The Unkle wrote:
I don't get it.
You think the vaccines work and you are vaccinated.
What threat am I to you?
You're just an a****""""
The Unkle wrote:
I don't get it.
You think the vaccines work and you are vaccinated.
What threat am I to you?
You're just an a****""""
The Auntie-Unkle wrote:
The Unkle wrote:
The reason people like you can get away with being unvaccinated is only because the majority of the population is vaccinated. You should be thanking the people getting vaccinated because they have saved your life. If the majority was like you, we would all be dead.
You honestly believe that? WE would all be dead were it not for the vaccines?
How are you supposed to have a dialogue with people like this?
People have vaccines for more than COVID, you know. If it weren't for vaccines, life expectancy would be MUCH lower.
And the other point made is true; people who aren't vaccinated are protected by the people who are vaccinated. You should be thanking them. Instead, you ridicule them.
No. Just asking why the vaccinated are afraid of the non vaccinated. Nobody seems to have an answer. Just lies about what I have said and weird conspiracy theories of how I will cause mutant variants.
Das Unkle wrote:
I can tell you how Moderna and Pfizer are benefiting from the decision of this guy they just paid off, oops, I mean hired. Surprisingly I do not know all the details as Big Pharma has not been consulting with me.
It's kind of sad to watch people grasp at straws to avoid admitting that the Oligarchs are lying and they never even questioned it.
You really don't understand how Science works, do you? It's not done in a bubble. Science is studied and peer reviewed by many independent reviewers. If what you're saying is true, this would be a massive conspiracy theory unlike anything we've ever seen before.
theodore ace wrote:
Das Unkle wrote:
I can tell you how Moderna and Pfizer are benefiting from the decision of this guy they just paid off, oops, I mean hired. Surprisingly I do not know all the details as Big Pharma has not been consulting with me.
It's kind of sad to watch people grasp at straws to avoid admitting that the Oligarchs are lying and they never even questioned it.
You really don't understand how Science works, do you? It's not done in a bubble. Science is studied and peer reviewed by many independent reviewers. If what you're saying is true, this would be a massive conspiracy theory unlike anything we've ever seen before.
Welcome to the pharmaceutical industry
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/08/business/medical-journal-says-merck-concealed-vioxx-data.htmltheodore ace wrote:
Das Unkle wrote:
I can tell you how Moderna and Pfizer are benefiting from the decision of this guy they just paid off, oops, I mean hired. Surprisingly I do not know all the details as Big Pharma has not been consulting with me.
It's kind of sad to watch people grasp at straws to avoid admitting that the Oligarchs are lying and they never even questioned it.
You really don't understand how Science works, do you? It's not done in a bubble. Science is studied and peer reviewed by many independent reviewers. If what you're saying is true, this would be a massive conspiracy theory unlike anything we've ever seen before.
This actually works against you. Theodore said corruption on the scale you suggest is simply unrealistic. You referred to an article in which the New England Journal of Med outted a corrupt trial and researcher.
See... checks & balances. Too many minds to align. This proved theodores point. Not yours....
theodore ace wrote:
Das Unkle wrote:
I can tell you how Moderna and Pfizer are benefiting from the decision of this guy they just paid off, oops, I mean hired. Surprisingly I do not know all the details as Big Pharma has not been consulting with me.
It's kind of sad to watch people grasp at straws to avoid admitting that the Oligarchs are lying and they never even questioned it.
You really don't understand how Science works, do you? It's not done in a bubble. Science is studied and peer reviewed by many independent reviewers. If what you're saying is true, this would be a massive conspiracy theory unlike anything we've ever seen before.
If by "many" you mean between 2 and 4 then I guess you're correct. Peer review ensures that horrible papers don't make it into the pages of a journal but that is about it. Vaccines are not peer reviewed (and I would go so far as to say they are not science but a technology) and they are approved by a government, there is a big difference.
Bra-ket wrote:
theodore ace wrote:
You really don't understand how Science works, do you? It's not done in a bubble. Science is studied and peer reviewed by many independent reviewers. If what you're saying is true, this would be a massive conspiracy theory unlike anything we've ever seen before.
If by "many" you mean between 2 and 4 then I guess you're correct. Peer review ensures that horrible papers don't make it into the pages of a journal but that is about it. Vaccines are not peer reviewed (and I would go so far as to say they are not science but a technology) and they are approved by a government, there is a big difference.
The publications related to the trials are peer-reviewed.
I don't know how exactly how the FDA advisory committees work, but generally there is a panel of 'peers' that recommends decisions to the bureaucrats at the FDA.
the letter why wrote:
I know you are just trolling.
However, the obvious answer is one that's easily available to you. Consider why schools require vaccines for certain diseases. Many people have health issues that prevent them from getting vaccines. Vaccines are also not 100% effective. If everyone is vaccinated, the possibility that a disease can transmit to one of these vulnerable groups is basically zero. If everyone just got vaccinated (a pipe dream, sure) COVID would disappear - instead it will linger for years.
If there were actual risks associated with getting a vaccine, then it would perhaps be reasonable to weigh pros and cons. But there aren't actually any downsides to getting the COVID vaccine, just conspiracy theories boosted by political plays.
So am I worried about my own health because you won't get vaccinated? Not particularly. Am I worried that the enormous number of people who refuse to get vaccinated will lead to another surge of Covid later this summer or fall and kill thousands more? Pretty much. Do I have any hope that you and millions of Americans will stop being complete idiots? Unfortunately no.
It is remarkable that the same group of idiots who have been against masks, shutdowns, basically any version of disrupting normality in the face of a pandemic are now - when given a simple chance to get things back to normal - refuse to do it. It's incredibly hypocritical, but unfortunately, not surprising.
The risks are you DON'T know. Do some research on the Swine Flu vaccine the government told people they need to get and you'll see why people don't want to get this shot.
Get your shot if you want as to get it. If you don't want the shot, DON'T get it. This mess will be over and never spoken about after 12 more months. It's just a media nightmare right now.
The Unkle wrote:
No. Just asking why the vaccinated are afraid of the non vaccinated. Nobody seems to have an answer. Just lies about what I have said and weird conspiracy theories of how I will cause mutant variants.
Several people have answered you. You just choose to ignore it.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE DON'T CARE.
You're focusing on the tiny few who get upset over everything. But ur just as bad.
THE88-GIFT wrote:
The risks are you DON'T know. Do some research on the Swine Flu vaccine the government told people they need to get and you'll see why people don't want to get this shot.
Get your shot if you want as to get it. If you don't want the shot, DON'T get it. This mess will be over and never spoken about after 12 more months. It's just a media nightmare right now.
Remind me how many excess deaths this "media nightmare" has caused in the USA. Also do some quick math with estimated attack rate (~35%) and estimated herd immunity threshold (70-80%). Let me know your projected # of additional excess deaths to reach herd immunity with a vaccine?
Thanks!
We received our vaccinations because we want the pandemic to end. You are an impediment to that. With so many anti-vaxxers in the United States, the only way the pandemic can end is if an appreciable amount of anti-vaxxers die from the virus and that can be a very slow process. (Although I must admit fun to watch.)
theodore ace wrote:
Das Unkle wrote:
I can tell you how Moderna and Pfizer are benefiting from the decision of this guy they just paid off, oops, I mean hired. Surprisingly I do not know all the details as Big Pharma has not been consulting with me.
It's kind of sad to watch people grasp at straws to avoid admitting that the Oligarchs are lying and they never even questioned it.
You really don't understand how Science works, do you? It's not done in a bubble. Science is studied and peer reviewed by many independent reviewers. If what you're saying is true, this would be a massive conspiracy theory unlike anything we've ever seen before.
You don't understand how the overall system works.
Money runs everything and the big money is in a few hands.
Do you have any clue as to how many times Big Pharma has had to pay-out big $$ due to their faking trial results?
What happened with oxycontin? How was that allowed to be prescribed as a non-addictive drug for all those years?
[quote]Fat Boy wrote:
We received our vaccinations because we want the pandemic to end. You are an impediment to that.
How? WE non vaccinated apparently will get the virus and will nearly all recover and have immunity.
The vaccinated will be safe
Fat Boy wrote:
We received our vaccinations because we want the pandemic to end. You are an impediment to that. With so many anti-vaxxers in the United States, the only way the pandemic can end is if an appreciable amount of anti-vaxxers die from the virus and that can be a very slow process. (Although I must admit fun to watch.)
What if that herd immunity thingy all of a sudden wears off ?
**********
Q: How long does protection from a COVID-19 vaccine last ?
A: We don’t know how long protection lasts for those who are vaccinated.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.htmlDanM wrote:
Fat Boy wrote:
We received our vaccinations because we want the pandemic to end. You are an impediment to that. With so many anti-vaxxers in the United States, the only way the pandemic can end is if an appreciable amount of anti-vaxxers die from the virus and that can be a very slow process. (Although I must admit fun to watch.)
What if that herd immunity thingy all of a sudden wears off ?
**********
Q: How long does protection from a COVID-19 vaccine last ?
A: We don’t know how long protection lasts for those who are vaccinated.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html
The Plan is to keep this thing going endlessly. Two "booster" shots per year with freedoms restricted for all
Harambe wrote:
THE88-GIFT wrote:
The risks are you DON'T know. Do some research on the Swine Flu vaccine the government told people they need to get and you'll see why people don't want to get this shot.
Get your shot if you want as to get it. If you don't want the shot, DON'T get it. This mess will be over and never spoken about after 12 more months. It's just a media nightmare right now.
Remind me how many excess deaths this "media nightmare" has caused in the USA. Also do some quick math with estimated attack rate (~35%) and estimated herd immunity threshold (70-80%). Let me know your projected # of additional excess deaths to reach herd immunity with a vaccine?
Thanks!
Last line did u mean herd immunity with a vaccine or without a vaccine?
trashcan wrote:
Harambe wrote:
Remind me how many excess deaths this "media nightmare" has caused in the USA. Also do some quick math with estimated attack rate (~35%) and estimated herd immunity threshold (70-80%). Let me know your projected # of additional excess deaths to reach herd immunity with a vaccine?
Thanks!
Last line did u mean herd immunity with a vaccine or without a vaccine?
(assuming meant without vaccine)
CDC is converging on attack rate in the range of standard epidemiology models, assuming we discard the CDC's dire hypothesis of initially 100% susceptible population and adopt instead something in the range of 50% susceptible.
See Griffoni, Weiskopf et al "Targets of T Cell Responses to SARS-CoV-2..." Cell 181 pp. 1-13, June 25, 2020, who write "Importantly we detected SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4* T cells in ~40%-60% of unexposed individuals, suggesting cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating 'common cold' coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2."
Which is more plausible:
that SARS-CoV-2 is unique and special in every way in the history of human disease (super deadly, except it is really the age 75+ who are at special risk, masks are super effective unlike every other respiratory disease, asymptomatic spread is a ferocious threat, I could go on), or
that SARS-CoV-2, despite its small peculiarities (such as impacting sense of smell) and yes, unusual impact on a vulnerable, relatively highly susceptible population, behaves a lot like every other influenza-like illness we have known?
pinesol wrote:
CDC is converging on attack rate in the range of standard epidemiology models, assuming we discard the CDC's dire hypothesis of initially 100% susceptible population and adopt instead something in the range of 50% susceptible.
See Griffoni, Weiskopf et al "Targets of T Cell Responses to SARS-CoV-2..." Cell 181 pp. 1-13, June 25, 2020, who write "Importantly we detected SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4* T cells in ~40%-60% of unexposed individuals, suggesting cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating 'common cold' coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2."
Which is more plausible:
that SARS-CoV-2 is unique and special in every way in the history of human disease (super deadly, except it is really the age 75+ who are at special risk, masks are super effective unlike every other respiratory disease, asymptomatic spread is a ferocious threat, I could go on), or
that SARS-CoV-2, despite its small peculiarities (such as impacting sense of smell) and yes, unusual impact on a vulnerable, relatively highly susceptible population, behaves a lot like every other influenza-like illness we have known?
Yes, I meant without the vaccine. Good catch!
Cross reactive T-cells have been known for ages. Obviously this does not have a huge impact on true immunity or many places would have hit herd immunity at 40% attack rate ages ago.
Is your claim that we would be at herd immunity at 40-50% infected without vaccines? That seems unlikely considering there are places with test positivity rising -now-.
The age-old denier line "NOW we are truly at herd immunity" (from infection) still needs more evidence than... in vitro data from a year ago. We are lucky vaccines bailed the deniers out from the 4th and 5th waves making their "this time it's herd immunity (I promise!!1)" arguments look dumb for a 4th and 5th time.
There is nothing unique and special about a novel coronavirus with high transmissiblity and infectiousness (and relatively high mortality rate)!Scientists have known this was coming for ages. All it took was a coronavirus with the right characteristics.
Asymptomatic spread as a threat is a given once you assume -any- incubation period and good airborne transmission. That is again not surprising.
Masks are fairly effective, low cost, and easy to comply with, so they are obvious public health measures for an airborne pandemic.
So basically everything you posited is "unique and special" about COVID is actually unsurprising.
Harambe wrote:
pinesol wrote:
CDC is converging on attack rate in the range of standard epidemiology models, assuming we discard the CDC's dire hypothesis of initially 100% susceptible population and adopt instead something in the range of 50% susceptible.
See Griffoni, Weiskopf et al "Targets of T Cell Responses to SARS-CoV-2..." Cell 181 pp. 1-13, June 25, 2020, who write "Importantly we detected SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4* T cells in ~40%-60% of unexposed individuals, suggesting cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating 'common cold' coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2."
Which is more plausible:
that SARS-CoV-2 is unique and special in every way in the history of human disease (super deadly, except it is really the age 75+ who are at special risk, masks are super effective unlike every other respiratory disease, asymptomatic spread is a ferocious threat, I could go on), or
that SARS-CoV-2, despite its small peculiarities (such as impacting sense of smell) and yes, unusual impact on a vulnerable, relatively highly susceptible population, behaves a lot like every other influenza-like illness we have known?
Yes, I meant without the vaccine. Good catch!
Cross reactive T-cells have been known for ages. Obviously this does not have a huge impact on true immunity or many places would have hit herd immunity at 40% attack rate ages ago.
Is your claim that we would be at herd immunity at 40-50% infected without vaccines? That seems unlikely considering there are places with test positivity rising -now-.
The age-old denier line "NOW we are truly at herd immunity" (from infection) still needs more evidence than... in vitro data from a year ago. We are lucky vaccines bailed the deniers out from the 4th and 5th waves making their "this time it's herd immunity (I promise!!1)" arguments look dumb for a 4th and 5th time.
There is nothing unique and special about a novel coronavirus with high transmissiblity and infectiousness (and relatively high mortality rate)!Scientists have known this was coming for ages. All it took was a coronavirus with the right characteristics.
Asymptomatic spread as a threat is a given once you assume -any- incubation period and good airborne transmission. That is again not surprising.
Masks are fairly effective, low cost, and easy to comply with, so they are obvious public health measures for an airborne pandemic.
So basically everything you posited is "unique and special" about COVID is actually unsurprising.
Masks (as in universal crappy grade masking in the casual mass population way) never seemed especially effective before. That's the CDC line for all the other influenza-like illnesses, and continues to be, and was the CDC line on COVID until about April 8, 2020.
Compliance is haphazard at best.
People been trying for decades to show masks work to contain influenza-like illnesses. Weak evidence at best in highly controlled situations.