Vaccine

What is scary is that we are going thru such lengths for a a virus with the statistics that it has. These are unprecedented measures that are extreme by historical measures.
It is unprecedented. That is why we have to fight back against it.

It is infringement upon our rights based on a virus that is of no real threat to the majority of the population.
 
Projecting?

I don’t think you understood the post.

Grace posted a garbage pseudo-study, and I explained why it was garbage.

No one was even pretending to predict the future. The twitter dude made an attempt to explain the past, and I explained why it was trash - statistically speaking.
Who said you were pretending?
 
If the sample size is too small it's because Florida cases are declining so rapidly that kids aren't getting sick so there isn't a huge pool there. In which case, again, what's the rationale for masking kids?
Sample size in this case is number of jurisdictions, nit the number of people.

Kind of moot anyway. If you want to do a natural experiment like he did, you also need to think about selection bias possible alternate explanations. That is, were there any other differences between the mask mandate districts and the non-mask mandate districts. For example, the mask mandate districts are likely to have populations which were more worried about covid in other ways. This would affect both the height of the peak, and therefore the rate of post peak decline.

Ok. Now that’s two reasons your Twitter “study” is garbage. Need more? Or can we just stop pretending that “I saw this thing on bit chute” counts as evidence?
 
Vaccine passports for a disease that will eventually become endemic?
THIS ^^^^

Madness what they want to do.

By the way THIS is why we shouldn't be mandating the vaxx...and especially on kids with no risks. We have yet to know if there are any long term affects. Note...the article doesn't say what they are seeing is because of the vax, but on the other hand they don't know yet. That is why long term studies need to be done before we mandate people take a vaxx.

 
Sample size in this case is number of jurisdictions, nit the number of people.

Kind of moot anyway. If you want to do a natural experiment like he did, you also need to think about selection bias possible alternate explanations. That is, were there any other differences between the mask mandate districts and the non-mask mandate districts. For example, the mask mandate districts are likely to have populations which were more worried about covid in other ways. This would affect both the height of the peak, and therefore the rate of post peak decline.

Ok. Now that’s two reasons your Twitter “study” is garbage. Need more? Or can we just stop pretending that “I saw this thing on bit chute” counts as evidence?
Selection bias sounds about right. Corona has been extremely selective. It chooses the elderly and the immuno-suppressed. But we've known that since May 2020. Mandates are one size fits all. That's not Science. That is garbage.
 
Sample size in this case is number of jurisdictions, nit the number of people.

Kind of moot anyway. If you want to do a natural experiment like he did, you also need to think about selection bias possible alternate explanations. That is, were there any other differences between the mask mandate districts and the non-mask mandate districts. For example, the mask mandate districts are likely to have populations which were more worried about covid in other ways. This would affect both the height of the peak, and therefore the rate of post peak decline.

Ok. Now that’s two reasons your Twitter “study” is garbage. Need more? Or can we just stop pretending that “I saw this thing on bit chute” counts as evidence?

Oh please. As Hound pointed out a lot of the stuff the CDC has put out (like the hairdresser, county and carrier studies) were all garbage too. The double explanation was pointed out to you in those studies too (such as on the carrier or the Bangladesh study it combined the effects of masks and distancing) but you dismissed those too.

I'm not claiming it's probative of anything. But they are interesting in the same way your studies were.

And I notice you still have no response for Dr. Chicken Little who even he seems to have run off your island. Like studies, you only like the experts that agree with you.
 
It is unprecedented. That is why we have to fight back against it.

It is infringement upon our rights based on a virus that is of no real threat to the majority of the population.

It's so unprecedented that the US Supreme Court has upheld the legality of mandatory vaccinations - twice.

Does your plan to fight back involve storming the Capitol again? Or maybe another recount? As long as Cyber Ninjas are fleecing all of you anti-vaxxer/mask cultists, maybe you should ask them to recount the 700,000 plus who have already died of Covid.
 
Oh please. As Hound pointed out a lot of the stuff the CDC has put out (like the hairdresser, county and carrier studies) were all garbage too. The double explanation was pointed out to you in those studies too (such as on the carrier or the Bangladesh study it combined the effects of masks and distancing) but you dismissed those too.

I'm not claiming it's probative of anything. But they are interesting in the same way your studies were.

And I notice you still have no response for Dr. Chicken Little who even he seems to have run off your island. Like studies, you only like the experts that agree with you.
I read Osterholm’s piece.

It reads like he is overcorrecting after his hurricane comments.

His view on masks effectiveness (25%) is reasonable. I do disagree with the lens he puts on it. “How long can I stay in this room” is the wrong question. It is not actually true that 14 minutes is safe and 16 minutes is not safe. So, “adds 5 minutes to a 15 minute window” just compares a misleading number against itself.

I don’t dismiss distance in the Bangladesh study. You are saying the masked clusters might have also kept their distance better. Could be true, but it doesn’t change the result. Masks still work, you are just arguing about how they work.

It is possible that surgical masks were effective because they made everyone think about doctors. Or maybe people in Bangladesh find masks unattractive, and therefore stay further away. It doesn’t matter. You are just arguing the mechanism. The effect is still that surgical masks reduced transmission.
 
Should we start a GoFundMe to get a therapist for GG?
No. He has been in and out of various "institutions" for years. He gets better in there because they have him on a mandate regime of drugs. Once he gets "better" they release him. After some time he start forgetting to take his meds...and then starts surfing reddit and then posting those results along with his insults here.

So it would be a pointless waste of money.
 
Vaccine passports are a choice. You are free to get one or not. Why would anyone be screaming about freedom of choice? Isn't freedom the American way? I do understand people screaming when someone takes away your freedom to choose. That's very un-American, you know, taking away our freedoms and trying to mandate what we can and cannot do with our bodies, especially when it only impact some Americans, but not all - that's certainly discrimination.
Not really following what you are trying to say. Twisting politics in with medicine is silly and a slippery slope. You are more than welcome to have the choice/life discussion with someone else.

Vaccine passports are simply not worth the effort. what do they really do?

  1. slightly reduce the risk to healthy vaccinated individuals who've been vaccinated?
  2. VERY slightly reduce the risk to kids, who are protected by youth
  3. Slightly reduce the risk of vulnerable people, who are few.
Maybe we will use vaccine passports to try and get people to get the vaccine. That will likely expend a good amount of political captial to achieve what end?

What's even the point when you can still: get sick, pass on the virus, die from breakthrough infections. Makes zero sense. Wait until people don't get their boosters. What then. It's much easier to practice medicine.
 
Should we start a GoFundMe to get a therapist for GG?
The bar does provide some free intervention services. Has he burned through those?

I read Osterholm’s piece.

It reads like he is overcorrecting after his hurricane comments.

His view on masks effectiveness (25%) is reasonable. I do disagree with the lens he puts on it. “How long can I stay in this room” is the wrong question. It is not actually true that 14 minutes is safe and 16 minutes is not safe. So, “adds 5 minutes to a 15 minute window” just compares a misleading number against itself.

I don’t dismiss distance in the Bangladesh study. You are saying the masked clusters might have also kept their distance better. Could be true, but it doesn’t change the result. Masks still work, you are just arguing about how they work.

It is possible that surgical masks were effective because they made everyone think about doctors. Or maybe people in Bangladesh find masks unattractive, and therefore stay further away. It doesn’t matter. You are just arguing the mechanism. The effect is still that surgical masks reduced transmission.

IIRC in the Bangladesh study the primary distancing effects were in the older, not the young, for which even with surgicals there wasn't a statistical difference for younger people. Even if you accept "maybe people in Bangladesh" find masks unattractive that would only mean they'd work in Bangladesh and places were similar cultures....not that "the effect is still that surgical masks reduced transmission". Like Hound said, you complain about these things, but then when you do em yourself it's perfectly acceptable. A better, more scientific approach is not to say anything (except perhaps a definitive RCS) proves anything, but rather that it is "interesting" and see where else it leads us.

Oster is basically saying the same thing I've been saying since spring of last year. Masks on a micro level are probably effective on a short term basis. If you have students with ill fitting cloth masks though crowded in a room with only adequate ventilation for 6-9 hours, they ain't gonna doing anything. Same with the passenger sitting on a bus or an airplane who is sick next to you. Same with the coworker in the meat packing plant or sharing the cubicle next to yours.
 
Not really following what you are trying to say. Twisting politics in with medicine is silly and a slippery slope. You are more than welcome to have the choice/life discussion with someone else.

Vaccine passports are simply not worth the effort. what do they really do?

  1. slightly reduce the risk to healthy vaccinated individuals who've been vaccinated?
  2. VERY slightly reduce the risk to kids, who are protected by youth
  3. Slightly reduce the risk of vulnerable people, who are few.
Maybe we will use vaccine passports to try and get people to get the vaccine. That will likely expend a good amount of political captial to achieve what end?

What's even the point when you can still: get sick, pass on the virus, die from breakthrough infections. Makes zero sense. Wait until people don't get their boosters. What then. It's much easier to practice medicine.
The point of the vaccine passports is to provide an easy way of showing it, where its required. My initial reply was with respects to your "scary" comment. The EU example I gave has nothing to do with medicine, its about providing a consistent reporting platform across jurisdictions. They allow ease of travel to countries that require validation of status wrt COVID. Its not about being vaccinated, i.e. see the 3 options. You're bent out of shape about imaginary things that don't exist.

As for the choice / politics angle - mea culpa. I do find it hypocritical though with the "freedom of choice (my body) for me for this, but not for you for that", argument.
 
Well on one of the vaxxes they are now recommending they dont be administered to young people.

This is precisely why you shouldn't mandate a drug without having years of study on it.


Sweden is worried about it as well.

 
Back
Top