patrick.net

richwicks says

You're not harassing me. I think you're just disingenuous. I don't see the point in discussion when one of the people is being dishonest about their thinking and opinions.

Zak says

hehehehe lol omg I keep laughin...

I doubt it. I think it's just a dig at me, as you cannot explain any error in my logic.

Bottom line.

Before all that covid shit the common narrative wrt vaccination was that everybody who can be vaccinated against some disease needs to do it in order to protect these who can't be vaccinated for some medical reason. It is completely gone now. Instead they just scream their heads off: "get the jab or we'll punish you! FBI! Litigation!". Weird, huh?

Onvacation says

richwicks says

If the vaccine works, the unvaccinated aren't a threat to the vaccinated since they are immune.
If the vaccine doesn't work, there's no point in taking the vaccine at all.

Where's the error in my reasoning?

Many people are logic challenged, or they let their emotions take over.

The number of ICU beds that are available is relatively small. Most of these beds are taken by people with other medical problems. The death rates between Covid and the measles are roughly the same, but the same reason we don't want to see measles go through our populace we'd prefer not to see massive amounts of Covid cases.. If there were a substantial number of Covid cases requiring hospitalization, it could easily overwhelm the limited number of ICU beds available.

Having large numbers of unvaccinated members of society poses risks to the medical infrastructure.

They did the lockdowns (whether truly needed or not) to flatten the curve so our medical infrastructure wouldn't get overwhelmed. By not being vaccinated you could add to a spike in cases that would cause harm to others by having medical care denied to them.

richwicks says

I'm a year into a lockdown in California over a virus of which I have less than a 1% chance of dying from.

More like a quarter of that, .26%, unless you are living in a Nursing Facility.
And even less than that if you have some modest degree of health.

Misc says

The same arguments for not getting the Covid vaccine can be made for not getting the measles vaccine.

No. The measles vaccine is a tried and proven VACCINE! The experimental biologic agent is a experimental biologic agent and trials are ongoing.

See the difference?

WookieMan says

Asbestos was all the rage and we still are dealing with it in homes and businesses. How about them led pipes and paint? We got that wrong for decades and probably killed or disable probably 10's of millions of people from two mundane products that were thought to be safe. Not even a medication which we've currently got FDA approved ones killing people on a daily basis.

I would add sugars and high Omega 6 vegetable oils to that. An industry influenced government "Food Pyramid" that has killed and disabled millions and continues to do so.

If your argument is that it has the "Experimental" label that the FDA gave it, that argument is going to go away.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/pfizer-asks-fda-for-full-approval-of-coronavirus-vaccine/ar-BB1gsRQ2?ocid=msedgntp

Misc says

If your argument is that it has the "Experimental" label that the FDA gave it, that argument is going to go away.

It's not experimental because the FDA says it is. It's experimental because it is still being tested and we have yet to see the medium term effects much less the long term effects.

Robert Sproul says

I would add sugars and high Omega 6 vegetable oils to that. An industry influenced government "Food Pyramid" that has killed and disabled millions and continues to do so.

The man speaks the truth! I'd just add: Industrial lubes != food.

Booger says

Zak says

https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2021/05/06/india-doctors-hiding-kiley-pkg-lead-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/coronavirus-intl/

ehh.. not that bad really.. just runs the whole ICU out of oxygen... or is this fake news because CNN is the source..??

Fake news / propaganda. That, and if it's true, it says more about one places ability to maintain supplies, or shitty procurement processes.

CNN is Communist propaganda and very very gay.
https://patrick.net/post/1240230/2014-03-25-cnn-comes-out-as-gay?0#comments

Obligatory:

Onvacation says

You really have to ask yourself, Why does the government want every man, woman, and child to get injected with an experimental biologic agent for a cold that is asymptomatic or has minor symptoms for most? AND they are trying to pass it off as a "safe and effective vaccine" when it has caused many deaths and injuries, does not confer immunity, and will not stop you from spreading the disease.

Something nefarious is going on above and beyond all the nefarious stuff that is going on all the time.

Additionally, why are they pushing the vaccine on people who already had Covid and recovered. All the studies point to long-lasting T cell immunity, but they're pressuring us to still get the jab. The variant argument is bullshit.

Misc says

If there were a substantial number of Covid cases requiring hospitalization, it could easily overwhelm the limited number of ICU beds available.

Fine, then pressure "at risk" people to get the vaccine. Over 60 and people with serious underlying conditions. Not me.

zzyzzx says

I got the J&J!!
One and done :)

The weird part is....i was supposed to get dementia and now deformations? Even herpes and death is on the agenda!

Weird....not even herpes yet!???? seems to take longer with me. I'll keep you posed. If I dont respond for a few days, you will know I either have dementia or died.

porkchopexpress says

Fine, then pressure "at risk" people to get the vaccine. Over 60 and people with serious underlying conditions. Not me.

The jury is out on it already. No one wants it for the most part. They "estimate" IL is 30% or so vaccinated. I can get ANY of the shots tomorrow. Just roll up and get it.

I don't know, 70% of people in my state don't want it. I'm not a follow a pack guy either, but it's pretty obvious no one wants to take this and thinks it's BS. Everyone getting it is either elderly, essential worker just because it was offered and now anyone that basically wants it. 30% vaccinated.... lol.

Even with such a low vaccination rate, Chicago is planning to "open up," whatever that means. Nothing has changed. We just poked a bunch of people and they were un-brainwashed. It's a miracle. lol.

You know... If this were a real pandemic, we would need to run PR campaigns to encourage people to get a shot.

Just saying.

joshuatrio says

You know... If this were a real pandemic, we would need to run PR campaigns to encourage people to get a shot.

Just saying.

Agreed....its a scamdemic. Still got the shot though.

My cousin posts on FaceBook his bad reaction to both jabs. But FB can't let that go, and interjects a comment:

Zak says

mell says

You don't want to do follow any calculation

You're not doing calculations. You're dismissing broad swaths of society to fudge your numbers.

"This is for 0-21, but the percentage of those with underlying conditions for young adults til age 25 at least if not 30 are probably the same, around 75%. That would cut deaths among "healthy" to 1/4, or 500."

See that. That's bullshit, not math. You just wrote off your argument for 75% of the population. I'm beginning to think you're just fucking insane and its worthless to even talk to you.

It's clear what that means, maybe you're just being obtuse at this point, clinging to your government covid death numbers. It's clear to everyone that if 75% of those dead had underlying health conditions that the risk of dying from covid for the avg. healthy young person is much smaller and not worth the risk of the jab and boosters over time. Whereas the vaccine deaths have no such distribution, they affect otherwise perfectly healthy people the same way. Why is this so hard to understand?

WookieMan says

porkchopexpress says

Fine, then pressure "at risk" people to get the vaccine. Over 60 and people with serious underlying conditions. Not me.

The jury is out on it already. No one wants it for the most part. They "estimate" IL is 30% or so vaccinated. I can get ANY of the shots tomorrow. Just roll up and get it.

I don't know, 70% of people in my state don't want it. I'm not a follow a pack guy either, but it's pretty obvious no one wants to take this and thinks it's BS. Everyone getting it is either elderly, essential worker just because it was offered and now anyone that basically wants it. 30% vaccinated.... lol.

Even with such a low vaccination rate, Chicago is planning to "open up," whatever that means. Nothing has changed. We just poked a bunch of people and they were un-brainwashed. It's a miracle. lol.

That's the thing - it has passed through, the vaccination won't really make a difference as we have approached t cell herd immunity in pretty much all states. Hence your risk of catching covid if you haven't been exposed to it yet (40-81% already have, by now closer to 80%) is so low that the risks of the jab may be quite higher. The antibody test is not perfect unfortunately, since it doesn't tell t cell immunity which is the most important factor, even when antibodies have faded.

mell says

Why is this so hard to understand?

Money or emotion.

Some people are making a lot of money from this scam.

Other people are genuinely terrified and think the only path to safety is EVERYONE conforming to the government's [arbitrary] rules.

Onvacation says

mell says

Why is this so hard to understand?

Money or emotion.

Some people are making a lot of money from this scam.

Other people are genuinely terrified and think the only path to safety is EVERYONE conforming to the government's [arbitrary] rules.

We've had 30 positive pcr tests per day in a county of 1MM even before the mass vaccinations started. It's over and endemic now. And we have therapeutics. The risk profile has completely changed. There is no reason to keep the vaccination push going as it's a losing risk benefit math for 80% of the unvaxxed.

ThreeBays says

Vaccination with current vaccines are shown to elicit higher immune memory than getting the disease, because they deliver a consistent dose. Whereas viral infection has a 100 fold variance in immune memory.

Do you have a link to the study on the experimental biologic agent that shows this? Or did you just pull it out of your ass?

This experimental biologic agent is new. We can speculate, but we have no idea of its long term safety and efficacy.

Even worse, it could just be a placebo to ease us into the new world order.

Thank you Onvacation and Mell for doing all of this heavy lifting. I think Zak may be Bitcoin. They act very similar.

Robert Sproul says

The median age of death has been 83. In other words, folks who were fixing to die anyway.

Given that the media age of a CCP Virus death is greater than the median age at death, one could plausibly argue that the virus extends life.

It's true though. The average age of a CCP Virus death is greater than the median age at death.

Does that not lessen your fear at all?

Onvacation says

Why do you hate children?

Well, somebody hates children.
Infants as young as 6 MONTHS OLD are taking part in vaccine trials by both Pfizer and Moderna.
They don't get it and they don't significantly transmit it, but they need to be vaccinated anyway, apparently.

zzyzzx says

Booger says

Zak says

https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2021/05/06/india-doctors-hiding-kiley-pkg-lead-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/coronavirus-intl/

ehh.. not that bad really.. just runs the whole ICU out of oxygen... or is this fake news because CNN is the source..??

Fake news / propaganda. That, and if it's true, it says more about one places ability to maintain supplies, or shitty procurement processes.

CNN is Communist propaganda and very very gay.
https://patrick.net/post/1240230/2014-03-25-cnn-comes-out-as-gay?0#com...

Its a fake news an attempt to make it looks real. He is talking about parliament building that was planed more than 2 years ago and linking to virus! Now India's supreme court woke commie judges are on full scale activism and dictating on supplied who should get what and where! These idiots generally take decades to close any legal case if the people are still alive. These judges should be hanged in public.

WineHorror1 says

Thank you Onvacation and Mell for doing all of this heavy lifting. I think Zak may be Bitcoin. They act very similar.

All the NPC's spouts the same propaganda. It's hard to tell them apart.

I think it's a positive thing for them to come here and be subjected to facts and logic.

I used to be so ignorant. I cheered when we bombed Iraq. I bought a house during the bubble. Chemotherapy almost killed my wife.

One day while trying to figure it all out I ran into this site. There are a lot of smart people here that will research "the facts" and argue with logic. I have learned a lot.

If you try to bring lies and emotional arguments you won't get very far.

Onvacation says

WineHorror1 says

Thank you Onvacation and Mell for doing all of this heavy lifting. I think Zak may be Bitcoin. They act very simila

Zak has me on ignore because I made fun of him thinking Bitcoin will crash. He got sooooooooooooooooooo excited when Bitcoin dipped. I told him it will soon hit ATH's and it did......he couldnt take it :)

Patrick says

Robert Sproul says

The median age of death has been 83. In other words, folks who were fixing to die anyway.

Or more likely. all those people who died of old age were classified as being Covid deaths.

You did your research, Right?

Why you still wearing a mask?

PHARMACIST SHOWS BLANK COVID-19 VACCINE INSERT.

ThreeBays says

Here you go: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6529/eabf4063

So you pulled it out of your ass.

ThreeBays says

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK0C5tFHze8

Is there a copy of your vid on a platform that doesn't censor the president?

ThreeBays says

Onvacation says

ThreeBays says

Vaccination with current vaccines are shown to elicit higher immune memory than getting the disease, because they deliver a consistent dose. Whereas viral infection has a 100 fold variance in immune memory.

Do you have a link to the study on the experimental biologic agent that shows this? Or did you just pull it out of your ass?

Here you go: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6529/eabf4063

Looked at antibody, memory B cell, CD4+ T cell, and CD8+ T dynamics over 8 months.

Immunoglobulin G (IgG) to the spike protein was relatively stable over 6+ months. Spike-specific memory B cells were more abundant at 6 months than at 1 month after symptom onset. SARS...

People who have had CV or cold infections have had cross immunity for years if not decades, that's why up to 40% had preexisting immunity. Yet the agent fades after 5-12 months. If you truly believe these claims then you should not return for your "booster" in less than 5 years, maybe you can do one at year two, but generally it's every 5-15 years. Everything else is hogwash. Obviously people with natural infection have vastly superior t cell immunity against various characteristics (protein expression) of the virus, not just the s protein. That's why you usually get influenza every 5-15 years of you had a natural infection. Even the ABs can last years. Anything that "needs" you to come back every year or even more often you should be very skeptical of.

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3563

"
With public health responses around the world predicated on the assumption that the virus entered the human population with no pre-existing immunity before the pandemic,4 serosurvey data are leading many to conclude that the virus has, as Mike Ryan, WHO’s head of emergencies, put it, “a long way to burn.”

Yet a stream of studies that have documented SARS-CoV-2 reactive T cells in people without exposure to the virus are raising questions about just how new the pandemic virus really is, with many implications.

Not so novel coronavirus?
At least six studies have reported T cell reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 in 20% to 50% of people with no known exposure to the virus.5678910

In a study of donor blood specimens obtained in the US between 2015 and 2018, 50% displayed various forms of T cell reactivity to SARS-CoV-2.511 A similar study that used specimens from the Netherlands reported T cell reactivity in two of 10 people who had not been exposed to the virus.7

In Germany reactive T cells were detected in a third of SARS-CoV-2 seronegative healthy donors (23 of 68). In Singapore a team analysed specimens taken from people with no contact or personal history of SARS or covid-19; 12 of 26 specimens taken before July 2019 showed reactivity to SARS-CoV-2, as did seven of 11 from people who were seronegative against the virus.8 Reactivity was also discovered in the UK and Sweden.6910

Though these studies are small and do not yet provide precise estimates of pre-existing immunological responses to SARS-CoV-2, they are hard to dismiss, with several being published in Cell and Nature. Alessandro Sette, an immunologist from La Jolla Institute for Immunology in California and an author of several of the studies (box 1), told The BMJ, “At this point there are a number of studies that are seeing this reactivity in different continents, different labs. As a scientist you know that is a hallmark of something that has a very strong footing.”

Box 1
Swine flu déjà vu
In late 2009, months after the World Health Organization declared the H1N1 “swine flu” virus to be a global pandemic, Alessandro Sette was part of a team working to explain why the so called “novel” virus did not seem to be causing more severe infections than seasonal flu.12

Their answer was pre-existing immunological responses in the adult population: B cells and, in particular, T cells, which “are known to blunt disease severity.”12 Other studies came to the same conclusion: people with pre-existing reactive T cells had less severe H1N1 disease.1314 In addition, a study carried out during the 2009 outbreak by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 33% of people over 60 years old had cross reactive antibodies to the 2009 H1N1 virus, leading the CDC to conclude that “some degree of pre-existing immunity” to the new H1N1 strains existed, especially among adults over age 60.15

The data forced a change in views at WHO and CDC, from an assumption before 2009 that most people “will have no immunity to the pandemic virus”16 to one that acknowledged that “the vulnerability of a population to a pandemic virus is related in part to the level of pre-existing immunity to the virus.”17 But by 2020 it seems that lesson had been forgotten.

RETURN TO TEXT
Researchers are also confident that they have made solid inroads into ascertaining the origins of the immune responses. “Our hypothesis, of course, was that it’s so called ‘common cold’ coronaviruses, because they’re closely related,” said Daniela Weiskopf, senior author of a paper in Science that confirmed this hypothesis.18 “We have really shown that this is a true immune memory and it is derived in part from common cold viruses.” Separately, researchers in Singapore came to similar conclusions about the role of common cold coronaviruses but noted that some of the T cell reactivity may also come from other unknown coronaviruses, even of animal origin.8

Taken together, this growing body of research documenting pre-existing immunological responses to SARS-CoV-2 may force pandemic planners to revisit some of their foundational assumptions about how to measure population susceptibility and monitor the extent of epidemic spread.

Population immunity: underestimated?
Seroprevalence surveys measuring antibodies have been the preferred method for gauging the proportion of people in a given population who have been infected by SARS-CoV-2 (and have some degree of immunity to it), with estimates of herd immunity thresholds providing a sense of where we are in this pandemic. Whether we overcome it through naturally derived immunity or vaccination, the sense is that it won’t be over until we reach a level of herd immunity.

The fact that only a minority of people, even in the hardest hit areas, display antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 has led most planners to assume the pandemic is far from over. In New York City, where just over a fifth of people surveyed had antibodies, the health department concluded that “as this remains below herd immunity thresholds, monitoring, testing, and contact tracing remain essential public health strategies.”19 “Whatever that number is, we’re nowhere near close to it,” said WHO’s Ryan in late July, referring to the herd immunity threshold (box 2).

Box 2
Calculating the herd immunity threshold
In theory, outbreaks of contagious disease follow a certain trajectory. In a population that lacks immunity new infections grow rapidly. At some point an inflection in this growth should occur, and the incidence will begin to fall.

The 1970s gave rise to a theory that defined this inflection point as the herd immunity threshold (HIT) and offered a straightforward formula for estimating its size: HIT=1−1/R0 (where R0 is the disease’s basic reproduction number, or the average number of secondary cases generated by an infectious individual among susceptible people). This simple calculation has guided—and continues to guide—many vaccination campaigns, often used to define target levels of vaccination.20

The formula rests on two assumptions: that, in a given population, immunity is distributed evenly and members mix at random. While vaccines may be deliverable in a near random fashion, from the earliest days questions were raised about the random mixing assumption. Apart from certain small closed populations such as “orphanages, boarding schools, or companies of military recruits,” Fox and colleagues wrote in 1971,21 truly random mixing is the exception, not the rule. “We could hardly assume even a small town to be a single homogeneously mixing unit. Each individual is normally in close contact with only a small number of individuals, perhaps of the order of 10-50.”

Nearly 50 years later, Gabriela Gomes, an infectious disease modeller at the University of Strathclyde, is reviving concerns that the theory’s basic assumptions do not hold. Not only do people not mix randomly, infections (and subsequent immunity) do not happen randomly either, her team says. “More susceptible and more connected individuals have a higher propensity to be infected and thus are likely to become immune earlier. Due to this selective immunization by natural infection, heterogeneous populations require less infections to cross their herd immunity threshold,” they wrote.22 While most experts have taken the R0 for SARS-CoV-2 (generally estimated to be between 2 and 3) and concluded that at least 50% of people need to be immune before herd immunity is reached, Gomes and colleagues calculate the threshold at 10% to 20%.2223

Ulrich Keil, professor emeritus of epidemiology from the University of Münster in Germany, says the notion of randomly distributed immunity is a “very naive assumption” that ignores the large disparities in health in populations and “also ignores completely that social conditions might be more important than the virus itself.” He added, “Tuberculosis here is the best example. We all know that the immune system is very much dependent on the living conditions of a person, and this depends very much on education and social conditions.”

Another group led by Sunetra Gupta at the University of Oxford has arrived at similar conclusions of lower herd immunity thresholds by considering the issue of pre-existing immunity in the population. When a population has people with pre-existing immunity, as the T cell studies may be indicating is the case, the herd immunity threshold based on an R0 of 2.5 can be reduced from 60% of a population getting infected right down to 10%, depending on the quantity and distribution of pre-existing immunity among people, Gupta’s group calculated.24

RETURN TO TEXT
But memory T cells are known for their ability to affect the clinical severity and susceptibility to future infection,25 and the T cell studies documenting pre-existing reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 in 20-50% of people suggest that antibodies are not the full story.

“Maybe we were a little naive to take measurements such as serology testing to look at how many people were infected with the virus,” the Karolinska Institute immunologist Marcus Buggert told The BMJ. “Maybe there is more immunity out there.”

The research offers a powerful reminder that very little in immunology is cut and dried. Physiological responses may have fewer sharp distinctions than in the popular imagination: exposure does not necessarily lead to infection, infection does not necessarily lead to disease, and disease does not necessarily produce detectable antibodies. And within the body, the roles of various immune system components are complex and interconnected. B cells produce antibodies, but B cells are regulated by T cells, and while T cells and antibodies both respond to viruses in the body, T cells do so on infected cells, whereas antibodies help prevent cells from being infected.

An unexpected twist of the curve
Buggert’s home country has been at the forefront of the herd immunity debate, with Sweden’s light touch strategy against the virus resulting in much scrutiny and scepticism.26 The epidemic in Sweden does seem to be declining, Buggert said in August. “We have much fewer cases right now. We have around 50 people hospitalised with covid-19 in a city of two million people.” At the peak of the epidemic there were thousands of cases. Something must have happened, said Buggert, particularly considering that social distancing was “always poorly followed, and it’s only become worse.”

Understanding this “something” is a core question for Sunetra Gupta, an Oxford University epidemiologist who developed a way to calculate herd immunity thresholds that incorporates a variable for pre-existing innate resistance and cross protection.24 Her group argues that herd immunity thresholds “may be greatly reduced if a fraction of the population is unable to transmit the virus.”

“The conventional wisdom is that lockdown occurred as the epidemic curve was rising,” Gupta explained. “So once you remove lockdown that curve should continue to rise.” But that is not happening in places like New York, London, and Stockholm. The question is why.

“If it were the case that in London the disease hadn’t disseminated too widely, and only 15% have experienced the virus [as serology tests indicate] . . . under those circumstances, if you lift lockdown, you should see an immediate and commensurate increase in cases, as we have observed in many other settings,” Gupta told The BMJ, “But that hasn’t happened. That is just a fact. The question is why.”