Vaccine

baldref said:
You're far more the latter than the former
Click to expand...
The biggest problem is some people confuse science with truth when in fact its just a process or methodology (albeit a good process typically). Usually its the one's in science that think its the truth, which is just arrogance. Exhibit A is Fauci claiming to be science and to question him is to question science.

www.scientificamerican.com

If You Say 'Science Is Right,' You're Wrong

It can’t supply absolute truths about the world, but it brings us steadily closer
www.scientificamerican.com www.scientificamerican.com

www.forbes.com

Science Does Not Reveal Truth

The biggest giveaway is that scientific theories change with time. As we acquire new information or new data, we have to update all of our beliefs. And how can a belief be true if it is subject to change at a moment's notice?
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
 
watfly said:
This is a slightly different study. It doesn't look at effectiveness against infection but effectiveness against symptomatic disease. Similar results to other study two dose vaccine is not effective against Omicron, much better with booster although that wanes as well.


It seems we have two camps in this forum. Pro-Vax Koolaid or Pro-Vax Realistic, although to team Kool-Aid, Pro-Vax Realistic is Anti-Vax. In hindsight, I feel like I would may have been better off with a booster.
Click to expand...

This is the published form of the UK data that was linked on this thread back in late Dec/early Jan. "symptomatic disease" as they are using it in this context means a case that was not detected just by PCR. somebody walked into a doctor's office or something. So it's still really a case study, not severe disease/hospitalization. As per my last post the message is, as has since been repeated in other studies, there is sufficient antigenic drift with omicron that if you want to bend community transmission/case load you need the high Ab titers afforded by a recent booster-or a recent infection.

BTW, since there were various complaints on this thread about no studies on infection primed immunity (ie "natural immunity"-as if there were any other kind) good longitudinal studies have now been done. The only fly in the ointment for infection primed immunity is that the extent of long term cellular immunity going forward correlates tightly with disease severity. So if you almost died, you should be pretty resistant going forward towards the next viral emergence from resevoirs. If you were not so sick, not so much.
 
dad4 said:
Baldie, your main contribution here is thumbs up to anyone who agrees with Tucker Carlson. I’m ok without your support.
Click to expand...
Your main contribution is professing your opinions as truths, and believing the establishment gives a shit about you. Sorry preacher, it doesn't.
 
watfly said:
The biggest problem is some people confuse science with truth when in fact its just a process or methodology (albeit a good process typically). Usually its the one's in science that think its the truth, which is just arrogance. Exhibit A is Fauci claiming to be science and to question him is to question science.

www.scientificamerican.com

If You Say 'Science Is Right,' You're Wrong

It can’t supply absolute truths about the world, but it brings us steadily closer
www.scientificamerican.com www.scientificamerican.com

www.forbes.com

Science Does Not Reveal Truth

The biggest giveaway is that scientific theories change with time. As we acquire new information or new data, we have to update all of our beliefs. And how can a belief be true if it is subject to change at a moment's notice?
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...
And it’s the one’s immersed in the fringe belief system that believe science lacks the validity of those that wish to oppose it.
 
GoldenGate said:
You anti-vaxxers all live in opposite world. In fact, relying on your anecdotal "evidence" instead of actual medical and scientific studies is the very definition of emotional no matter how much you claim the opposite. See: When poignant stories outweigh cold hard facts: A meta-analysis of the anecdotal bias - ScienceDirect . Of course, morons like you completely ignore scientific studies based on your anecdotal "evidence", because it is the only place you can go to support the confirmation bias that you are looking for: Confirmation bias | Cram.

No one is surprised that the anti-vax/mask clown car crowd ignores studies and science because they're too emotional to understand what is happening, because that's who whiny Karens are. It's what you do.
Click to expand...
This would all makes sense if you could even recognize a well done study. Too bad so many studies are just crap or had/have agendas. They all do, even the ones you disgree with. Check out some decent masking studies out of spain. Anyway, you are just a clown blowing smoke up everyon'e 4th point of contact. It's much more fun to see you get all worked up. It's obvious you wouldn't know a scientific study even if it was printed on the inside of your mask.

Covid as you knew it (and how you would like to have kept it) is over. The vaccinated have their vaccines, the unvaccinated don't, and the naturally infected are what they are. Go out and thank your medical health professionals that would even treat you.

looking forward to your froth filled response - will check it out in a few days.
 
GoldenGate said:
The first Omicron variant was detected three months ago in the US and there weren't enough cases and spread to even start a study until January. Yet here you are claiming two months later that it's perfectly fine to parade around unvaccinated and unmasked because there hasn't been a peer reviewed study in the mere two months that it even became possible to start conducting a study. Honestly, you are about as stupid as they get. So please tell me the exact day that this study should have been completed and peer reviewed to meet your "rigorous" standards? And how does the fact that a study hasn't been published in two months "prove" that there is no difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated? I feel like you let someone repeatedly hit you over the head with an Easton brand baseball bat because there hasn't been a scientific study proving that those brands will also give you a concussion, so surely you'll be fine. If there hasn't been a definitive study (which we know from your time here that you would disregard anyway because it does not fit your Karen-y emotional snowflake confirmation bias) yet to prove something is happening, it clearly isn't happening, right? And you know that because you've seen with your own microscopic eyes how Omicron is spread, right?
Click to expand...
where do you get your stuff from? It's like you forget what you were looking at. Who even says Easton Brand bat? You def don't play baseball.
 
watfly said:
From my anecdotal survey, those that were boosted seemed to have milder symptoms than only the 2 shotters. Although the 2 shotters symptoms weren't awful.
Click to expand...
watfly said:
This is a slightly different study. It doesn't look at effectiveness against infection but effectiveness against symptomatic disease. Similar results to other study two dose vaccine is not effective against Omicron, much better with booster although that wanes as well.


It seems we have two camps in this forum. Pro-Vax Koolaid or Pro-Vax Realistic, although to team Kool-Aid, Pro-Vax Realistic is Anti-Vax. In hindsight, I feel like I would may have been better off with a booster.
Click to expand...
Yeah, no regrets getting boosted from me. I'd call what I got a cold - no fever, no chest congestion, no real downtime.
 
Grace T. said:
My dad finally caught it. Despite being boosted, going around no where without an N95, and not really socializing except very rarely and outdoors and not during the relevant time period (we hadn't been around him in the relevant time period). We are at a loss for where he might have caught it...the market (well then even those N95s don't help), a lab to get his blood drawn (someone real contagious must have crossed there), the dog??? (even though they say dogs don't transmit to humans). So far only the sniffles on day 2 and no other symptoms (fingers crossed).
Click to expand...
All the best to your dad, @Grace T.

I'd guess the R0 for omicron is higher than calculated - exceptionally contagious. With milder symptoms in general and even more so if vaccinated, many people that aren't required to test won't be counted as cases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top