Instead of banning certain members...

[DavidRvR]

Seems Everyone is all over the place when it comes to their experiences with this Virus... I have treatments that have worked to kick Covid and has kept High risk friends from catching when their Better half had it..

I am also a firm believer is Natural immunity. But I understand Autoimmune.. My daughter is in the same boat.. She has a few and will not take the shot. We all had covid (maybe twice).. Not worried about it but I also have a backup plan to treat without getting this shot...

But I am also a believer in Free Choice.. Do what makes you feel good.. Even if the shot only last a couple weeks to a couple months.. They will have another soon.. In the mean time we will find out what this thing actually affects as its never been used on Humans before.

Might be good... Time will tell.. But i have my reasons for not getting it and it boils down to I dont feel I need it.. Time will tell on that also.

I dont knock either side.

 

[DaveMatthews]

Maybe a tiny little insect will help to reverse climate change.

The tick that makes people allergic to red meat is in D.C.

Our recent warm weather has reawakened ticks, and one tick, in particular, is becoming more common in the Washington D.C. area: the lone star tick. One bite from this tick, which is easily identified by the white spot on its back if it's female, can make people have adverse reactions to eating...

www.yahoo.com

Aw crap!

 

[DavidRvR]

Something I came across a few min ago

 

[Mr. Coffee]

@DavidRvR, what you are showing is that you'd flunk any statistics class. You don't need to be all that intelligent to realize that unvaccinated people are probably less likely, on the average, to get a covid test than vaccinated people. And since those stats are done by Walgren's chances are you are looking at people who choose to be tested, which again is much more likely in vaccinated people than unvaccinated.

 

[Mulezen]

Maybe a tiny little insect will help to reverse climate change.

The tick that makes people allergic to red meat is in D.C.

Our recent warm weather has reawakened ticks, and one tick, in particular, is becoming more common in the Washington D.C. area: the lone star tick. One bite from this tick, which is easily identified by the white spot on its back if it's female, can make people have adverse reactions to eating...

www.yahoo.com

I laugh at these little things…until 3am when I wake up frantically scratching

 

[DavidRvR]

@DavidRvR, what you are showing is that you'd flunk any statistics class. You don't need to be all that intelligent to realize that unvaccinated people are probably less likely, on the average, to get a covid test than vaccinated people. And since those stats are done by Walgren's chances are you are looking at people who choose to be tested, which again is much more likely in vaccinated people than unvaccinated.

Take it at face values.. as I can give excuses on why it is, you can give the same as why its not... Just something I found is all..

 

[Mulezen]

More science (yikes) about long covid and what you avoid by taking the shot

Covid hospitalisation may affect thinking similar to 20 years of ageing

Some people experience lingering cognitive decline, with degree of impairment linked to illness severity

www.theguardian.com

 

[Mr. Coffee]

Take it at face values.. as I can give excuses on why it is, you can give the same as why its not... Just something I found is all..

What you found was a bunch of misleading statistics taken out of context, reinforcing a decision you have already made for yourself.

 

[DavidRvR]

What you found was a bunch of misleading statistics taken out of context, reinforcing a decision you have already made for yourself.

I could say the same. They are not mine just some I found.. To me it doesnt matter either way.. its just information, you choose to read it for what it is or isnt. Not my job to Push by ideas as I could care less.

I am patiently waiting.. Time will tell what is correct and what is not. I toss these things in the same area as 20 years ago coffee was bad.. then 5 years ago, Coffee is good and so on..

One thing I have found is that if any govt pushes so hard on anything they have other motives at hand.. So again take what I say with a grain of salt... as do I yours.

But it makes me actually stop and read and to see what others thing and why.. But again I will go to work today and do my daily things and come home (hopefully) and cook some food for the family. That is what is important to me at the end of the day.. The rest of the noise is just that. It isnt my job to convince anyone of what is or what isnt..That would be your job (everyone).

 

[Handlebars]

@DavidRvR, what you are showing is that you'd flunk any statistics class. You don't need to be all that intelligent to realize that unvaccinated people are probably less likely, on the average, to get a covid test than vaccinated people. And since those stats are done by Walgren's chances are you are looking at people who choose to be tested, which again is much more likely in vaccinated people than unvaccinated.

You offer a garbage analysis, although it may well be true that unvaccinated are less likely to take a drugstore test, YOU FAILED TO QUANTIFY IT or mention that aspect, thus highlighting your own DEFICIT ; All around the world government pages are showing that the boostered are double the rate.

 

[Handlebars]

What you found was a bunch of misleading statistics taken out of context, reinforcing a decision you have already made for yourself.

Take it at face values.. as I can give excuses on why it is, you can give the same as why its not... Just something I found is all..

Yes, you do demonstrate understanding of why there may be reasons why it looks a certain way, and that looks can be decieving, whereas Mr. Coffee neglects that reasoning when it goes his way of groupthink.
He didn't analyse how much effect his objection might have on the graph results - instead he jumped straight to conclusions and blame, barring any further analyses. Closed mind.
First is to show the relative frequency of such drugstore testing for unvaccinated vs the other groups, or discuss it reasonably. Nope, not reason by Mr Coffee, just hysterical abhorrence reaction.

Ontario government graph shown above and UK government reports show relatively the same thing as David's presentation; boostered people are more likely by far to be a covid case.

It can all be reasonably discussed by reasonable people without the hysterics....

...discussed like this:
"Maybe the boostered were allowed to go to spreader events and to travel but the unvaccinated were not."

So then we can think like this: "Oh, so what about the double vaccinated? How do they compare to the boostered?"
Again, much alike to unvaccinated - half as likely to be a case as the boostered.

Hmmm! Mr.Coffee. Explain that by blame and accusations.

 

[Handlebars]

What you found was a bunch of misleading statistics taken out of context, reinforcing a decision you have already made for yourself.

Did you check whether or not it was rate per 1000 tests of each vaxx status? In other words, is it positives per 100 or 10,000 unvaxxed tests vs positives per 100 or 10,000 double vaxxed tests, etc? That would remove the source of bias you jumped to conclude was the reason for the showing.
I think all you've done is believe what you wanted to see in it. Exactly what you accuse, that is what you did.

You don't need to be all that intelligent to realize that unvaccinated people are probably less likely, on the average, to get a covid test than vaccinated people.

And you don't have to be all that intelligent to realize that it may already have been taken into account and done on a percentage basis for each 100 or 100,000 tests in each vaxx status, like the government graphs do, which show the same type of effect.

Now, I'm not a fan of Walgreen's integrity, or stats persons' skills, but the thing is TO not IMMEDIATELY JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS WHICH SUPPORT YOUR OWN VIEWS, which is something you very obviously did, while making accusations of incompetence.

SO, AS THE ONTARIO GOVERNMENT PAGE EXPLAINS how its figures are arrived at:

rate of covid-19 cases per 100,000 is calculated by dividing the number of cases for a vaccination status by the total number of people with the same vaccination status and then multiplying by 100,000

Your hysterically derived belief about method is statistically accounted and controlled for by governement statisticians and we see approximately the same thing; the boostered person is about twice as likely to be a case.

 

[DavidRvR]

Maybe someone can decipher this? Mr Coffee maybe? Not a graph just a bunch of info and I guess Im to dumb to read so here we are..


Did Pfizer Perform Adequate Safety Testing for its Covid-19 mRNA Vaccine in Preclinical Studies?

The Market Ticker Error: No Outside Links

market-ticker.org

If you are interested in some reading and some other point of views on a few things... Site is a little wanky

The Market Ticker Error: Post Not Available

market-ticker.org

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Why do you people still talk with the trolls who should have been banned from these Forums?

 

[DavidRvR]

Why do you people still talk with the trolls who should have been banned from these Forums?

Why ban? Discussions isnt liked? Maybe the topic needs to go? Not sure why anyone responds if they dont like something .. I try not to complain about people as I am not petty.

 

[Handlebars]

Why ban? Discussions isnt liked? Maybe the topic needs to go? Not sure why anyone responds if they dont like something .. I try not to complain about people as I am not petty.

Why ban when forbidden behavior against other members is constantly exhibited by the ban needer, and their inability to respond logically on-topic is also exhibited?
No intellectual tools to do otherwise when the argument does not go their way.
That is all. They spend inordinate numbers of posts trying to corral other members in the discussion to only see what they agree with.

It's funny to see the weakness - to say the least of it.

 

[BlackHand]

Bear in mind that the group "Not Fully Vaccinated" is the former group "Unvaccinated" being flooded with all vaccinated who become cases within 2 weeks after vaccination, even if it was their 2nd vaccination

Did I miss the part of Ontario's data where they quantify how the 'not fully vaccinated' are being flooded by recent vaccinees? Or is that just your own supposition and editorializing...

BTW, did nobody read Walgeens notes about that raw data?

All around the world government pages are showing that the boostered are double the rate.

Not here. They are about even - unless I look at my age bracket, then I see that the rate for 'not fully vaccinated' is about 3.2x the rate the boostered.

 

[Handlebars]

Indeed. As I've mentioned before, it's the former group "Unvaccinated" that was flooded with vaccinated who got infected in under 14 days after being vaccinated...and that goes for people on their SECOND vaccine.
So the group "Not fully vaccinated" is the unvaccinated group's cases PUMPED UP WITH CASES OF THE VACCINATED...THUS RAISING the rate of of the new "Not fully vaccinated" group. If members of the r former group "Partially vaccinated" DID NOT get infected in under the 14 days after their next vaccination, they stayed and would LOWER their group rate. So the playing field was tilted against the "Not fully vaccinated".
Before the switcheroo that eliminated the uncomfortable comparison with unvaccinated, the fully vaccinated were about 86% of the population and now about 90%, so take that into account as well.
And thank you for pointing that out, that the playing field has been tilted in a way that helps the vaccinated look better.

Did I miss the part of Ontario's data where they quantify how the 'not fully vaccinated' are being flooded by recent vaccinees?

 

[Handlebars]

BTW, did nobody read Walgeens notes about that raw data?

I did.

Not here. They are about even - unless I look at my age bracket, then I see that the rate for 'not fully vaccinated' is about 3.2x the rate the boostered.

Please show that.
Or is that just your own supposition and editorializing...?

 

[Handlebars]

Did I miss the part of Ontario's data where they quantify how the 'not fully vaccinated' are being flooded by recent vaccinees? Or is that just your own supposition and editorializing...

I'm happy to use the term "supplemented" with cases that appeared in other groups in under 14 days since their recent vaccinations. And cases "skimmed off" 2 groups, which reduces their case rates.