« First « Previous Comments 290 - 329 of 699 Next » Last » Search these comments
And now it has reached the extreme of doctors in California being told by law that they may not report or repeat what they see with their own eyes or they will be punished for spreading "disinformation".
Onvacation says
Will you acknowledge that 75% of Covid deaths were amongst those 65 or older?
Sure, this is a disease that disproportionately affects older people, diabetics, and a few other risk factors. I dont have the percentages broken down by risk factor handy, but sure that's the truth as I understand it.
I've gotten lost in tin foil hat world of non credible information,
Sure, this is a disease that disproportionately affects older people, diabetics, and a few other risk factors. I dont have the percentages broken down by risk factor handy, but sure that's the truth as I understand it.
I could graph the numbers again but I seem to recall that 93% of the Covid-19 deaths were people that Died "with" not "from". I also recall that most of the casualties had multiple comorbidities.
@Patrick If we have someone who openly said they are a Democrat on this thread, willing to debate/discuss things, I think people need to refrain from insulting Democrats in general. Because by association you are lobbying insults at DeficitHawk. Not cool.
I have posted the CDC chart many times in this thread, but no one seems to look at it or respond. I wont re-post it again. But the excess mortality is deaths FROM covid... not WITH covid. It is people who would not be expected to die except for that COVID happened.
In hindsight, would you agree that there was a severe over-reaction to this pandemic?
Can you imagine any reasons doctors were forbidden to use therapies (hydroxy, Ivermectin, etc.) that could have saved lives?
Mell, nearly every comment you put says "math doesnt lie"... i also am pretty capable at doing math. The issue isnt how to do the math, its what dataset you trust to use for the analysis and avoiding the use of apples vs. oranges in analysis... Do you think all countries have equal reporting probability for deaths and cause of death? do they have the same prevalance rates of the same strains? Did their waves of infection coincide with the same treatment options becoming available? Do you think comparing two different countries outcomes in a cherry picked way like this without developing methods to account for all those differences in the dataset is just "math doesnt lie"?
Math can very much mislead to wrong conclusions if you do this sort of thing.
The "endpoints" you are looking at don't matter, only deaths and serious cripplings over the mid to long term matter,
mell says
The "endpoints" you are looking at don't matter, only deaths and serious cripplings over the mid to long term matter,
WE've seen serious infections and side effects out to about 250 days in that one study, adn the vaccines overwhelmingly reduce severe infecton and have few side effects. but I agree this is not 'long term' enough to remove all doubts. One has to start to extrapolate on what likely side effects may present in the future etc, adn we wont have the data on that for a long time, I agree with that. Thats why I dont think the risk/benefit is there for mandating vaccines
But if you are saying the data are already that outcomes with vaccine during the pandemic are WORSE than they would have been without, I dont know how you are reaching that conclusion, at least not from the studies I've shared with you. Im not going to spend the time digging into ...
mell says
also have a medical background
I have 7 PhDs and 11 Masters, myself.
Patrick says
What if, say, 0.1 percent of vaxx recipients died or were severely injured, yet the government kept denying it?
This would be a high rate of side effects, only acceptable if the severity of the disease is higher still. covid is probably higher than 0.1 percent, but only by a few times, and I'd want a better risk/benefit in a vaccine.
But this type of statement you make seems to be made along with a narrative that "covid doesnt kill, only vaccines kill", and that narrative is not true.
I disagree, because I think vaccine mandates ARE within their authority, and its a judgement call on a case by case basis based severity/efficacy/safety....
there are democrats out there that openly can't stand what's going on
there are democrats out there that openly can't stand what's going on.
adn the vaccines overwhelmingly reduce severe infecton and have few side effects
The trouble with those examples (for me to reach any conclusion from them) is that I am not in a position to verify whether those cases were caused by a vaccine or not, whether the person even GOT the vaccine, and what the prevalence of those symptoms/conditions is in the non vaccinated population.
So who should I believe?
A controlled study is to give schools and big pharma federal money. Has nothing to do with actual science. There's no incentive to actually study anything and find a solution. It's to keep getting more money. I thought this was obvious?
I dont support mandates, but I dont support hanging those who do.
Hey DeficitHawk:
1. Do you think farts are funny?
2. Do you think news stories like these are funny?
https://patrick.net/post/1325136/2019-06-15-passenger-found-guilty-of-masturbating
https://patrick.net/post/1227218/2013-07-19-pizzeria-owner-denies-masturbating-in
3. Do you love reading stories like this one: https://patrick.net/post/1338348/2021-03-05-yet-still-another-school-kid-gets-lucky
4. Do you desire to retire in Caligulan Splendor someday?
5. Do you think we are in a housing bubble?
There was a similar story about the doctor who discovered that a baby aspirin a day had better results than expensive anti-cholesterol drugs. He had a very hard time getting his research known and accepted.
It may be constructive for us to talk about where we get our information, and how we vet it. We may not agree who's realty is the alternate one.
Interested in how your experience compares?
Id say vaccines geared towards the original strains may have helped me avoid the original strain, but did not prevent infection with omicron.
there are papers showing that getting the original vaxx makes you ~4x more likely to catch other strains
A study from Tel Aviv University found that a South African variant of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus affects people vaccinated with the Pfizer shot more than unvaccinated people.
The study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, indicated that the B.1.351 variant of the virus was found eight times more in individuals who were vaccinated—or 5.4 percent against 0.7 percent—against those who were not vaccinated. Clalit Health Services, a top Israeli health-care provider, also helped in the study.
« First « Previous Comments 290 - 329 of 699 Next » Last » Search these comments
By polite, I mean refraining from attacking the person in either direction, but sticking to points of argument instead. So no "You are a (whatever)" will not be allowed. The only appropriate use of "you" will be "Here you said..."
I just ran into an old guy in a cafe who pointed in the newspaper to the governor results in California, which added up to 110%. I said, "well, that's California" and so he accused me of being an "election denier". I asked if he'd seen "2000 Mules" and he said he hadn't "because it's been debunked". Uh, it's the same people who committed the election fraud who are claiming that "2000 Mules" was debunked.
Nor had he heard what was on Hunter's laptop, since he watches only corporate news.
I think I might have made a dent in his wall of denial, and I'd like to try with others.