patrick.net

Zak says

So here's thing thing. It's kind of hard to say "yeah this is already happening a little bit with the low current death rate of covid" but then say the risk is low if a mutation with a higher death rate crops up.

That's also a common lie. If you have had a natural covid infection you are protected against most if not all variants, mutants, call em what you will, to a high enough degree that you won't get seriously ill. That's called t/b cell immunity. The mrna/dna vaccines that only build on the antibody response fade quickly and provide no protection for variants that alter their protein(s) enough to evade or render the ABs useless. You will most certainly lose the herd immunity race (plus lots of side effects from the agents) against the corona viruses without a high degree of natural immunity from real infections among the low risk groups, that's why we have never had a vaccine for a CV. A vaccine's main purpose is to protect the vulnerable, not to add to long term herd immunity, which doesn't work for many viruses such as the flu virus. In fact antibody mediated vaccination works better with bacteria, that's why the tetanus vaccine is so successful. For viruses acquired t/b cell immunity from exposure is vastly superior.

mell says

In fact it's a crime exposing adolescents and kids with close to zero risk of serious covid illness to the much higher risk of serous side effects from the agent.

Hmm, so what is the death rate for people age 18-24 from covid vs from the vaccine? I'll wait. This should be a 2 second google search if you are correct.

ThreeBays says

Covid increases your risk of death by...
33% for age 30-39
35% for age 40-49
60% for age 50-65

You must not have much of a point if you stoop to this. If the risk of death for someone in a given year is .00003%, and some factor increases the risk to .00004%, that is a "33% increase." The reality of risk going from next to nothing to another next to nothing is not negated because you play a statistical trick. Percent increase is almost always a propaganda tool to hide small numbers.

Even Lauren Job’s 'The Atlantic' is acknowledging just how much liberals have come to love their cozy authoritarianism.
“….liberals who aren’t quite ready to let go of pandemic restrictions. For this subset, diligence against COVID-19 remains an expression of political identity—even when that means overestimating the disease’s risks or setting limits far more strict than what public-health guidelines permit.”
“For many progressives, extreme vigilance was in part about opposing Donald Trump. Some of this reaction was born of deeply felt frustration with how he handled the pandemic. It could also be knee-jerk. “If he said, ‘Keep schools open,’ then, well, we’re going to do everything in our power to keep schools closed,” Monica Gandhi, a professor of medicine at UC San Francisco, told me.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/05/liberals-covid-19-science-denial-lockdown/618780/

This pol shows how frightened the Left was by the disinformation they received from their pandering media. They actually thought if you got this "nightmare disease" you had a 50% chance of hospitalization.
“But Democrats got it wrong again when it came to rates of hospitalization. The actual rate is 1-5% but 41% of Democrats put the hospitalization rate at 50+ percent, which is way off. Meanwhile, Republicans were 2 1/2 times as likely to give the correct answer.”
https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2021/03/18/survey-republicans-underestimate-covid-risks-democrats-overestimate-n380956

Onvacation says

@Zak

When do you think the pandemic will end?

I actually think we are getting pretty close to only having a low background level of cases. I think UCSD reported zero new cases in the hospital today. And for sure the hospitals aren't filling up with covid vaccine symptom cases despite 100 million people just getting jabbed, so ... ya know.. there is that. I think by July it will be background spreading around the unvaccinated.

To me, we can go the way of polio and kill this thing off, or we can have an irritating and slightly more deadly flu that ends up lingering in the background for decades.. perhaps mutating and slowly nullifying vaccine effectiveness.

Robert Sproul says

diligence against COVID-19 remains an expression of political identity—even when that means overestimating the disease’s risks or setting limits far more strict than what public-health guidelines permit

I agree with this statement. There has been an abuse of authority with regards to covid. The evidence I've seen nonetheless shows the vaccine is relatively safe, while more dangerous than normal vaccines, but less dangerous than covid itself by a large margin. I would vehemently oppose that we mandate it, but I would highly recommend we educate and encourage people to get it.

HeadSet says

Percent increase is almost always a propaganda tool to hide small numbers.

I agree with this statement, but in this case, I think he was just showing that there is a difference in reference to a post I made. For instance, I'm still waiting on @mell to post a simple death rate due to covid vs due to the vaccine for those in the 18-24 range. The numbers for both are vanishingly small, and yet, they are still higher for covid, despite mell's claim to the contrary.

(And not just claim to the contrary, but claim that it is in fact so far opposite that it is criminal) ... Stiiiiiilllll waiiiiting......

Zak says

mell says

In fact it's a crime exposing adolescents and kids with close to zero risk of serious covid illness to the much higher risk of serous side effects from the agent.

Hmm, so what is the death rate for people age 18-24 from covid vs from the vaccine? I'll wait. This should be a 2 second google search if you are correct.

Again this is not a correct approach and there may be no foolproof one, but definitely one approaching correctness. When you look up the deaths - you probably are referring to the 0.1% number - you need to consider that those are only people with serious enough illness to.be hospitalized. What is missed are the other 99% of those age 18-24 who have no symptoms or such mild symptoms that they never get tested for covid or go to the hospital (that's also why it has almost 30% death rate for ages 70-79 because those are hospitalized patients only). Again, take seroprevalence and apply the number of deaths to that, then the number of deaths/serious illness from the vaccine is far higher than from covid. On top of that you need to factor in those 20%-50% who don't get enough exposure for an infection at all, whereas the jab is a 100% certainty. Of course if you only look at the serious enough cases to be confirmed - ok some mild cases may get caught when the whole family takes a test when one member gets sick - then that death rate may seem higher than the one from the agent, but if you do the math correctly taking the sampled seroprevalence into account there's no way a normal/healthy 18-24 yr old should take the risk of taking those agents/vaccines.

Zak says

The numbers for both are vanishingly small, and yet, they are still higher for covid

Are they higher for Covid vs Jab with a realistic comparison? That is, you count count only those who died of Covid and not those died of another cause but may have have Covid or estimated to have had Covid at time of death. Also to be fair, you would need to subtract out the historical percentage of flu deaths for ages18-24, as it is pretty obvious that flu deaths were combined with Covid deaths this time.

ThreeBays says

Zak says

The numbers for both are vanishingly small, and yet, they are still higher for covid, despite mell's claim to the contrary.

Correct. Based on the VAERS data we have (which may be over or undercounting) getting the Vax reduces your risk at any age by 100 to 200x.

| VAERS Deaths | COVID-19 Deaths | Risk reduction from vaccination
18-29 | 29 events | 2125 | 98.6%
30-39 | 43 events | 6165 | 99.3%
40-49 | 85 events | 16694 | 99.5%
50-64 | 386 events | 86390 | 99.6%
65+ | 2152 events | 449938 | 99.5%

They're not, the risks of death from vaccination are much higher for healthy people,. Math doesn't lie. And while covid death numbers and vaers report numbers are likely somewhat inaccurate, 40%-80%+ seroprevalence just is. Fact. An by this number alone coercing a minor to get vaccinated should be considered a crime at this point.

@mell
he posted the numbers right there, and your response is "They're not" LOL..

pay no attention.. 2+2 does not equal 4 seroprevalence prestidigitation!

and then you say math doesn't lie! LOL!!! You're fucking funny!

Also note, mell does not dispute the 29 number for VAERS .. It's SO FUCKING CRIMINAL that 29 people died! despite if it saved even 1/10th of those that died of covid it would still be 10x better than getting covid...

yup TERRIBLE vaccine. you fucking simpleton..

MisdemeanorRebellionNoCoupForYou says

If we return to a non-Weathermen Media Era, it's going to be astounding at how many Mask Karens and Soys claim they never believed in the vaccine or the CCP Virus scam.

I'll second that.

I've had people call me nuts for saying stuff like, "Saddam Hussein DOESN'T have a weapons of mass destruction program! If he did, our government would show actual proof, not fucking mock up computer drawings!" - only to have them tell me years later "I never believed Iraq had a weapons of mass destruction program".

I'm so tired of living among sheep. They'll join the gang in a second, and all they will never go against it.

Zak says

HeadSet says

Percent increase is almost always a propaganda tool to hide small numbers.

I agree with this statement, but in this case, I think he was just showing that there is a difference in reference to a post I made. For instance, I'm still waiting on @mell to post a simple death rate due to covid vs due to the vaccine for those in the 18-24 range. The numbers for both are vanishingly small, and yet, they are still higher for covid, despite mell's claim to the contrary.

(And not just claim to the contrary, but claim that it is in fact so far opposite that it is criminal) ... Stiiiiiilllll waiiiiting......

I did the math for you in the answer above. You should be able to compute the real risk given seroprevalence and not hospitalized patients. Cnbc September 2020: "!at least 121 deaths ages below 21 years!" (0-21 years, not just 18-24), by that time seroprevalce was already sampled at 40% minimum. 100MM people are below 21 in the US, 40% are 40MM people, so 121/40000000=0.000003025, or 0.0003%, but the other 60MM didn't have a covid infection then and may never get an infection so it's even much lower than that! And those dead may likely have had underlying conditions to a larger extent, so the real risk for a healthy adolescent is even much lower than much lower!

mell says

I did the math for you in the answer above. You should be able to compute the real risk given seroprevalence and not hospitalized patients.

no computation necessary, nor hospitalization rate. since the population count is the same for either statistic, you can just look at a raw count. 29 vaccine deaths 18-29
2125 covid deaths. with 100 million vaccinated, only up to 3-5x more people in the 18-24 range can even get vaccinations. at this rate that would only be 150 deaths vs over 2000. you're fucking ridiculous and cant do basic arithmetic, and call other people who can liars.

ThreeBays says

CDC already splits covid from flu and pneumonia. The latter two were not insignificant last year.

US Flu deaths for 2018-2019 Flu Season ~ 34,000
US Flu deaths for 2019 - 2020 Flu season ~ 22,0000
US Flu Deaths for 2020 - 2021 Flu Season ~ 600

Looking at those numbers, you seriously think the Covid death count does not include Flu deaths?

assume covid deaths are overinflated by double. the vaccine still lowers the risk of dying 50x for every age range

Zak says

mell says

I did the math for you in the answer above. You should be able to compute the real risk given seroprevalence and not hospitalized patients.

no computation necessary, nor hospitalization rate. since the population count is the same for either statistic, you can just look at a raw count. 29 vaccine deaths 18-29
2125 covid deaths. with 100 million vaccinated, only up to 3-5x more people in the 18-24 range can even get vaccinations. at this rate that would only be 150 deaths vs over 2000. you're fucking ridiculous and cant do basic arithmetic, and call other people who can liars.

If you don't want to understand basic math and instead stoop to insults I can't help you. Literally nobody age 18-24 has been vaccinated, if you vaccinated all of them the deaths would far outpace the deaths among the 40%-80% who have already contracted Covid. I did the math above and it's pretty clear, the risk of catching covid and dying from it is not existent for age 18-24. The risk from the jab is still "little" but much higher.

HeadSet says

ThreeBays says

CDC already splits covid from flu and pneumonia. The latter two were not insignificant last year.

US Flu deaths for 2018-2019 Flu Season ~ 34,000
US Flu deaths for 2019 - 2020 Flu season ~ 22,0000
US Flu Deaths for 2020 - 2021 Flu Season ~ 600

Looking at those numbers, you seriously think the Covid death count does not include Flu deaths?

Of course it includes almost all flu deaths as covid deaths as presumption is enough. People were not tested for anything else than covid or bot at all and the presumption was made. It's not necessarily always wrong to presume under high load/stress (although it came with financial incentives) if the treatment is similar but you can't use these numbers to do math with it.

personal

Zak says

assume covid deaths are overinflated by double. the vaccine still lowers the risk of dying 50x for every age range

Where did that 50x come from? I see the discussion where one compares the risk of Covid vs the risk of the jab. Are you assuming that getting the jab is 100% effective in preventing Covid? Once you get the jab it is impossible to die of Covid? I am presently in Omaha visiting in-laws. The local paper today had an article about a local nursing home that has 29 cases of Covid - despite all the residents having been vaccinated. Also, it is not just about immediately dying from the jab. What about the long term effects?

There is no way that a healthy person with virtually no chance of dying from Covid should take a jab that does carry a very small risk of death, a risk of immediate side effects, plus an unknown long term risk.

mell says

If you don't want to understand basic math and instead stoop to insults I can't help you.

Let's get some more facts straight. If you want to dispute data, and argue validity of numbers, that's firmly in the professional discourse realm. You call me a liar while you tell me that 29 is a bigger number that 2000, and I'll call you a stupid wrong fuck right to your face. You started it not me.

HeadSet says

Zak says

assume covid deaths are overinflated by double. the vaccine still lowers the risk of dying 50x for every age range

Where did that 50x come from? I see the discussion where one compares the risk of Covid vs the risk of the jab. Are you assuming that getting the jab is 100% effective in preventing Covid? Once you get the jab it is impossible to die of Covid? I am presently in Omaha visiting in-laws. The local paper today had an article about a local nursing home that has 29 cases of Covid - despite all the residents having been vaccinated. Also, it is not just about immediately dying from the jab. What about the long term effects?

There is no way that a healthy person with virtually no chance of dying from Covid should take a jab that does carry a very small risk of death, a risk of immediate side effects, plus an unknown long term risk.

Yes that math is wrong. We didn't even go into calculating the effectiveness of the vaccine and instead took 2k deaths "with covid" (pcr test within 28 days or presumed without test) as face value for dying of covid. Also keep in mind that most of those had underlying health conditions for which a vaccine may be appropriate. But for those young and healthy the risk of serious events from covid is so low that a guaranteed jab would expose then to a higher risk. Targeted vaccination for a small subset is the way to go.

Zak says

Also note, mell does not dispute the 29 number for VAERS .. It's SO FUCKING CRIMINAL that 29 people died! despite if it saved even 1/10th of those that died of covid it would still be 10x better than getting covid...

yup TERRIBLE vaccine. you fucking simpleton..

It becomes criminal when it becomes compulsory for education, extra-curricular activities, to work, and to travel. Not having the choice to opt out and being essentially forced to take something in order to continue living your life as it has been is what is criminal. No test with 99.999% certainty of proving patient compatibility with the experimental biological agent without adverse side effects or death? No JAB!

HeadSet says

Where did that 50x come from?

yeah it comes from death rates. some people dispute that over 2000 people in the 18-29 range have died due to reporting errors, or dying of something else while infected with covid for example. I don't really buy this, but to give that argument the benefit of the doubt, assume it is true for a moment, and that covid rates are overreported by something stupid like 2x. So instead of 2000 dead, it's only 1000 for example. In this case, we have 29 deaths vs 1000 deaths.. still a ridiculous multiplier (ok maybe 30x instead of 50x or something). Nobody is disputing that 29 people in the 18-29 range have died from the vaccine. It's sad, but it's like 30x less sad than all the people that would have died from covid.

ForcedTQ says

It becomes criminal when it becomes compulsory for education, extra-curricular activities, to work, and to travel. Not having the choice to opt out and being essentially forced to take something in order to continue living your life as it has been is what is criminal.

Ok..look I'm reasonable. I absolutely said I don't think the vaccine should be compulsory by law for governmental purposes. I temper that by saying it is 100% acceptable for private business to take some reasonable measures to prevent the spread of a highly communicable disease among their workforce and potential other customers. For instance, enforcing that customers/employees wear a mask during the time the virus is highly prevalent. Temperature checks seem reasonable. However vaccine cards do not, in the same way disclosing HIV status does not.

I 100% don't understand school vaccination requirements. If the vaccine works, and you send your kids to school vaccinated, then they should be protected against other kids who didn't get the vaccination, with a high level of effectiveness. I mean, I feel sorry for a kid if their idiot parent won't get them the polio vaccine, but that's part of a free country, and punishing the kid worse by denying them an education seems more idiotic than the anti vax parents. If your kid has a "special need" that they need safety from anti vaxers.. I'm sorry, but the safety of that 1 kid against a possible risk is on the parent to mitigate.. not on the school..

Zak says

To me, we can go the way of polio and kill this thing off,

So you think the cure to the common cold is THIS vaccine? Or is THIS virus laboratory made and so dangerous that we must stamp it out of existence? Some third choice?

Zak says

It's sad, but it's like 30x less sad than all the people that would have died from covid.

I am not concerned with the exact numbers so much, just the logic before you punched the calculator. You are assuming the jab is like the Polio Vaccine. One shot of Polio Vaccine stops a person from ever getting polio. Unfortunately, the jab does not prevent one from getting Covid. Therefore, it is a logic flaw to say a particular control group had 100 deaths from Covid but only 10 deaths from the jab, so the jab is 10x safer. Nor can you say that the jab saved anyone from getting or dying from Covid.

Zak says

mell says

If you don't want to understand basic math and instead stoop to insults I can't help you.

Let's get some more facts straight. If you want to dispute data, and argue validity of numbers, that's firmly in the professional discourse realm. You call me a liar while you tell me that 29 is a bigger number that 2000, and I'll call you a stupid wrong fuck right to your face. You started it not me.

If you want to get technical you started when I mentioned coercing minors and you brought up stats for 18-29. I explained my math on that and more - almost all have underlying health conditions which skews the risk for a healthy person to a way too high number, plus many with underlying conditions don't qualify to get vaccinated in the first place - but that aside since when is a minor over 18? People 18-29 can make their own decisions by law for almost anything, but minors are 0-17 and should never be forced to take the vaccine and thus increase their risk of serious events vs naturally taking on covid.

ThreeBays says

Let's not forget the covid numbers are further stacked against you if you're a male.

and fat or unhealthy.

Onvacation says

So you think the cure to the common cold is THIS vaccine?

No. We find ourselves fortunate enough, that this particular strain and slightly mutated strains that are succeptible to prevention by the vaccine could actually be wiped out entirely in the way polio was. Lots of people are very wary about this vaccine. The data I have seen seems to show that it is pretty durned safe, yet there is a lot of messaging counter to that. Even right here on Patnet, people like mell try to call out very straightforward data that shows it is about 100x safer to get the vaccine than to get Covid, and call people that illustrate this simple fact liar. That is a tall order to fight against . Covid in no way is the same disaster as polio, but we do have a similar opportunity to make the world just a bit better, and a bit safer. And we can do it with a 100x lower risk than just letting people get covid.

So to be transparent and honest when discussing the vaccine, it's relatively important to own the real risks from the covid vaccine. People really do die from it. But again, it is 100x worse to just let it run free amongst the population without at least calling out the ahem errenous statements like mell makes. I think that with 140 million vaccinated currently, and probably a good chunk more already immune from infection, known or unknown we're probably getting close to this thing getting strangled out.

So, if I call out bullshit a bit more strongly, it's not because I think i am saving the world or something.. Covid is really not polio terrible, but it is 500k old and unhealthy people dead terrible, which is still pretty bad. It makes me sad we couldn't have gotten vaccine over into India faster, because I bet their population is actually going to have a few million dead due to this. And really, all these conspiracy claims do serve to distract from that kind of unified front to go bring this around the world. That's sad, and I think its worth calling out the bullshit over.

Zak says

Onvacation says

@Zak

When do you think the pandemic will end?

I actually think we are getting pretty close to only having a low background level of cases.

I don't believe the "pandemic" will ever end.

The shutdowns are being done for other reasons, not to prevent the spread of what is quite obviously (to me at least) a minor disease.

It will be September and we'll still be bombarded with propaganda about how we're all about to die. This pandemic only ends when people demand that it ends.

The problem is getting people to realize how viciously the power structure that runs our government deceives us. That's the struggle.

mell says

I explained my math on that and more - almost all have underlying health conditions which skews the risk for a healthy person to a way too high number,

Don't talk mealy mouthed out the side of your face. Are you saying the 29 that died from the vaccine were all perfectly healthy and had no medical condition? Are you actually claiming to fucking know that!?!? And on top of that, you're saying those 29 people absolutely would not have died from the virus!?!?

Here.. try it out.. "Sorry for calling you a liar. You make a good point, and the data shows I was wrong"

Its pretty easy, and you can stop defending a wrong position on top of it.

In 500 days we went from 2 weeks to flatten the curve to 70% jabbed with the experimental biologic agent and you don't have to wear a mask outdoors any more.

And as soon as they reach that goal they will have to wait until the early adopters get their "update" jabs.

16-YEAR-OLD GIRL DEAD AFTER VACC!NE

The systematic poisoning of the human race.

richwicks says

what is quite obviously (to me at least) a minor disease.

I mean, 500k people dead. I get that a bunch of them were old and had other conditions.. But fuck, thats a pretty dismissive blow off of half a million people? I mean, lots of doctors have fucking worked their asses off fighting this.

Yeah, the governmental response was shit, but it's a pretty far stretch to pretend this was all just made up or something. I 100% agree with you that we need to reign in out of control politicians. And as far as pandemic strecthing and restrictions.. Just fucking ignore them (but still respect private property rights if a business doesn't want you maskless)

But if your employer tells you they need a vaccination record tell them to fire you and then sue them.

Onvacation says

16-YEAR-OLD GIRL DEAD AFTER VACC!NE

Yeah it's sad, right Onvacation. There's a couple hundred more like that one for the vaccine across all ages. Unfortunately there are over 100x more of these sad stories because of covid in every single age range.

ThreeBays says

Trump really was a douchebag

And there you have it. The real reason for the pandemic. Too many people hated Trump more than they loved America. They were, are, willing to let our economy and culture deteriorate because orange man bad.

Does Biden really think that most Americans wear masks?