERY VERY low cases, deaths, and IFRs (SK, HK, Japan, Aus, NZ, Singapore)

Places in the US had very low cases, deaths, and IFRs (San Francisco city).

You must be trolling - Wuhan and Lombardy (the first locations hit hard) were caught entirely unprepared. They imposed their measures much much too late.

And lastly the assertion that lockdowns kill more people is just hilarious - excess deaths (which you now refuse to discuss after being schooled by 5 people in the last thread) and provisional death data from the CDC show only minor changes in death from (suicide, overdose, cancer, heart disease).

You just listed island nations that closed their borders. These cannot be honestly compared to interconnected nations in Europe and the Americas. Yes, SK is essentially an island and you are essentially a liar with an agenda.