USA COVID-19 Vaccination Updates

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,690
2,251
1
Classic egocentric elitist. Think you can look at an obit and know how someone died when the obit has no mention of how the death occurred. I know three people over eighty that died in the last six months and none had even the slightest indication of Covid. All died at home.

Hopefully, you do realize that when you make such exaggerated claims it hurts what little credibility you may have had left.
And im sure tgar lot's of explainations for this. https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/why-the-risk-ratios-that-supposedly
 

dirge999

Well-Known Member
Dec 22, 2010
49
59
1
Am I remembering correctly that around the time of the Lancet hatchet job on HCQ (which was friday afternoon news dump later shown as completely false and bought and paid for) that there was a similar set of articles that went about saying that natural immunity was not good for Covid and that it waned very quickley and that vaccination was better. I remember at the time thinking that makes zero sense from a scientific standpoint. To this day, the fact that natural immunity is not 'allowed to be considered when it can be tested for continues to show me that medical science in NOT making decision buy politics is making decisions.
 

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,690
2,251
1
I am not concerned about credibility or your viewpoint. Swirling the drain and booting anti vaxxers are what they are at this point and here in small town Merica it’s pretty easy to spot them.

Send them home from the ER with a Get well card. Buy the ticket, take the ride as they say.

Cheer them on.

Shrug your shoulders when they boot.
Except they aren't the ones dying MORON. Open your eyes , youve been lied.....3x vax are now more likely to end up in hospital in the uk then unvaxxed....oops
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,813
25,530
1
An altered state
I am not concerned about credibility or your viewpoint. Swirling the drain and booting anti vaxxers are what they are at this point and here in small town Merica it’s pretty easy to spot them.

Send them home from the ER with a Get well card. Buy the ticket, take the ride as they say.

Cheer them on.

Shrug your shoulders when they boot.
You are a disgusting human being.

Please tell me you are not Penn State grad.
 

tgar

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Nov 14, 2001
19,123
19,117
1
You are a disgusting human being.

Please tell me you are not Penn State grad.
LOL. Hey, don’t get vaxxed, stay home. Live or die with your decision. Why do so many anti vaxxers turn out to be pussies when push comes to shove?
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,813
25,530
1
An altered state
LOL. Hey, don’t get vaxxed, stay home. Live or die with your decision. Why do so many anti vaxxers turn out to be pussies when push comes to shove?
You are an arrogant, egotistical, condescending, rude, cold, low life. You put down anyone with a different opinion. Strike out in anger with vulgarities. Sure you’re not Donald Trump? You have the exact same personality.
 

tgar

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Nov 14, 2001
19,123
19,117
1
You are an arrogant, egotistical, condescending, rude, cold, low life. You put down anyone with a different opinion. Strike out in anger with vulgarities. Sure you’re not Donald Trump? You have the exact same personality.
LOL, who gives a ****. Me and Donald are smart enough to be vaxxed.
 

tgar

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Nov 14, 2001
19,123
19,117
1
Probably why you hate him. You see all your worst character flaws in him.
Awwwwwwww LOL. Nobody cares, nobody. But you understand that. And i am not talking about Donald. but you understand that.

Get well card.
Swirl
boot.

buy the ticket, take the ride or be a pussy.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1
This is what happens when you don't act scientifically.

All the data shows that the vaccine DOES help some. Now, does it stop the spread - no.

But when you take a stance and decide to search for data that supports the stance, you are subject to getting smashed in debate.

Tgar is a midwit, but he's right about this singular issue.

The risk of a reaction to a vaccine, and all the POSSIBLE impacts to your immune system in the future (which I doubt) do not outweigh the benefits for the elderly and vulnerable.

Right- and now the media is spinning the narrative that "not everyone who died or is in the hospital was becasue of Covid, it was just with Covid." Which is what everyone has been saying for over a year........ but the numbers are killing this admin, so they need to flip the script.

Except they aren't the ones dying MORON. Open your eyes , youve been lied.....3x vax are now more likely to end up in hospital in the uk then unvaxxed....oops

You are a disgusting human being.

Please tell me you are not Penn State grad.

LOL, who gives a ****. Me and Donald are smart enough to be vaxxed.
 

Omar81

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2014
1,353
2,027
1
This is what happens when you don't act scientifically.

All the data shows that the vaccine DOES help some. Now, does it stop the spread - no.

But when you take a stance and decide to search for data that supports the stance, you are subject to getting smashed in debate.

Tgar is a midwit, but he's right about this singular issue.

The risk of a reaction to a vaccine, and all the POSSIBLE impacts to your immune system in the future (which I doubt) do not outweigh the benefits for the elderly and vulnerable.
Key phrase in the above: “for the elderly and vulnerable.”

And it should be surprising, but isn’t, which side of this discussion has the arrogant, condescending a-holes. Or that not only are they a-holes, but they’re perversely proud of it.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1
Key phrase in the above: “for the elderly and vulnerable.”

And it should be surprising, but isn’t, which side of this discussion has the arrogant, condescending a-holes. Or that not only are they a-holes, but they’re perversely proud of it.
Well, I can be quite the arrogant condescending ahole myself.

The problem in all of this is that people choose a side, then refuse to allow observations to modify their stance.

Of course, complicating it is that there is so much lying and misleading going on that it is easy, and sometimes justified, for people to discount data that goes against their theory.
 

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,690
2,251
1
This is what happens when you don't act scientifically.

All the data shows that the vaccine DOES help some. Now, does it stop the spread - no.

But when you take a stance and decide to search for data that supports the stance, you are subject to getting smashed in debate.

Tgar is a midwit, but he's right about this singular issue.

The risk of a reaction to a vaccine, and all the POSSIBLE impacts to your immune system in the future (which I doubt) do not outweigh the benefits for the elderly and vulnerable.
Sorry, but you do know why we have to look at other countries for info right...because others doesn't provide it. Hell look at what Massachusetts just put out....

The number of cases in vaccinated people may be undercounted due to discrepancies in the names and dates of birth of individuals, resulting in an inability to match records across systems. Hospitalization data is likely also undercounted as identification and reporting of hospitalized cases relies on that information being obtainable by case investigators through patient interview.

PA says this:

  • Vaccination status in the hospitalization data is not able to be verified by matching to a vaccination registry and may represent self-reporting by the patient or patient's family.
  • People hospitalized with COVID-19 often need to be re-hospitalized. The numerator of the hospitalization rate counts hospitalizations (thus double-counting persons hospitalized more than once), whereas the denominator counts persons, not hospitalizations.


The US has been running a disinformation campaign on the vaccines for months. The data is garbage most states put out. You are great at running stats but you can only use the data given. The UK at least puts the info out and then trys to explain it away by saying "vaccinated people care more about their health and thats why they test more."
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,813
25,530
1
An altered state
Key phrase in the above: “for the elderly and vulnerable.”

And it should be surprising, but isn’t, which side of this discussion has the arrogant, condescending a-holes. Or that not only are they a-holes, but they’re perversely proud of it.
Funny but there are....or at least were before the split......a half dozen lefty loons that act just like Trump. Always amazed me how they hate him but have all the same personality traits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1
Sorry, but you do know why we have to look at other countries for info right...because others doesn't provide it. Hell look at what Massachusetts just put out....

The number of cases in vaccinated people may be undercounted due to discrepancies in the names and dates of birth of individuals, resulting in an inability to match records across systems. Hospitalization data is likely also undercounted as identification and reporting of hospitalized cases relies on that information being obtainable by case investigators through patient interview.

PA says this:

  • Vaccination status in the hospitalization data is not able to be verified by matching to a vaccination registry and may represent self-reporting by the patient or patient's family.
  • People hospitalized with COVID-19 often need to be re-hospitalized. The numerator of the hospitalization rate counts hospitalizations (thus double-counting persons hospitalized more than once), whereas the denominator counts persons, not hospitalizations.


The US has been running a disinformation campaign on the vaccines for months. The data is garbage most states put out. You are great at running stats but you can only use the data given. The UK at least puts the info out and then trys to explain it away by saying "vaccinated people care more about their health and thats why they test more."
There is little doubt that the CDC and the states' health agencies have tried to skew the data, and the presentation of the data, as much as possible to show that vaccines are better than they really are.

I have no doubt that the numbers I've calculated wrt vaccine effectiveness are a little skewed high.

BUT I HAVE NO DOUBT, NONE WHATSOEVER, THAT THE VACCINE HELPS PEOPLE SURVIVE COVID.

So, rail against the mandate (because I'd be against the mandate almost no matter what) because in a free country, there is no place for either a mask or vaccine mandate.

But please do not try to minimize the role the vaccine has had, and can continue to have (although even more reduced due to Omicron) in preventing deaths.
 

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,690
2,251
1
There is little doubt that the CDC and the states' health agencies have tried to skew the data, and the presentation of the data, as much as possible to show that vaccines are better than they really are.

I have no doubt that the numbers I've calculated wrt vaccine effectiveness are a little skewed high.

BUT I HAVE NO DOUBT, NONE WHATSOEVER, THAT THE VACCINE HELPS PEOPLE SURVIVE COVID.

So, rail against the mandate (because I'd be against the mandate almost no matter what) because in a free country, there is no place for either a mask or vaccine mandate.

But please do not try to minimize the role the vaccine has had, and can continue to have (although even more reduced due to Omicron) in preventing deaths.
But see thats the problem. The vaccines have had a minimal role reducing deaths because the survival rate was already so high. In PA as of 12/31/20 before anyone was vaxxed, the under 60 population had a survival rate of 99.9996%. Again, I go to the UK where since July vaccinated deaths as a percentage of total deaths has been within a few percentage points of their population that was vaxxed. Of course we know a lot of unvaxxed deaths could not be vaccinated so that skews that number a bit. I've never said the vaccines were worthless for the vulnerable population, and more then likely that group is almost completely vaccinated. But they are still dying in large numbers. The fact that we can't trust the US government to be honest with these numbers is scary. The question is why are they so skewed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tlbakernc

Cletus11

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2003
11,686
7,979
1
This has really turned

and everything she said is true, that is why the tide is starting to turn. even as she said, the liberals are seeing that there is just not end and you cannot 'stop' a virus and to be in this perpetual state of open then close then open and stupidity of cloth masks and 4th booster shots, etc....

one thing that I think has been horrible in this whole pandemic is what she said about if as a liberal she comes out and says things like 'cloth masks do nothing' and 'vaccine passports make no sense' that she is labelled as a far right white supremacist, science denying Trumper shows how horrible this country and MSM and Social Media have gone in a horrible direction. we now know that cloths masks don't work, that the Wuhan lab was the most likely origin of the virus, that lockdowns don't work and yet 18 months ago you were literally banned from social media from saying something like this, that is actually really scary.

And I hope that the drum of how this has horribly effected childer and teenagers starts to be really pushed as they are a huge group that has lost 18-24 months of their life and development that cannot come back. that is a rallying cry that both liberals and conseratives should be able to agree and to push to end all this nonsense.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1
But see thats the problem. The vaccines have had a minimal role reducing deaths because the survival rate was already so high. In PA as of 12/31/20 before anyone was vaxxed, the under 60 population had a survival rate of 99.9996%. Again, I go to the UK where since July vaccinated deaths as a percentage of total deaths has been within a few percentage points of their population that was vaxxed. Of course we know a lot of unvaxxed deaths could not be vaccinated so that skews that number a bit. I've never said the vaccines were worthless for the vulnerable population, and more then likely that group is almost completely vaccinated. But they are still dying in large numbers. The fact that we can't trust the US government to be honest with these numbers is scary. The question is why are they so skewed?
But you have to use the vaccination rate of the group where all the deaths are happening.

The 65+ age group.

They are almost 100% vaxxed.

So, of course, all deaths will be among the vaxxed.

I calculated it.

Showed VE against death was 60%.

But I was worried that the calculation was sensitive to small changes in vaxx rate.
 

dirge999

Well-Known Member
Dec 22, 2010
49
59
1
But see thats the problem. The vaccines have had a minimal role reducing deaths because the survival rate was already so high. In PA as of 12/31/20 before anyone was vaxxed, the under 60 population had a survival rate of 99.9996%. Again, I go to the UK where since July vaccinated deaths as a percentage of total deaths has been within a few percentage points of their population that was vaxxed. Of course we know a lot of unvaxxed deaths could not be vaccinated so that skews that number a bit. I've never said the vaccines were worthless for the vulnerable population, and more then likely that group is almost completely vaccinated. But they are still dying in large numbers. The fact that we can't trust the US government to be honest with these numbers is scary. The question is why are they so skewed?

this isnt 'news' - but it is getting out there
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1
So, treatment only after two symptoms develop, plus time to mail the drug to the user.

Since the proposed method of effectiveness is stopping viral replication, seems like this is a trial "designed to fail".

Honest people would prescribe IVM as a preventative to 5000 people and track them to see their rate of infection and degree of illness.

Sheeple are awaiting their confirmation that "it doesn't work"
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1
Who can find information on the percentage of people in the USA who have NATURAL IMMUNITY to Covid?

I can't find it anywhere. It's done by checking the antibodies in the bloodstream. So, it is easy to do if you simply take blood donors.

Yet, I can't find it anywhere. Zero. Zilch.

But now that we know that the vaccine will not assist very much in achieving herd immunity, it is the single most important piece of data.

Easy to get. Highest importance. Yet nothing.

Our institutions have failed us. Terrible.

There is an old study from May that's out there, but we need information from the last month or so.
 

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,690
2,251
1
Who can find information on the percentage of people in the USA who have NATURAL IMMUNITY to Covid?

I can't find it anywhere. It's done by checking the antibodies in the bloodstream. So, it is easy to do if you simply take blood donors.

Yet, I can't find it anywhere. Zero. Zilch.

But now that we know that the vaccine will not assist very much in achieving herd immunity, it is the single most important piece of data.

Easy to get. Highest importance. Yet nothing.

Our institutions have failed us. Terrible.

There is an old study from May that's out there, but we need information from the last month or so.
The study from last May I think was based on 2020, when they said up to 4x as many people had it and didn't know it. I think you probably could assume the same up until maybe October. But in the last few months it seems testing went through the roof. They don't want to know who has natural immunity. This is still on the CDC website:

Getting sick with COVID-19 offers some protection from future illness with COVID-19, sometimes called “natural immunity.” The level of protection people get from having COVID-19 may vary depending on how mild or severe their illness was, the time since their infection, and their age. No currently available test can reliably determine if a person is protected from infection.

All COVID-19 vaccines currently available in the United States are effective at preventing COVID-19. Getting a COVID-19 vaccine gives most people a high level of protection against COVID-19 even in people who have already been sick with COVID-19.

Emerging evidence shows that getting a COVID-19 vaccine after you recover from COVID-19 infection provides added protection to your immune system. One study showed that, for people who already had COVID-19, those who do not get vaccinated after their recovery are more than 2 times as likely to get COVID-19 again than those who get fully vaccinated after their recovery. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUEngineer89

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1
The study from last May I think was based on 2020, when they said up to 4x as many people had it and didn't know it. I think you probably could assume the same up until maybe October. But in the last few months it seems testing went through the roof. They don't want to know who has natural immunity. This is still on the CDC website:

Getting sick with COVID-19 offers some protection from future illness with COVID-19, sometimes called “natural immunity.” The level of protection people get from having COVID-19 may vary depending on how mild or severe their illness was, the time since their infection, and their age. No currently available test can reliably determine if a person is protected from infection.

All COVID-19 vaccines currently available in the United States are effective at preventing COVID-19. Getting a COVID-19 vaccine gives most people a high level of protection against COVID-19 even in people who have already been sick with COVID-19.

Emerging evidence shows that getting a COVID-19 vaccine after you recover from COVID-19 infection provides added protection to your immune system. One study showed that, for people who already had COVID-19, those who do not get vaccinated after their recovery are more than 2 times as likely to get COVID-19 again than those who get fully vaccinated after their recovery. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Yes. They are laughable.

Vile Lysenkoists.
 

GulfCoastLion

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 14, 2002
5,848
3,399
1
Houston, TX

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,690
2,251
1

Doesn’t estimate the number of people who have natural immunity, but the CDC finally has a study admitting that natural immunity is far better than be vaccinated by the experimental jabs (finally)
But they still haven't changed their recommendations.
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
22,813
25,530
1
An altered state
Who can find information on the percentage of people in the USA who have NATURAL IMMUNITY to Covid?

I can't find it anywhere. It's done by checking the antibodies in the bloodstream. So, it is easy to do if you simply take blood donors.

Yet, I can't find it anywhere. Zero. Zilch.

But now that we know that the vaccine will not assist very much in achieving herd immunity, it is the single most important piece of data.

Easy to get. Highest importance. Yet nothing.

Our institutions have failed us. Terrible.

There is an old study from May that's out there, but we need information from the last month or so.
No one is allowed to discuss natural immunity. We hear every day about ICUs being full and the vaxxed vs unvaxxed ratio......but never a mention of anyone in the ICU that previously had Covid and thus had some degree of natural immunity. Same with deaths from Covid. Not saying it doesn’t happen but there are never any comparisons or data provided.

Same with testing. Or herd immunity discussions. Or prevention. Or with therapeutics. Never any discussion about how natural immunity affects any of those. It is verboten!
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1

Doesn’t estimate the number of people who have natural immunity, but the CDC finally has a study admitting that natural immunity is far better than be vaccinated by the experimental jabs (finally)
Don't tell @Jason1743 - he's a huge Walensky fan and thinks she knows more about this than I do.

He'd be very, very upset to find out that I was right and she was wrong.
 

Agoodnap

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2015
3,178
4,477
1
Don't tell @Jason1743 - he's a huge Walensky fan and thinks she knows more about this than I do.

He'd be very, very upset to find out that I was right and she was wrong.
The Penn State College of Health and Human Development did one such study throughout 2020 and into 2021 but I've never seen results published. My daughter was a participant in the study and she received a $20 Giant gift card each of the times (2) that she had blood drawn. The first time was May 2020 and it showed that she had had a previous infection, which she didn't know about as she hadn't had any symptoms.
 

GulfCoastLion

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 14, 2002
5,848
3,399
1
Houston, TX
The
But they still haven't changed their recommendations.
Unfortunately not. The totalitarian, tyranny continues. Not even recommendations of the basic, affordable, safe therapeutics that have been available since before the plan-demic started. But they’re now pushing the new government sponsored, Big Pharma therapeutics that cost 10 times the amount since they’ve been released 🤦‍♂️
 
Last edited:

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,690
2,251
1
The Penn State College of Health and Human Development did one such study throughout 2020 and into 2021 but I've never seen results published. My daughter was a participant in the study and she received a $20 Giant gift card each of the times (2) that she had blood drawn. The first time was May 2020 and it showed that she had had a previous infection, which she didn't know about as she hadn't had any symptoms.
Didn't USC or another CA school do a similar study and found that the number at the time could be up to 50x(which is way to high even in my opinion!) more people then knew they had it.

There was a French study to looking at long covid that had 60% of the participants who didn't think they had covid actually did. I'm posting this for that stat not the long covid part.
 

Cletus11

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2003
11,686
7,979
1
The study from last May I think was based on 2020, when they said up to 4x as many people had it and didn't know it. I think you probably could assume the same up until maybe October. But in the last few months it seems testing went through the roof. They don't want to know who has natural immunity. This is still on the CDC website:

Getting sick with COVID-19 offers some protection from future illness with COVID-19, sometimes called “natural immunity.” The level of protection people get from having COVID-19 may vary depending on how mild or severe their illness was, the time since their infection, and their age. No currently available test can reliably determine if a person is protected from infection.

All COVID-19 vaccines currently available in the United States are effective at preventing COVID-19. Getting a COVID-19 vaccine gives most people a high level of protection against COVID-19 even in people who have already been sick with COVID-19.

Emerging evidence shows that getting a COVID-19 vaccine after you recover from COVID-19 infection provides added protection to your immune system. One study showed that, for people who already had COVID-19, those who do not get vaccinated after their recovery are more than 2 times as likely to get COVID-19 again than those who get fully vaccinated after their recovery. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
i am confused by what you think your last sentenceis saying and the article posted below shows what anybody in medical field would expect. Previous infection + vaccination is the most safe, then previous infection without vax, then vax, then nothing. Like any scientist would expect.

in any case, think we peaked in the USA this past week and we will see the numbers start going down this week. we are also seeing a lot more articles and talking heads and MSM start to talk about lockdowns and shutdowns and closures, etc...not being the right pathway considering Omicron (and to a lesser extent Delta) made the vaccine ineffective against getting and transmitting Covid. Assuming we see the numbers really go down relatively fast in February, i think as weather improves in March we see the numbers continue to push low.

Only question left in my mind is there another variant out there that will just repeat what omicron did (I think probably yes) and when that does occur, what will be the response this time around.
 

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,690
2,251
1
i am confused by what you think your last sentenceis saying and the article posted below shows what anybody in medical field would expect. Previous infection + vaccination is the most safe, then previous infection without vax, then vax, then nothing. Like any scientist would expect.

in any case, think we peaked in the USA this past week and we will see the numbers start going down this week. we are also seeing a lot more articles and talking heads and MSM start to talk about lockdowns and shutdowns and closures, etc...not being the right pathway considering Omicron (and to a lesser extent Delta) made the vaccine ineffective against getting and transmitting Covid. Assuming we see the numbers really go down relatively fast in February, i think as weather improves in March we see the numbers continue to push low.

Only question left in my mind is there another variant out there that will just repeat what omicron did (I think probably yes) and when that does occur, what will be the response this time around.
The last sentence that says 2X more likely. From one study---months ago is still on their website. Meanwhile their most recent study shows minimal increase being vaxxed after infection. Getting the vax is hardly worth it after infection. If you aren't in the vulnerable category there is no benefit from getting vaxxed after infection especially if your case was mild.

 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
3,958
6,215
1
The Penn State College of Health and Human Development did one such study throughout 2020 and into 2021 but I've never seen results published. My daughter was a participant in the study and she received a $20 Giant gift card each of the times (2) that she had blood drawn. The first time was May 2020 and it showed that she had had a previous infection, which she didn't know about as she hadn't had any symptoms.
Interesting.

The idiots in our wasteful federal government receive $12 billion per years, but have managed not to get an estimate.

However, they are able to waste money on an obviously fraudulent study showing vaccines are stronger than natural immunity.