To Vaccinate or Not---The Rat Flu Odyssey Continues

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

Vaccines can be required of the population to partake in various activities such as attending public school...i'm looking forward to when that happens.

---

For sure and I'm supportive of that. I look at this way. One can choose to prize one's own individual right over one's own duty to society/community as a whole.

And most anti-vaxxers/vaccine skeptics are strongly biased towards individual rights vs society. If you make a choice to prize your own individual rights then, in return, you accept that society wishes to put into place safeguards to protect the community as a whole against you. Of course anti-vaxxers/vaccine skeptics cloak that in the "freedoms" rhetoric. Illogical; anti-vaxxers/vaccine skeptics can have freedoms to make poor choices. But society at large can also have freedoms to protect itself.

vaccination is already required in some countries, albeit thru the back door.
In France for example, you cannot go to a restaurant, concert, bar without being vaccinated or have a negative test in the last 24 hours. And the test is not free anymore.
So if you're not vaccinated and you want to go to a restaurant, every time you go, it will cost you 50 dollars on top of the dinner cost.


Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

Yeah, it's weird because his chart illustrates the base rate fallacy and yet he preceded the graphics with the word 'nope' so who knows maybe he likes the pretty pictures but doesn't know what it means.


In case anyone cares about RJ's misleading use of data: The more vaccinated a population, the more we’ll hear of the vaccinated getting infected.

For example, say there’s a community that’s 100% vaccinated. If there’s transmission, we know breakthrough cases will happen. So, by definition, 100% of outbreak cases will be among the vaccinated. It will just be 100% out of a smaller number.

Cue Israel. They are one of the global leaders in vaccinations; 85% of Israeli adults are vaccinated. So, say we have the following scenario: With an infection rate among the vaccinated of 2% and infection rate of 13% among the unvaccinated, this would give us an efficacy rate of 85%. This is pretty darn close to the clinical trial efficacy rate, meaning the Pfizer vaccine is still working against Delta.

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.subs...are-vaccinated

---

What are you talking about? The chart shows there is practically no difference in the infection rate between vaxxed and non-vaxxed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The AD

Is there evidence the COVID-19 vaccines do, though? Our assumption is that their effectiveness will diminish, but I wouldn't call it "clear" until there's data to back up that assumption.

---

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle...ng-2021-07-05/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

What are you talking about? The chart shows there is practically no difference in the infection rate between vaxxed and non-vaxxed.

---

This will likely be the only time I ever post in response to you, but you are, unsurprisingly, poorly informed and apparently either didn't read what was linked to or didn't understand it. In fact, the author addresses your misstatement in discussing base rate bias:

This is likely an example of base rate bias in epidemiology (it’s called base rate fallacy in other fields). Professor Levy said that “half of infected people were vaccinated”. This language is important because it’s very different than “half of vaccinated people were infected”. And this misunderstanding happens all. the. time.

The author then goes on to further explain how we know the vaccines are still working, even against Delta:

The more vaccinated a population, the more we’ll hear of the vaccinated getting infected. For example, say there’s a community that’s 100% vaccinated. If there’s transmission, we know breakthrough cases will happen. So, by definition, 100% of outbreak cases will be among the vaccinated. It will just be 100% out of a smaller number.

Attachment 380783

Cue Israel. They are one of the global leaders in vaccinations; 85% of Israeli adults are vaccinated. So, say we have the following scenario:

100 adult community

4 COVID19 cases

50% of cases were among the vaccinated

It would look something like this:

Attachment 380784

With an infection rate among the vaccinated of 2% and infection rate of 13% among the unvaccinated, this would give us an efficacy rate of 85%. This is pretty darn close to the clinical trial efficacy rate, meaning the Pfizer vaccine is still working against Delta.


[I am aware RJ is a troll but this is easily misunderstood, IMO.]

Phil Valentine the conservative radio host anti vaxxer who had the virus change his tune and message to pro vax went on a vent this afternoon.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wkr...19-battle/amp/

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

https://scontent-bos3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...97&oe=61078326

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

This will likely be the only time I ever post in response to you, but you are, unsurprisingly, poorly informed and apparently either didn't read what was linked to or didn't understand it. In fact, the author addresses your misstatement in discussing base rate bias:

This is likely an example of base rate bias in epidemiology (it’s called base rate fallacy in other fields). Professor Levy said that “half of infected people were vaccinated”. This language is important because it’s very different than “half of vaccinated people were infected”. And this misunderstanding happens all. the. time.

The author then goes on to further explain how we know the vaccines are still working, even against Delta:

The more vaccinated a population, the more we’ll hear of the vaccinated getting infected. For example, say there’s a community that’s 100% vaccinated. If there’s transmission, we know breakthrough cases will happen. So, by definition, 100% of outbreak cases will be among the vaccinated. It will just be 100% out of a smaller number.

Attachment 380783

Cue Israel. They are one of the global leaders in vaccinations; 85% of Israeli adults are vaccinated. So, say we have the following scenario:

100 adult community

4 COVID19 cases

50% of cases were among the vaccinated

It would look something like this:

Attachment 380784

With an infection rate among the vaccinated of 2% and infection rate of 13% among the unvaccinated, this would give us an efficacy rate of 85%. This is pretty darn close to the clinical trial efficacy rate, meaning the Pfizer vaccine is still working against Delta.


[I am aware RJ is a troll but this is easily misunderstood, IMO.]

---

The chart is isolating the vaccinated and non-vaccinated.

For instance, age group 20-29: there are 120 cases. 95 among vaccinated, 25 not vaccinated. Of these 120 cases 79% are vaccinated and 21% are not vaccinated. 78% of Israelis age 20-29 are vaccinated - basically no difference in infection rate in these 120 cases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talisman

If the unvaxxed were the only ones harmed by their choice it would be one thing, but there are some who can't get vaccinated because of compromised immune systems and other valid medical reasons and the unvaccinated are assisting in the spread and mutation of the disease. Small pox persisted for ~200 years after Jenner's discovery because of anti-vaxxers.

---

This, and what a bunch of other people have pointed out. I have a friend with a new infant and 2.5 year old at home whose wife is an MD at a large hospital. She has been losing her shit over the prospect that they are going to be stuck for another year(?) in essentially the quarantine most of us have left behind (she is seriously just losing it, and I'm a little concerned for her). They obviously don't want their kids to be infected with delta, and grandmother with some additional risk factors is a frequent care-giver. It's fine to be indifferent to what anti-vaxxers do to themselves (how about their children?), but until covid is gone or we exile those shitbags to covid island or something it will never be just themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

What are you talking about? The chart shows there is practically no difference in the infection rate between vaxxed and non-vaxxed.

---

Your chart (not the table) is labeled cases vs hospitalizations, not case rates vs hospitalization rates. If it's absolute numbers and not rates then the same number of cases in a group roughly six times larger suggests a lower overall case rate. Regardless, the chart clearly shows the vaccine is effective when it comes to preventing hospitalizations.

Re the table which does appear to show a smaller difference in case rates between the two groups: there's evidence data from a month ago got the denominator wrong (since mid July data normalized to group size shows 3 times more unvaccinated cases vs vaccinated ). That's inline with what Israeli government data indicates for effectiveness in preventing infection against the delta variant vs. previous variants (64 percent vs. 97 percent)

So, as things stand cases in Israel are 1/10th their peak prior to widespread vaccination, serious cases are at an lower relative rate, nearly four times lower, and ICU admissions are 1/20th what they were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

The chart is isolating the vaccinated and non-vaccinated.

For instance, age group 20-29: there are 120 cases. 95 among vaccinated, 25 not vaccinated. Of these 120 cases 79% are vaccinated and 21% are not vaccinated. 78% of Israelis age 20-29 are vaccinated - basically no difference in infection rate in these 120 cases.

---

To reiterate the response above, you're referring to the table not the chart. It looks like the table contained incomplete data and as a result got the denominator wrong when making the calculations.

Though it would fuck up health care system short term but won't we all appreciate the unvaxxed just getting it over with and get the pink jab?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The AD

Is there evidence the COVID-19 vaccines do, though? Our assumption is that their effectiveness will diminish, but I wouldn't call it "clear" until there's data to back up that assumption.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

From the NEJM:

This study showed that administration of a third dose of the BNT162b2 (mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine) vaccine to solid-organ transplant recipients significantly improved the immunogenicity of the vaccine, with no cases of Covid-19 reported in any of the patients. However, a large proportion of the patients remain at risk for Covid-19. Barrier measures should be maintained, and vaccination of the relatives of these patients should be encouraged.




Just to add, the fact that the delta variant is more vaccine-resistant is not the same thing as a diminishing immune response in the body over time.

---

I got the J&J yesterday on top of my two Pfizer shots and two bootleg vaccines last summer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

As has been pointed out more than once, if the virus in question is delta the viral load is the same whether vaccinated or unvaccinated. That's the reason for the CDC's change in policy.



Double check your math. And did you mean unvaccinated?

---

No, but he stepped on his own dick by using the term "rate" incorrectly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splat

I got the J&J yesterday on top of my two Pfizer shots and two bootleg vaccines last summer.

---

Splat is going to be the source of the untreatable superCOVID mutation, but the good news is it'll also get you so high you won't feel a thing.

Kids under 12. Who cares?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splat

I got the J&J yesterday on top of my two Pfizer shots and two bootleg vaccines last summer.

---

https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...58&oe=6107B21A

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

As has been pointed out more than once, if the virus in question is delta the viral load is the same whether vaccinated or unvaccinated. That's the reason for the CDC's change in policy.



Double check your math. And did you mean unvaccinated?

---

Sorry, guess I missed that. Haven't been following this thread that closely due to excessive cunting.

While that means if he has delta, I would have still been exposed to the same amount of virus wether he was vaxed or not, it doesn't make him any less of an asshole for not getting the shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

Your chart (not the table) is labeled cases vs hospitalizations, not case rates vs hospitalization rates. If it's absolute numbers and not rates then the same number of cases in a group roughly six times larger suggests a lower overall case rate. Regardless, the chart clearly shows the vaccine is effective when it comes to preventing hospitalizations.

Re the table which does appear to show a smaller difference in case rates between the two groups: there's evidence data from a month ago got the denominator wrong (since mid July data normalized to group size shows 3 times more unvaccinated cases vs vaccinated ). That's inline with what Israeli government data indicates for effectiveness in preventing infection against the delta variant vs. previous variants (64 percent vs. 97 percent)

So, as things stand cases in Israel are 1/10th their peak prior to widespread vaccination, serious cases are at an lower relative rate, nearly four times lower, and ICU admissions are 1/20th what they were.




To reiterate the response above, you're referring to the table not the chart. It looks like the table contained incomplete data and as a result got the denominator wrong when making the calculations.

---

I was talking specifically about the table, my mistake saying chart. That seems to be the source of the confusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

LOL. Are Ron and CS really arguing that all vaccines are ineffective?



Exactly. My sister is an organ transplant recipient and the antirejection medication she's on renders vaccines ineffective, at least that's what her doctors are worried about. We've got people like Ron and CS that think they're more important than everyone else and don't care about being part of society, trying to get beyond this thing, so they put others at risk. Extraordinarily selfish and stupid.

Same is the case for kids...but yeah, don't do anything to possibly help society get past this because you don't want your face covered or because you're afraid of a getting a shot.

---

Seems the same people scared to get a vaccine are the same type who have to carry a gun to the supermarket to feel safe.

The most scared bunch of people on the planet.

Extreme fear masked as “freedom” so they don’t hurt their own feelings.




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

I was talking specifically about the table, my mistake saying chart. That seems to be the source of the confusion.

---

RJ doesn’t know the difference between a chart and a table.

btw, do you have the link for the chart?
and did you get vaxxed or not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...58&oe=6107B21A

---

I’ve been to Gary Indiana. I’m pretty sure that’s a fake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DougW

the absolute number is 100 times higher but that is not the rate, or is that your point that they don't understand its not a rate?

per rates one is .1% in vaxxed and 50% in un

---

Sorry what I meant was:

this is what an antivaxxer would say - “that the rate is 100x higher in the vaxxed group!”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splat

I got the J&J yesterday on top of my two Pfizer shots and two bootleg vaccines last summer.

---

Do you also do your own dentistry?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennymac

Sorry what I meant was:

this is what an antivaxxer would say - “that the rate is 100x higher in the vaxxed group!”

---

Got it. You had me worried about you for a minute. Or maybe I'm slow.

Apparently I’m the slow one. I’ll take a lap and a nap.