Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 11/26/2021 at 8:13 PM, Ivanhoe said:

Only a horse-paste-eating, RW thug would posit the possibility that a respiratory virus could evolve. Joe Biden promised he would end COVID, periodt.

 

Without being partisan, Trump said it would be all over by now. Politicians eh, what you gonna do? :)

There are reports out of South Africa its really not as bad as its been made out. The problem of course being, if South Africa didnt want to be locked down, that is precisely what they would be saying. Reports out of the UK say its been infecting people whom have been double jabbed.

The best guess is it evolved in someone whom was immune compromised, possibly someone with AIDS perhaps? Which points again to the experts saying that Africa must be vaccinated to stop this kind of thing happening, once again seemingly to turn up on target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 13.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, lucklucky said:

Der Zeitgeist  can you reread properly the graphic i posted?

 It is number of infected per 100000 persons. 

Your graphic is totally wrong.

In the graphic i posted it is bigger the proportion of vaccinated with COVID.

Oh, the old "I do not know what an infection rate is, nor what it shows" mistake...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

We've been through this already (several times, actually).

RaYtjYM.png

Wrong graphic.

If you have 2000 persons per 100000 with Covid and vaccinated

If you  have 1000 persons per 100000 with Covid and not vaccinated.

There is no way that the proportion of persons not vaccinated with  Covid can be bigger than proportion of persons vaccinated with Covid.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, lucklucky said:

Wrong graphic.

If you have 2000 persons per 100000 with Covid and vaccinated

If you  have 1000 persons per 100000 with Covid and not vaccinated.

There is no way that the proportion of persons not vaccinated with  Covid can be bigger than proportion of persons vaccinated with Covid.

No. You assume that everyone is constantly tested and the infection status of everyone is constantly known. But that's not the case, and the graph you quoted earlier doesn't show complete information about the entire population, but only those that are tested.

It's the same argument we had a few weeks ago. I can try to explain it to you, I cannot understand it for you, sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

We've been through this already (several times, actually).

RaYtjYM.png

Actually it doesnt seem to be that - for some reason it seems unvaccinated are in fact registering as positives less as rate as well. I was wondering myself but looking at the tables of same data, the rates are in fact not per 100'000 population but  per 100K vaccinated/unvaxxed. It's a curious result, although among the later graphs on hospitalization, ICU and death rates of vaccinated are lower by clear margin as one would expect.

Perhaps an effect of remaining unvaccinated not inclined to get tested because it's just a flu anyway, or the vaccinated being inclined to socialize in public places more freely, or something else... In UK one would expect the vaxx/unvaxx bars close anyway, since the AZ is not doing that great to prevent infection with the delta, especially after some months have passed, and with 2-week period between the two shots as was done in the UK. But a bit surprising still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

11 minutes ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

No. You assume that everyone is constantly tested and the infection status of everyone is constantly known. But that's not the case, and the graph you quoted earlier doesn't show complete information about the entire population, but only those that are tested.

It's the same argument we had a few weeks ago. I can try to explain it to you, I cannot understand it for you, sorry.

So now it is the people that are not tested, so you have no way to know their infection rates, that gives you knowledge about infection rates.  

 

Interesting "understanding"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lucklucky said:

 

So now it is the people that are not tested, so you have no way to know their infection rates, that gives you knowledge about infection rates.  

 

Interesting "understanding"...

Sorry, but I'm not having the same argument about this once again. 

The point you made earlier by misinterpreting that graph is essentially that being vaccinated carries a higher risk of COVID infection than being unvaccinated.

If that is the assumption you want to make for your own decisions regarding vaccination or getting a booster, that's fine, I really don't care. I'm dealing with enough crazy anti-vaxxer arguments in my real life, and I don't have to deal with this crap in my free time. Good luck to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

Sorry, but I'm not having the same argument about this once again. 

The point you made earlier by misinterpreting that graph is essentially that being vaccinated carries a higher risk of COVID infection than being unvaccinated.

If that is the assumption you want to make for your own decisions regarding vaccination or getting a booster, that's fine, I really don't care. I'm dealing with enough crazy anti-vaxxer arguments in my real life, and I don't have to deal with this crap in my free time. Good luck to you.

First you present a wrong graphic that do not represent the chart i posted. 

So it is you that misrepresented the chart.

When i pointed that, you change the subject and say instead it is the persons not tested that will make your graphic right.

Then challenged again and you evade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, jmsaari said:

Perhaps an effect of remaining unvaccinated not inclined to get tested because it's just a flu anyway, or the vaccinated being inclined to socialize in public places more freely, or something else... 

Something like that, probably, depending on the testing strategies different countries tend to pursue and other mitigation measures being in effect for particular groups.

Whatever it is, I'm pretty sure it's not "vaccines cause Covid" like some people here apparently believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, lucklucky said:

First you present a wrong graphic that do not represent the chart i posted. 

So it is you that misrepresented the chart.

When i pointed that, you change the subject and say instead it is the persons not tested that will make your graphic right.

Then challenged again and you evade.

Like I said, I'm not having the same argument over and over again.

If you want to believe that vaccines cause Covid, go ahead. Good luck with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

Like I said, I'm not having the same argument over and over again.

If you want to believe that vaccines cause Covid, go ahead. Good luck with that.

Since you believe that people that are not tested will make your chart right,  the chances are that you will believe anything that will be convenient for the time. Including if it will be useful that vaccines cause Covid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really care if vaccinated people were to contract covid more often (if it were a fact, it would fly right in the face of conventional wisdom, so I'm not ready to believe that without further evidence).

I'm concerned about the health care system being overwhelmed, and where we're observing it, it's the unvasccinated people who are clogging the system, and as a result of their irresponsible obstinacy, denying the necessary treatment of others. I know people with cancer that won't get their scheduled treatments because ignorant anti-vaxxers are filling up the wards so fast that all scheduled treatments are on hold, again, and I'm beginning to lose patience with those fuckers, and people who feed them the bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anecdotal evidence seen first hand, so worthless. When France required the COVID pass for the population, protests started:

https://www.independentespanol.com/?utm_source=redirect

When Italy required the COVID pass, less violent protests kicked off and ended up in an unexpected direction:

https://www.euronews.com/2021/10/25/how-a-covid-pass-protest-sparked-a-debate-in-italy-on-its-fascist-past

Over here, presented with the possibility of no holiday travel and no bars, there are queues to get the shots!

https://elpais.com/sociedad/2021-11-25/la-vacunacion-se-anima-en-espana-tras-el-aumento-de-la-incidencia-y-la-posible-ampliacion-del-certificado-covid.html

I got the reinforcement Moderna shot (I had J&J originally) yesterday and the queues for the first shot were running out of the door...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spain does handle the whole process rather well. First of all getting your shot is easy and you have to actively opt out to not get vaccinated, while for example in Germany you have to make an effort to get your shot. And the hard early waves seem to have reduced the number of anti-vaxxers by a lot.

From the British study, the fact that really matters: 

COVID-19 cases presenting to emergency care (within 28 days of a positive specimen) resulting in an
overnight inpatient admission by vaccination status between week 38 and week 41 2021

grafik.png.be23adc12c583e16de507803f0c6d154.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

I'm concerned about the health care system being overwhelmed, and where we're observing it, it's the unvasccinated people who are clogging the system, and as a result of their irresponsible obstinacy, denying the necessary treatment of others. I know people with cancer that won't get their scheduled treatments because ignorant anti-vaxxers are filling up the wards so fast that all scheduled treatments are on hold, again, and I'm beginning to lose patience with those fuckers, and people who feed them the bullshit.

Yes, that's also why I no longer have any patience to discuss a lot of the bullshit that's routinely brought up in this thread.

A friend of mine is currently pregnant with her second child. Shortly after the start of her pregancy, she discovered a lump in her right hand, at he base of her thumb that kept growing. At first it looked like they might be able to remove it,  with a special form of local anesthesia before the pregancy has advanced so much that no doctor wants to risk surgery any longer. But now because the hospitals are completly swamped by unvaccinated COVID cases (80-90% unvaccinated in the ICU at my local university hospital), so that's all off the table until the child is born.

Now my friend has to wait until March with a freaking tumor growing in her hand, constantly thinking of her own mother that already died of cancer last winter with no one being able to visit her in hospital when she was dying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 10:47 PM, Mistral said:

I am just going to leave this here

 

 

Nu was also skipped because of the possible confusion between "nu" and "new" and Xi was skipped because disease name should not include geographic locations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, lucklucky said:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1027511/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf

Vaccinated-2x-more-likely-to-be-infected-30-or-older-UK.thumb.jpg.a1dfa5ce9fdd38c1463260ba684007e4.jpg

 

Higher rate of Covid infections in vaccinated  than in those that did not took the vaccine.

Turns out that this was due to lazy statistics work by the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) that has been notised by the ONS (the UK's statistics agency) and subsequently (edit: partially) corrected in newer reports. This was in all the papers back in September (first thing I found was an Guardian article)

https://osr.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/correspondence/ed-humpherson-to-dr-jenny-harries-covid-19-vaccine-surveillance-statistics/

The UKHSA has good numbers on the number of people vaccinated (in the 40-49 group about 6.4 million) for obvious reasons. The number of unvaccinated can obviously not be determined as accurately but it should be the number of people minus the number of people vaccinated. As anyone who has done basic arithmetic knows if you subtract two numbers of similar size the result is very sensitive to errors in the numbers and here is where it goes wrong.

UKHSA used their own data from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) and got a number of 1.7 million unvaccinated (note this is based on a FoI release of week 36 data not week 38 like in the graph). This data is not reliable enough (includes dead, moved, duplicates etc) and if we use use the actual census numbers we get a 700k unvaccinated. That one correction increases the rate among 40-49 by a factor of 2.4 which makes the numbers more resonable.

Week 36 data:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/797276/response/1907896/attach/4/1440 FOI Population rates used in Covid 19 surveillance report.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

Edited by glappkaeft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly, even relatively straight forward statistics can be unintuitive at first glance. My personal rule on statistics is to never comment on anything unless I actually run at least some of the numbers myself. So in this case I quickly (as above) found that the UKHSA screwed up badly when they calculated the number of unvaccinated people. Why? I had to search for it since I needed the number to calculate the rate and it was not listed in the study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Samuel said:

Nu was also skipped because of the possible confusion between "nu" and "new" and Xi was skipped because disease name should not include geographic locations.

How can Nu (which is not Nu in Greek but anyway thats another story) be confused in Italian or Chinese or any other language with new?  Every single language has a phonetic way of spelling the Greek Alphabet which differs from the Greek (As in English Ni became Nu) and I am sure Nu does not mean new in every one of them.

Nu /ˈnj/ (uppercase Ν lowercase ν; Greek: νι ni [ni]) 

And, when Rho comes up I am sure they will also skip that right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rho,_Lombardy

Thats one of the lamest excuses ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time I see Nu with N capitalised I read it as a Nusselt number... but i do see the point that avoiding the potential confusion of a "nju" or "new" variant being discussed. Xi vs Rho.. well, not at R yet but some regions, and their leaders, will presumably prove more equal than others....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Without being partisan, Trump said it would be all over by now. Politicians eh, what you gonna do? :)

There are reports out of South Africa its really not as bad as its been made out. The problem of course being, if South Africa didnt want to be locked down, that is precisely what they would be saying. Reports out of the UK say its been infecting people whom have been double jabbed.

The best guess is it evolved in someone whom was immune compromised, possibly someone with AIDS perhaps? Which points again to the experts saying that Africa must be vaccinated to stop this kind of thing happening, once again seemingly to turn up on target.

And he was just as dumb when he said it.  Here is the difference I see between Biden and Trump when it comes to Covid; Trump was a critical driver of us having a vaccine in under a year.   Best industry estimate is that had we gone with the original CDC/EU plans of localizing the development project within the CDC/NIH/ECDC we would be looking at approximately 1/5 the funding and using the same established vaccine platforms we would be looking at 2023 for release.  Without Trump and Merkle you do not have a vaccine.  Period.  Those two had to fight down rebellions within their respective CDC's and fight their deep state tooth and nail to make this happen.  For those who are most concerned with Covid I would propose that even if you hate either of those two you have to admit that they are two of the most critical and effective politicians in at least 2 decades.  I can thus give Trump a pass for saying stupid lying bullshit where I won't Biden; Trump was personally responsible through his decisions (along with his partner Merkle) for a vaccine that saved millions of lives.  Kinda tilts the scales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...